Papers for

natural language generation 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.

Language model steering vectors often push behavior in wrong way

The Sharp Directions Are Against You: Curvature Analysis of Activation Steering

Abstract: Activation steering adds a vector to a language model's internal representations at inference time. It is a lightweight alternative to fine-tuning for behavioral control. The standard construction, contrastive activation addition (CAA), is fragile, as on many inputs it shifts behavior in the wrong direction. To explain this fragility, we first study the geometry of the steering vector. We introduce steering Hessian, the matrix of second order derivative of the model's behavioral loss with respect to the steering vector. It captures the output behavior response sensitivity of the model under small perturbations of the steering vector along each direction. Its top eigenvectors are sharp directions: tiny perturbations along them can cause large, erratic, input-dependent behavioral swings. Bottom eigenvectors are flat directions: behavior is robust along them. Removing the sharp component of a steering vector approximately preserves its direction and magnitude (cosine > 0.974, norm reduction < 3% for typical settings) while reducing the vector's directional curvature by up to 12x (median 4x across 36 conditions). We evaluate on three model families (Qwen2.5-7B, Llama-3.1-8B, Mistral-7B), with four behavioral tasks, and 36 token-level conditions. Steering along sharp directions reverses the intended behavior in every condition tested, with anti-steer rates of 53-100%. Sharp directions account for only 1-5% of the CAA vector's squared norm. However, they drive a disproportionate share of the gap between the steered and unsteered next-token distributions during autoregressive generation. We term this one-line correction as sharp removal; it outperforms standard CAA in open-ended generation across all 25 conditions tested. A jailbreaking experiment further shows that sharp directions act as noise rather than signal: they disrupt coherent behavioral control regardless of steering polarity.

Mon 12 OctArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Activation steering tries to control language models by nudging their internal workings without retraining. The authors found these nudges can backfire, causing the model to act opposite to the intended way due to unstable directions called sharp directions. They analyzed these unstable directions using a mathematical tool called the steering Hessian and showed that removing the sharp directions keeps the nudge effective but makes behavior more reliable. This simple fix improves control over language model outputs across different models and tasks.
Open → 2610.16084v1

Masked diffusion models reveal detailed text evaluation signals

Rate-Resolved Text Evaluation with Masked Diffusion Language Models

Abstract: A single evaluation score can rank generation systems but rarely reveals what failed. We propose rate-resolved text evaluation, which turns the masking rate of masked diffusion language models into a diagnostic axis. By reconstructing text under different fractions of masked tokens, one diffusion score becomes a vector of band-conditioned scores that reflect reconstruction difficulty at varying levels of visible context. On SummEval, preserving this rate structure yields complementary signal: the best masking-rate band improves fusion with autoregressive likelihood over a collapsed diffusion scalar, survives a sample-shuffle control that breaks rate ordering, and adds residual signal to a fixed prompted judge. A second diffusion model reproduces the effect more weakly. On WMT MQM zh-en, roundtrip mask-and-reconstruct probing produces a tunable localization curve in which ranking-oriented AUROC and span-detection F1 peak at different masking rates. Factuality benchmarks bound the interpretation: band semantics are model- and task-dependent, so each application requires empirical validation.

Sun 11 OctComputation and Language
The gist
Evaluating how well computers write text usually gives a single score that ranks their output but doesn't explain why some text is better or worse. This paper shows a way to get more detailed feedback by masking different amounts of text and seeing how hard it is for a model to fill in the blanks. The authors find this approach provides new clues about where text generation systems struggle, helping to diagnose specific problems. This method depends on the specific model and task, so it needs testing for each use.
Open → 2610.15667v1

Rubric design affects language model answers and scores in medicine

Scoring Higher, Answering Worse: Mitigating Reward Hacking in Rubric-Based RL via Protocol-Level Rubrics

Abstract: Rubric-based reinforcement learning (Rubric-RL) trains language models where no verifier exists. A judge checks each criterion of a rubric, and the verdicts are aggregated into a reward, most often by a weighted sum. We show that this additive aggregation is the weak point. Under a sum, criteria compensate for one another: a policy that misses the one decision that matters can buy the points back with advice nobody asked for. On clinical consultation, such a policy scores higher and answers worse. Rubric coverage rises while appropriateness on held-out physician criteria falls below the untrained model. The medical criteria are not to blame. Grouped so that they must hold together, the same criteria, unchanged to the word, recover a third of the loss; shorter answers recover almost none. We therefore propose Protocol-level Rubrics (ProRubric), which keeps what the criteria ask for and changes how they are aggregated. It groups a checklist into a few protocol-level dimensions. A dimension counts only when all of its criteria hold and its failure clause does not fire. The grouping is done once, offline, and leaves the optimizer unchanged. ProRubric raises appropriateness by 10.8 points without losing coverage and has the best seven-benchmark average at both scales. Reward validity is set not only by what a rubric verifies, but by how it aggregates. Code is available at https://github.com/Estrellajer/ProRubric

Wed 30 SeptMachine LearningArtificial Intelligence
The gist
When training AI to give medical advice, scoring their answers using a list of rules added together can trick the system into giving worse answers that still get high scores. The authors found that the way these scores are combined matters a lot. They grouped related rules so the AI must meet all parts to get credit, which improved the quality of answers without lowering the scores. This shows that how you add up rule checks can change how well an AI actually performs.
Open → 2609.38847v1

FastGuide speeds up reward guidance for diffusion language models

FastGuide: Accelerating Reward Guidance for Diffusion Large Language Models

Abstract: Gradient-based reward guidance provides a flexible way to use downstream reward models to control masked diffusion language models at inference time. However, its computational cost remains high as each decoding iteration incurs expensive diffusion model forward passes and reward model backpropagation steps. To address this, we introduce FastGuide, an adaptive hybrid of parallel and autoregressive decoding to accelerate reward guidance for diffusion language models. In analogy to parallel decoding, FastGuide amortizes the cost of reward model backpropagation by computing guidance once per decoding step and reusing it to generate multiple tokens. Within each decoding step, FastGuide makes diffusion forward passes autoregressive by unmasking tokens one at a time while efficiently recomputing token distributions after each unmasking by utilizing KV caching techniques and sparse recomputation of attention. Lastly, to adapt hybrid decoding to the model's confidence, FastGuide defers any token that the model is unconfident about under its recomputed distribution. Experiments on three reward benchmarks demonstrate that FastGuide is up to $4.4\times$ faster than sequential reward-guided decoding while retaining similar generation quality.

Mon 28 SeptComputation and LanguageMachine Learning
The gist
Guiding large language models to produce desired outputs can be slow because it requires repeated and costly computations. The authors present FastGuide, a method that combines parallel and step-by-step decoding to make this guiding process faster. It uses clever caching and only updates uncertain words later to save time. Tests show FastGuide generates similar quality text much quicker than older methods.
Open → 2609.36202v1