arXiv:2606.25984v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed as investment research assistants, yet no benchmark tests whether they can accurately reconstruct and apply the specific procedural decision frameworks of expert...
arXiv - Computer Science: Machine Learning
active · last success 2026-07-11 03:59
-
arXiv:2606.25984v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed as investment research assistants, yet no benchmark tests whether they can accurately reconstruct and apply the specific procedural decision frameworks of expert investors. We introduce InvestPhilBench, a multi-layer benchmark spanning eight cognitive tiers, from principle identification (L1) to novel framework extrapolation (L8). The v0.6 release comprises 118 primary-source-verified principle cards, 25 decision-framework cards with explicit topology metadata, and 243 QA questions (197 dev / 46 held-out test). For reproducible scoring at scale we introduce the Benchmark Automated Scoring Pipeline (BASP), five algorithmic metrics, the Failure Mode Detection Protocol (FMDP) covering six failure modes, and Gate Reconstruction Accuracy (GRA), a per-gate metric for questions with gold reasoning programs. This release is primarily a benchmark-and-methodology contribution: its empirical study -- a four-model sanity wave on the 188-question development split (closed-book) -- is deliberately preliminary and stress-tests the metric design rather than ranking models. The wave shows a sharp provider-tier split (BASP 0.906 vs. 0.438), though these mixed-judge numbers are confounded upper bounds. The central methodological finding survives the caveat: the BASP composite saturates at the frontier (Claude L4 = 0.932) while GRA still exposes a procedural deficit (frontier L4 GRA ~0.77, L7 GRA 0.57-0.62) -- composite scoring rewards fluent prose and hides the procedural gap. On a 100-item expert-annotated gold set, the automated BASP composite tracks the human reference at Pearson r = 0.72 (MAE = 0.10). v0.6 also implements a unified judge and true model-in-the-loop retrieval/oracle conditions; the de-confounded multi-model leaderboard and full three-condition run are v1.0 deliverables.
-
arXiv:2607.06655v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: In this report, we present Pelican-VLA 0.5, a unified VLA model that integrates vision-language understanding, future-frame generation, and action prediction within a single architecture. Pelican-VLA 0.5 achieves...
arXiv:2607.06655v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: In this report, we present Pelican-VLA 0.5, a unified VLA model that integrates vision-language understanding, future-frame generation, and action prediction within a single architecture. Pelican-VLA 0.5 achieves attention-level generalization: without object annotations, segmentation masks, attention supervision, or task-specific fine-tuning, its action pathway already focuses on the manipulation-relevant object and contact region. This behavior persists across unseen scenes and unseen robot embodiments, and is substantially stronger than in other open-source VLA baselines. We verify that this ability originates from the learnable Bottleneck Token inserted between perception and action: by routing task-relevant visual information through a compact bottleneck, the tokens interface induces manipulation-centric attention during pre-training and remains effective across different policy structures, including a MoT-style architecture. -
arXiv:2606.00329v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recursive systems can enter collapse-like regimes -- self-reinforcing amplification, persistent recursion, and narrowing diversity that mask accelerating internal degradation -- before overt failure becomes visible. We...
arXiv:2606.00329v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recursive systems can enter collapse-like regimes -- self-reinforcing amplification, persistent recursion, and narrowing diversity that mask accelerating internal degradation -- before overt failure becomes visible. We introduce Loopzero, a claim-bounded benchmark framework for testing whether recursive failures follow a directional telemetry pattern: rising gain (G), recursive persistence (p), and declining diversity ($\delta$). The claim boundary is specified in Lean; the Lean artifact does not verify real telemetry, benchmark validity, or detector performance. We evaluate the bridge on two frozen public-artifact benchmarks: a segmented public-markets benchmark (Volmageddon 2018, COVID MWCB 2020) and a MovieLens-25M offline deterministic recommender replay. Detectors are evaluated under a locked equal-false-positive contract (FP $\in$ [0.03, 0.07], pre-registered) so all configurations face the same alert budget. Neither tested standard comparators nor Loopzero's pre-registered quantile detector achieved an accepted operating point. Directional witness alignment held on both canonical benchmarks, with adjacent-horizon and row-level limitations disclosed. Digitized Shumailov et al. (2024) LLM training-loop trajectories are directionally consistent with the pattern; matched-FP evaluation in that domain is deferred. The contribution is a reproducible, falsifiable benchmark framework for evaluating recursive-collapse warning claims under an explicit alert-budget contract -- non-acceptance reported as a first-class scientific outcome. -
arXiv:2606.16567v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Neural ordinary differential equations (neural ODE) gained attention in safety critical settings such as continuous-time controllers for cyber-physical systems and classifiers integrated into automated decision...
arXiv:2606.16567v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Neural ordinary differential equations (neural ODE) gained attention in safety critical settings such as continuous-time controllers for cyber-physical systems and classifiers integrated into automated decision pipelines, raising the question whether their behavior can be formally verified. Existing tools dedicated to neural ODE provide only a single reachability call without iterative input-set refinement, limiting the precision of their verdicts to whatever one reachability call can deliver. We present TNODEV, the first formal verifier for neural ODE that integrates a falsification checker, a fast interval-based reachability backend based on continuous-time mixed monotonicity, a verification and refinement loop with three input-set splitting heuristics, and a parallel scheduler in a single end-to-end pipeline. TNODEV supports safe-set inclusion verification on pure neural ODE, neural ODE in closed loop with a neural network controller and general neural ODE (GNODE), with the safe set specified either as an interval or as the half-space intersection induced by a target classification label. We evaluate TNODEV on a range of benchmarks across safe-set inclusion and classification-robustness properties, including a direct reachability comparison against NNV 2.0 and CORA and a verification comparison against NNV 2.0 on MNIST general neural ODE classifiers. - End of feed