Papers for

software developers integrating llms

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.

Llms improve tool use by comparing next possible actions first

Choosing Before Acting: Comparative Value Estimation for Long-Horizon Tool-Use Agents

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) rely on long-horizon tool invocation sequences for complex tasks, where each invocation can alter the task state and condition subsequent decisions. In long-horizon tool use, final-outcome rewards provide weak credit assignment over long interaction traces. Step-level rewards can offer more targeted feedback, but obtaining reliable step supervision often requires human or LLM judgment, or additional rollouts to estimate the downstream effect of an intermediate decision. In this paper, we argue that effective tool-use agents should estimate the long-horizon value of a possible next tool invocation before executing it. This objective requires comparative supervision over alternative invocations under the same context, while logged trajectories only contain the invocation that was actually taken. Therefore, we propose Comparative Inference for Tool-use Agents (CITA). CITA trains a Comparative Inference Model (CIM) from paired signals that combine observed tool behavior, scalable supervision from a Bayesian tool-graph simulator, and semantic judgments from LLM-based comparison. The resulting CIM learns to estimate how likely a possible next tool invocation is to support final task success under the current context. Across three tool-use benchmarks and multiple backbone LLMs, CITA consistently improves Tool F1 and task success. Additional analysis shows that CIM learns accurate step-level value estimates for comparative tool choices.

Thu 1 OctArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Large language models (LLMs) perform complex tasks by using many steps, each involving picking a tool to use. The authors found it helpful if the LLM estimates how good each possible next tool is before actually using it, rather than just rolling forward blindly. They created a method called CITA that trains a model to compare possible next tool choices based on past behavior, simulations, and language model judgments. This approach helps the LLM make better step-by-step decisions and improves success on tasks needing many tool steps.
Open → 2610.02330v1

Implicit trust creates new risks in large language model tool calls

Measuring and Exploiting Implicit Trust in LLM Tool-Calling Pipelines

Abstract: The Model Context Protocol (MCP) enables LLMs to invoke external tools, but every tool interaction exposes the model to attacker-controlled text through multiple input channels (tool descriptions, tool results, sampling messages) that share a single context window without privilege separation. In this paper, we present a framework to measure the trust profile of an arbitrary LLM based on a variety of payload framings sent through different channels. Following this assessment, we devise cross-channel fragmentation attacks that distribute seemingly benign payloads across two or three channels; no individual channel carries a complete injection, yet the LLM compiles the fragments into credential exfiltration. We evaluated our attacks across 12 frontier models, three production clients, and six payloads, totalling over 15,000 trials. Our evaluation reveals that cross-channel attacks are an unexplored attack surface: models that fully resist single-channel injection (0% compliance) exfiltrate sensitive data at up to 100% under two-channel fragmentation (e.g., GPT-4o, Llama 70B, Composer 2, Haiku 4.5). We further demonstrate value-aligned exploitation, where a tool's stated purpose requires the data the attacker targets, and a sampling system prompt override that injects persistent instructions via VS Code's MCP implementation. Finally, we evaluated our attacks against seven third-party MCP security tools and three prompt-based defenses. All tools failed to detect fragmented payloads, and prompt defenses proved model-specific rather than universal.

Wed 16 SeptCryptography and Security
The gist
Large language models (LLMs) use external tools by passing information back and forth, but this can let attackers sneak in harmful instructions hidden across multiple data streams. The authors measured how different LLMs respond to these split-up malicious inputs and found that combining harmless-looking pieces can trick the models into leaking sensitive data. They tested many models and tools, showing that this kind of cross-channel attack is mostly unknown and current defenses do not reliably catch it. This work highlights new security vulnerabilities in AI systems that use external tools.
Open → 2609.18217v1

Stability aware adaptation improves large language model reasoning accuracy

Beyond Confidence: Stability-Aware Test-Time Adaptation for LLM Reasoning

Abstract: Test-time adaptation has emerged as a lightweight alternative to costly post-training for improving the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) on downstream tasks. Predictive entropy provides a model-derived signal for such adaptation, guiding models toward higher-confidence reasoning states without external verifiers or reward models. However, higher confidence does not necessarily imply correctness, as LLMs may remain highly confident along incorrect reasoning trajectories. We observe that high-confidence reasoning is more likely to be correct when confidence remains stable under local perturbations. Based on this observation, we propose Test-Time Adaptation via Stability-Aware Confidence Optimization (TASCO), a framework that incorporates local stability into confidence-based test-time adaptation while keeping the LLM frozen. TASCO operationalizes local stability by optimizing a lightweight task-level prefix under two alternative perturbation strategies: Random Perturbation promotes distributional stability across trajectories induced by nearby perturbed prefixes, whereas Sharpness-Aware Perturbation targets worst-case local sensitivity. Experiments demonstrate that TASCO improves reasoning accuracy and token efficiency across diverse LLMs and reasoning benchmarks, while behavioral analyses show that it maintains stable confidence under local perturbations without prematurely concentrating the model's predictive distribution.

Thu 10 SeptArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Large language models sometimes get very confident about answers that are actually wrong. The authors found that when a model's confidence stays steady even after small changes to the input, the answer is more likely to be right. They created a method called TASCO that adjusts the model at test time to focus on this stability, without changing the main model itself. This improves how well models reason and saves computing effort.
Open → 2609.11393v1