The Copy Ceiling: An Input-Exposure Control for Ontology-Grounded Generation over Curated Corpora

When a language model answers from a curated corpus via graph-based retrieval, a large grounding uplift does not establish reasoning over the retrieved structure: the context may already expose the gold answers. We propose exposure accounting, which classifies each gold item by whether the shown context exposes it and whether the answer recovers it. Its scalar reference is the copy ceiling, the recall a verbatim copy of the context achieves; signed gain over copy measures the model's recall relative to this deterministic, judge-free baseline. Across ten models, unaided recall averages 0.26 and grounded recall 0.92, yet gain over copy is uniformly negative (-0.067 to -0.022). Of 11,360 gold-item observations, representing 1,136 target instances evaluated under ten models, only three unexposed items receive lexical credit. A stratified model-judged audit of 423 observations, with a symmetric quotation-verification policy, estimates that 97.1% of credited items assert the requested relation; all three unexposed credits fail relational adjudication. On targets the scaffold does not expose, lexical recovery falls from 0.121 unaided to 0.004 grounded; adjudication validates 71 of the 92 unaided credits and none of the three grounded credits, without establishing full-frame relational recovery rates. Rephrasing questions outside the graph's title vocabulary reduces exposure from 0.964 to 0.328, while an absence-triggered fallback activates on only 2 of 506 questions. A paired production study improves judged quality by +0.27 pooled, but negative controls do not establish content specificity beyond a well-formed on-corpus block. These results support exposure accounting as a standing control for corpus-derived evaluations. The accounting distinguishes exposed-item omissions from beyond-exposure recoveries; it does not determine whether reasoning occurred.

Mais de arXiv AI Papers

Entre para seguir esta fonte

arXiv AI Papers·ontem☆

Sensorimotor Alignment: A Platonic Proxy for Embodied Policy Success↗

Robotic foundation models are typically evaluated through costly closed-loop rollouts, which motivates cheap offline proxies for model capability. The Platonic Representation Hypothesis (PRH) suggests that as representations improve, different modalities such as vision and language converge toward a shared statistical model of reality. We ask whether motion trajectories form another such modality: as embodied models become more capable, should their sensory representations converge toward the structure of physical motion? To examine this, we propose Sensorimotor Alignment (S^2), a training-free offline metric that measures how well a model's sensory representation aligns with the geometry of physical motion. We find that S^2 correlates positively with downstream robot task success across embodied model families, making it a low-cost offline proxy for prioritizing models before closed-loop evaluation. S^2 can also identify promising vision-language model (VLM) backbones even before costly fine-tuning into vision-language-action models (VLAs). Beyond this correlation, S^2 offers representation-level explanations for phenomena observed in VLAs and world action models (WAMs). With S^2, we extend PRH to embodied models and make sensorimotor alignment empirically measurable, offering insight into why an embodied model succeeds beyond its closed-loop success rate.

en

arXiv AI Papers·ontem☆

Direct Pass@k Optimization for Thought Pruning: Balancing Quality and Diversity in Test-Time Reasoning↗

Test-time scaling has emerged as a key inference strategy for reasoning models, where a model generates a large number of candidate solutions in the hope of finding at least one correct solution. Running all candidate solutions to completion can be computationally demanding, so recent work prunes the candidate pool after generating only a short prefix, committing further computation only to the surviving candidates. Existing pruning strategies divide broadly into two categories: Quality-based methods assign a score to each partial solution and discard those predicted to ultimately lead to an incorrect final solution, while diversity-based methods select partial solutions that follow different reasoning trajectories and are therefore likely to cover different final solutions. The tension between these two objectives is an instance of exploration versus exploitation, yet little to no prior work on pruning exposes this trade-off directly, let alone optimizes it. In this paper, we introduce a pruning procedure that addresses this trade-off directly by optimizing pass@k over the selected solution pool. In particular, it chooses the pool to maximize the probability that at least one of its partial solutions, when continued to completion, yields a correct answer. Because this objective simultaneously rewards high-quality partial solutions and penalizes redundancy among them, quality and diversity are naturally balanced by the criterion itself rather than through separate ad-hoc design choices. On eight open-weight reasoning models, our method outperforms existing quality-based and diversity-based pruning strategies. The gains are particularly pronounced when the pruning procedure keeps a moderate number of partial solutions for continued generation, highlighting the value of directly balancing quality and diversity during pruning.

en

arXiv AI Papers·ontem☆

Phase Transition from Random Features to Fully Trainable Networks↗

Constructing accurate and computationally tractable approximation spaces is a fundamental task in scientific computing. Partially trainable neural networks bridge fixed random features and fully adaptive representations. This paper quantifies a phase transition pattern in approximation bounds and observes analogous behavior in training errors: a rapid but smooth initial improvement followed by diminishing returns, with a sharper transition under greater initialization mismatch. Under polynomial spectral decay with exponent α>1 and leverage compatibility, we establish a squared L_2 approximation rate {O}((κ_P(m/δ)/m)^α) for two-layer networks of width m and trainable proportion P, where κ_P=(P/κ_1^*+(1-P)/κ_0^*)^{-1}. The bound holds uniformly over the unit ball of a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS) with probability at least 1-δ. The constants κ_0^* and κ_1^* quantify the fixed and trainable groups' sampling mismatches relative to the target RKHS. For spherical biased-ReLU features in dimension d, we verify these assumptions with α=(d+2)/(d-1) and κ_0^*=4{2}τ(d+1)/d for initialization scale τ1, and κ_1^*=1 under ridge leverage sampling. For d=5 and τ=10, a trainable proportion of approximately 4.1\% captures 90\% of the reduction in the approximation bound from P=0 to P=1. A structured three-layer example illustrates how a few trainable first-layer neurons exploit fixed downstream blocks through nonlinear composition. Numerical experiments across diverse settings, including networks with up to 15 layers, exhibit similar phase transitions in training errors.

en

arXiv AI Papers·ontem☆

Reliable AI-Assisted Decisions via Selective Auditing↗

We consider online monitoring of an AI system that produces a sequence of decisions. At each round, the system outputs a proposed decision together with a confidence score estimating the trustworthiness of the decision. The decision and confidence score need not be produced by the same model: for example, one agent may propose a decision, while a separate verifier agent evaluates it and outputs a correctness or safety score. Based on this information, we must decide whether to accept the AI decision automatically or consult an expert, such as a human auditor, who reviews the proposal and either accepts or corrects it. We formulate this task as an online constrained optimization problem in which the goal is to minimize the frequency of expert auditing while guaranteeing that the fraction of AI errors that go unaudited stays below a user-defined threshold. We derive a family of algorithms with provable error-control guarantees with no assumptions, including a method that is optimally efficient: it asymptotically attains the best achievable auditing rate for both adversarial and i.i.d. data streams. Experiments on screening harmful requests to large language models, qualitative text annotation, and data labeling show that our methods achieve valid error control in practice while substantially reducing the need for human auditing compared to baselines.

en