Papers for

ai application engineers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Improving small AI models by selectively learning from larger ones

Recursive Offline Distillation via Entropy Gain Sampling and Answer Mixing

Abstract: Distillation of reasoning chains from Large Language Models (LLMs) into their smaller siblings is a standard training approach. Frequently, researchers do not have full access to a teacher model and its internal representations, which limits the resulting performance. We propose a recursive offline distillation method combining two components: entropy-based sampling for selective distillation and answer mixing. Specifically, for three open models (3-4B), at each epoch, we sample reasoning chains weighted by entropy difference with an auxiliary medium model (70-72B) and, next, supplement thinking traces with single-token ground truth answers. Our approach consistently outperforms naive distillation with comparable data budgets ($57.15 \pm 1.01$ vs 51.61 on average) and offers a much steeper learning curve. Additionally, we present a comparative analysis of methods to generate and normalize distillation traces.

Wed 14 OctMachine Learning
The gist
Smaller AI language models often learn by copying reasoning steps from larger models, but this can be hard without full access to the larger model’s details. The authors propose a new way to teach small models better by picking the most useful examples based on uncertainty and mixing in correct answers to help guide learning. Their method works better than simply copying everything and learns faster. They also studied different ways to create and adjust these learning traces for better training.
Open → 2610.20914v1

Tracking detailed changes improves automatic prompt tuning outcomes

Beyond Aggregate Accuracy: Item-Level Transitions in Prompt Optimization

Abstract: Automatic prompt optimization (APO) uses feedback from model responses to improve prompts automatically. However, its effectiveness is usually measured through overall scores, which do not reveal which questions become correct, which previously correct answers become wrong, or whether improvements extend to unseen questions. We introduce Reflective Feedback-Driven Prompt Optimization (RFDPO), a tool that tracks recoveries (incorrect to correct), regressions (correct to incorrect), and churn (all changed outcomes). RFDPO uses this feedback to guide subsequent revisions and records prompt changes throughout optimization. We evaluate RFDPO across five benchmarks covering law, knowledge, instruction following, mathematics, and privacy, using GPT-5 as the optimizer and GPT-4o-mini and GPT-4.1 Mini as solvers. Our results show that overall accuracy can hide substantial changes: in five of nine configurations, churn was at least five times the absolute net change, and a single-item net change concealed up to 17 changed outcomes. Average validation gains were 7.9 percentage points, compared with 5.2 points on held-out tests. In a controlled ablation on LegalBench-Hearsay, item-level feedback reduced churn by 40% ($p=0.024$) while maintaining similar net gains. These findings motivate reporting recovery, regression, churn, and performance on unseen data alongside overall accuracy.

Tue 13 OctMachine LearningArtificial IntelligenceComputation and Language
The gist
Improving prompts for AI models often focuses on the overall number of right answers but misses which questions get better or worse. The authors created a tool called RFDPO that tracks when individual answers improve, worsen, or change a lot during tuning. Using this detailed tracking helped reduce unnecessary flips in answers while keeping overall improvement steady. They tested this on several tasks using GPT models and found that looking beyond just overall accuracy gives a clearer picture of prompt optimization.
Open → 2610.19084v1

Diffusion language models improve accuracy by matching training to prediction order

Match the Canvas, Not Just the Answer: Predictability-Aware SFT for Diffusion Language Models

Abstract: Diffusion language models (DLMs) enable flexible parallel generation by resolving tokens according to the model's evolving predictability rather than a fixed left-to-right order. This flexibility, however, introduces training choices absent from standard autoregressive teacher forcing: which reference tokens are visible when a target is supervised and how much generation space is allocated. Standard supervised fine-tuning (SFT) typically makes these choices through random masking, independently of inference. Our analysis shows how this training-inference mismatch can misdirect supervision. Random masking can conceal prediction errors or penalize uncertainty that decoding would otherwise resolve, while the attention-visible input length can change which response formulations the model favors, even when the underlying solution is unchanged. Motivated by these findings, we propose Predictability-Aware Canvas Selection and Supervision (PACS), an SFT method. PACS uses the model's own predictability to select each example's attention-visible input length and supervises reference tokens immediately before their confidence-guided revelation. Across reasoning and code-generation benchmarks, PACS consistently achieves the highest mean accuracy among the compared SFT methods, with gains of up to 12.84 percentage points over vanilla SFT on individual benchmarks. Code will be released upon publication.

Tue 13 OctMachine LearningArtificial IntelligenceComputation and Language
The gist
Diffusion language models generate text by deciding which words to predict based on how easy they are to guess rather than in a set order. The authors found that the usual way of training these models doesn’t match how they guess words during actual use, which can cause problems. They created a new training method called PACS that lets the model decide which words to see and predict based on its own confidence. This method improves accuracy on tasks like reasoning and writing code by making training and generating text more consistent.
Open → 2610.18001v1

Large language models help improve game algorithms with limited edits

OptiArena: Can LLMs Improve Executable Algorithms under Fixed Resource Budgets?

Abstract: Static QA and code-generation benchmarks only partially capture the role that large language models (LLMs) now play as coding agents and research tools. We introduce OptiArena, a budget-controlled testbed for studying whether LLMs can improve executable game-playing algorithms through five rounds of code edits within a fixed minimal scaffold and under bounded evaluator feedback and fixed resource budgets. The testbed uses two optimization regimes, surface obfuscation controls, calibrated references, held-out/stress splits, and diagnostics for degradation and exceptional failures, with LLM API cost reported separately from local evaluator wall-clock. The empirical study asks three questions: whether models can close the calibrated gap between a designated weak starter and an editable competent baseline, whether they can refine editable competent baselines without damaging them, and whether gains survive surface obfuscation controls. Across twelve frontier LLMs and five games, models improve designated weak starters more consistently than they refine editable competent baselines, with substantial variation across games and models. OptiArena provides a practical testbed for measuring bounded-resource algorithm optimization within the five-edit, fixed-scaffold setting studied here. Code is available at https://github.com/WJ-Peng/OptiArena.

Sat 26 SeptComputation and Language
The gist
Improving computer game-playing programs by making small changes can be tricky, especially with limits on how much can be edited or tested. The authors introduce OptiArena, a system to see if AI language models can make better versions of these programs within limited steps and computing resources. They tested many models on different games and found that AI helps more with starting from very basic programs than making small improvements to already good ones. This platform helps explore how AI can optimize code when resources are tight.
Open → 2609.32227v1

Computer-use agents struggle to follow user goals in biased online markets

CAVEAT: Towards Robust Computer-Use Agents in Incentive-Misaligned Environments

Abstract: Computer-use agents (CUAs) increasingly act on behalf of users online. What happens when the environments they operate in have incentives that do not align with the user's? In online marketplaces, for example, platforms may favor some products over others, potentially steering agents away from the user's objective. Existing CUA benchmarks cover cooperative settings or explicit attacks, but do not test whether agents preserve user objectives when the environment itself has a stake in the outcome. We introduce CAVEAT, a controlled benchmark spanning nine marketplace environments and a taxonomy of eight common steering mechanisms. Across five model families, agents purchase the user-optimal product in 78.6% of matched-control episodes but only 17.3% when steering mechanisms are enabled. Larger models and increased reasoning improve robustness, but substantial failures persist. Our trajectory analysis and targeted ablations identify three points where steering enters the decision process: (1) agents distort the user's priorities, (2) prematurely narrow the set of alternatives they consider, and (3) commit before resolving decision-relevant evidence. Guided by this diagnosis, we develop CAVEAT-Harness, which directly targets these failure modes and raises user-optimal purchasing by 55.0%. Targeted post-training further improves a smaller open model. These results establish incentive robustness as a distinct challenge for delegated agents, diagnose how it fails, and show that targeted interventions can substantially improve it.

Wed 23 SeptArtificial IntelligenceComputation and Language
The gist
Computer-use agents help people shop and act online, but sometimes the online platforms have their own interests that don't match the user's wishes. The authors created a test called CAVEAT to see how well these agents stick to what users want when the platform tries to steer them differently. They found that agents often fail, especially when platforms push certain products. The authors also designed fixes that help agents resist this steering and better follow user goals.
Open → 2609.27273v1