llm developers

Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) perform well on reasoning benchmarks, but it remains unclear whether this reflects genuine contextual reasoning or reliance on facts memorized in their parameters. We investigate this by distinguishing two possibilities: a broad \textit{memorization bias}, where familiar content improves reasoning performance, and the \textit{Strong Parametric Shortcut Hypothesis}, where models skip reasoning entirely and recall stored answers. To test these effects, we introduce \textbf{MemoReason}, a human-curated benchmark that pairs factual reasoning tasks with structurally identical \fictitiousterm{} versions where real entities like people, companies, or dates are systematically replaced by \fictitiousterm{} ones of the same type. This \scorerevision{preserves task structure and specified reasoning operations} while varying the familiarity of the context, allowing controlled measurement of how the parametric memory affects reasoning. \revision{Our evaluation of recent LLMs reveals consistent and statistically significant performance drops of up to 15.7\% in the fictitious setting, demonstrating a clear memorization bias.} However, a targeted analysis of \revision{questions failed in the fictitious setting} shows that models rarely respond with the corresponding factual answer, indicating that direct parametric shortcuts are not the dominant failure mode. These findings suggest that parametric memory influences reasoning through mechanisms more complex than simple factual recall. \textbf{MemoReason} provides a controlled framework for studying these mechanisms and for extending paired factual-fictitious{} evaluation to broader reasoning settings.

Abstract: Safety-aligned LLMs can exhibit emergent misalignment (EM): narrow domain adaptation unexpectedly triggers catastrophic safety failures across unrelated domains. Prior static analyses leave training dynamics unmapped, while existing defenses rely on heuristics that degrade utility. We present a dynamic, second-order geometric study of EM. Tracking training trajectories reveals that directional Hessian curvature concentrates sharply on semantic pivot tokens. Grassmannian projections show that, in most settings, harmful-safe gap widens mainly because safe-gradient overlap declines. Leveraging these insights, we introduce a parameter-level Geometric Mitigation Framework that orthogonally projects empirical harmful gradient subspace out of parameter updates. On Qwen2.5-14B-IT, our defense suppresses free-generation EM by up to 80.0%; across the other three of four open-weight instruction-based model families (3B--20B), where single-layer behavioral EM is already near zero, teacher-forced evaluation shows same harmful subspace controls the conditional support of frozen EM responses. Crucially, these diagnostics unmask the illusion of behavioral safety: the same subspace remains measurable and steerable in models where behavioral EM is near zero. Code: https://github.com/WeiqiaoQUE/mechanistic-emergent-misalignment.

Abstract: Repeated sampling can reveal a correct numerical answer without yielding either a reliable system output or a supported derivation. We present Coverage, Realization, and Validity Evidence (CRV), an evaluation protocol for sampled large language model (LLM) reasoning over formal geometry states. Coverage is answer availability, realization is readout accuracy on the frozen candidate pool, and validity evidence is a label-blinded critic judgment of derivational support rather than a proof certificate. CRV freezes each candidate pool before comparing readouts and analyzes covered failures by correct-answer multiplicity and within-problem discrimination. On HardShift441, a 441-problem set for which a reference solver leaves 406 problems unsolved, a LoRA-adapted Qwen2.5-7B generator obtains 24.2% average single-sample accuracy and 68.9% pass@16, whereas verifier-weighted self-consistency (WSC) reaches 38.0%. Readout accuracy is particularly low when the correct answer occurs only once or twice in the pool. In a separate constructed audit of 195 covered problems, the critic labels 12 correct-answer representatives as supported, 181 as refuted, and two as uncertain. These results show that coverage, realization, and validity evidence from the critic are distinct quantities and should be reported separately.

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can learn reusable textual skills from execution feedback without updating their parameters, but effectively deciding how to revise these skills remains a key challenge. Existing methods typically rely on a fixed revision operator, a search strategy and the revision forms applied under it. However, we observe that no single revision operator consistently performs best across tasks, and repeatedly applying an unsuitable operator can limit further improvement. We propose StraTune (strategy-guided skill tuning), which lets a frozen optimizer LLM choose the revision operator at every round from the optimization state, which is defined as the current execution feedback together with the recorded outcomes of earlier strategies and forms. Candidate skills from every revision operator pass one candidate evaluation, which screens for gains and regressions on a small sample set and validates them on a larger one, and every outcome is written back to the optimization state for later choices. Across four benchmarks and two LLM settings, StraTune outperforms all five baselines in most settings. Ablations attribute the gains to the adaptive choice of the revision operator, since fixed, random, scheduled, and bandit strategy choices all score lower, and skills learned with a small target LLM also improve a stronger one. Code and learned skills are available at https://github.com/seai-lab/StraTune.

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can produce factually incorrect answers with high confidence, undermining their reliability and limiting the effectiveness of uncertainty-based error detection. While prior research attributes confident hallucinations to factors such as missing knowledge in training data, reasoning errors, or stochastic decoding, we uncover that post-training alignment itself is a primary driver of these errors, a phenomenon we call the \textbf{Alignment Paradox}. Across five model families evaluated on factual benchmarks, unaligned base models produce few high-confidence errors on long-tail factual queries, whereas instruction-tuned models multiply high-confidence errors ($p \ge 0.95$) by more than an order of magnitude (10$\times$ to 35$\times$). Layer-wise probing with the Logit Lens reveals that this overconfidence emerges in late layers, where wrong-answer margins expand past 4.0 points after remaining near zero across early and intermediate layers. These findings motivate limiting margin growth during post-training. We implement this principle through an entropy-dependent margin bound in direct preference optimization (DPO). In multi-epoch experiments with Mistral-7B, the bounded objective reduces high-confidence errors by up to 35.3\% relative to standard DPO while maintaining performance on evaluated general reasoning benchmarks. These results show that bounded margins mitigate confident hallucinations during post-training.

Abstract: Prompt engineering has become an indispensable tool for using large language models (LLMs), turning LLMs into task-specific experts without changing their weights. Despite notable theoretical advances in prompt engineering, the theory for the more practical hard or discrete prompts is largely open. In this paper, we try to fill this gap either by providing a complete solution or by making substantial progress on the three core theoretical questions regarding hard prompts. First, we show that determining the existence of a hard prompt for a transformer to solve a downstream task is NP-complete and that finding an optimal hard prompt is NP-hard, which is the first computational complexity result for hard prompting, as far as we know. Second, we show that, unlike soft or continuous prompts, hard prompts have essential limitations: hard prompts are not complete; short hard prompts do not significantly enhance the ability of transformers; and long hard prompts exhibit the "prompt dominating answer phenomenon," meaning that, with high probability, the same answer is given for all queries of the same length. On the other hand, linear hard prompts do not have the limitations of short or long prompts. Third, we provide a tight bound on the size of the task in terms of the prompt length for the performance of prompts on the finite task to generalize to the entire data distribution, leading to a necessary and sufficient condition for generalizability. This is the first result on generalization for prompting, as far as we know. Our findings not only offer the first theoretical insights into hard prompts but also provide provably reliable practical guidance for real-world LLM usage.

Abstract: Faithful user simulation is fundamental to building, evaluating, and improving interactive AI at scale. However, plausible individual responses do not ensure that simulated users reproduce the intent evolution and outcomes observed in real interactions. We propose TRACER, a multi-turn user simulator that explicitly models users' evolving intent and learns to align simulated behavior with real interaction trajectories. TRACER is trained in two stages: supervised fine-tuning on real user dialogues, followed by multi-turn reinforcement learning. The RL stage combines hierarchical outcome- and trajectory-level rewards with deviation-aware advantage modulation, jointly mitigating reward sparsity and credit assignment in long dialogues. On real customer-service sessions organized into reference cohorts, TRACER-7B surpasses the strongest baseline by 11.4 conversion F1, while also achieving the lowest group-level conversion-rate error and semantic trajectory distance, and generalizing to out-of-distribution scenarios. Human Turing tests yield identification accuracy close to chance, supporting the perceived naturalness of generated conversations. Building on this simulator, we further introduce the Dynamic Marketing Benchmark, which jointly evaluates persuasion effectiveness and response quality of LLMs through simulated interactions, revealing that higher response quality does not necessarily correspond to higher conversion rates.

Abstract: Attributing language model outputs to their internal computations is an open problem in interpretability. Existing methods, which use causal interventions, gradients, or learnable masks, either are infeasibly expensive or struggle to identify actual causally-important internal computations. We propose framing attribution as the problem of identifying nested subsets of internal components which minimise a downstream loss. To learn this task, we introduce Matryoshka Attribution (MAttr), a mask learning method that parametrises the mask with a simple differentiable sigmoid top-$k$ operator. We supervise training over all sparsities simultaneously by randomising $k$ over training, resulting in a learned ordering of components by attribution score. MAttr achieves number 1 on the official leaderboard of the Mechanistic Interpretability Benchmark (Mueller et al., 2025); our method identifies sparse and task-transferrable circuits across varying circuit bases. As a practical application, we show that MAttr can be trained with reinforcement learning to identify weight changes responsible for downstream behaviours in LLM finetuning. We train MAttr on refusal judge scores and find that restoring $1\%$ of Llama 3.1 8B Instruct's weights to their base model state is sufficient to remove refusals while maintaining capabilities. We view MAttr as a successful formulation of interpretability into a learnable objective that we can tackle with gradient descent, and encourage future work along these lines.

Abstract: In this work, we examine the topology of information flow patterns within attention graphs to effectively distinguish hallucinated from non-hallucinated responses. We analyze the Forman-Ricci curvature to identify structural patterns indicating information bottlenecks in attention graphs. We then introduce a method that captures both semi-local and global information-flow characteristics of attention heads associated with hallucinated responses. We evaluate our approach extensively across several LLMs and established benchmarks. Empirical results demonstrate that our proposed single-pass approach provides consistent improvements over existing attention-based and multi-response baselines across two hallucination-detection benchmarks, while achieving competitive performance across diverse LLM architectures. Further analysis reveals that impaired context sharing among tokens during causal generation is strongly associated with hallucination occurrences in LLMs. In particular, hallucinated responses are consistently characterized by an over-reliance on self-attention, diffused context retrieval from earlier tokens, or information over-squashing, especially in the final transformer layer.

Abstract: Reinforcement learning for LLM agents involves two distinct optimization di- mensions: how environment feedback is exploited within a trajectory, and how complete trajectories are aggregated across a batch. We formulate these dimen- sions as Intra-Trajectory Feedback Attribution and Inter-Trajectory Objec- tive Aggregation, and introduce BATON (Bayesian Attribution and Trajectory Objective Normalization), a dual-axis policy optimization framework. BATON instantiates the first axis with Bayesian Feedback Attribution, which constructs a feedback-conditioned posterior over sampled actions, and the second with Trajec- tory Mass Normalization (TMN), which assigns equal optimization mass to com- plete trajectories. Experiments with GRPO and GiGPO on ALFWorld, WebShop, and SearchQA show that both axes provide independent gains and that their combi- nation consistently achieves the strongest overall performance across model scales.

Abstract: Integrating robust safety guardrails into Large Language Models (LLMs) is essential for delivering helpful yet harmless responses. While proprietary systems exhibit reliable safety controls, their underlying methodologies and trade-offs remain largely undisclosed. Achieving comparable security in open-weight models remains a persistent challenge, as post-trained variants frequently suffer from over-refusal and degraded general quality. To overcome these drawbacks, we introduce Suan, a novel preference optimization algorithm. Unlike existing methods, we formulate the optimization objective directly at the gradient level, bypassing the standard variational derivation. As a result, we obtain more interpretable and robust training dynamics. Extensive evaluations across a diverse suite of competitive baselines and benchmarks demonstrate that Suan achieves superior safety alignment while fully preserving response utility.