❌

Normal view

Received β€” 5 March 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

R1-Code-Interpreter: LLMs Reason with Code via Supervised and Multi-stage Reinforcement Learning

arXiv:2505.21668v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Practical guidance on training Large Language Models (LLMs) to leverage Code Interpreter across diverse tasks remains lacking. We present R1-Code-Interpreter, an extension of a text-only LLM trained via multi-turn supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning (RL) to autonomously generate multiple code queries during step-by-step reasoning. Unlike prior RL + tool-use efforts focused on narrow domains such as math or retrieval, we curate 144 diverse reasoning and planning tasks and show that training a general-purpose Code Interpreter across them presents significant challenges due to task heterogeneity and scarcity of effective samples. To address this, we introduce a multi-stage curriculum learning approach that partitions training samples by measured improvement potential. The RL training prioritizes samples with higher potential and gradually shifts to lower-potential ones, increasing the average RL gains from merely +3.4% to +9.3% across Qwen-2.5 models (3/7/14B). Our final model, R1-CI-14B, improves average accuracy on the 37 test tasks from 44.1% to 72.4%, outperforming text-only GPT-4o (58.6%) and GPT-4o with Code Interpreter (70.9%). Notably, R1-CI-14B also exhibits emergent self-checking behavior through code generation. Datasets, Codes, and Models are available at https://github.com/yongchao98/R1-Code-Interpreter and https://huggingface.co/yongchao98.
Received β€” 25 February 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

Closing the Gap Between Text and Speech Understanding in LLMs

arXiv:2510.13632v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) can be adapted to extend their text capabilities to speech inputs. However, these speech-adapted LLMs consistently underperform their text-based counterparts--and even cascaded pipelines--on language understanding tasks. We term this shortfall the text-speech understanding gap: the performance drop observed when a speech-adapted LLM processes spoken inputs relative to when the original text-based LLM processes the equivalent text. Recent approaches to narrowing this gap either rely on large-scale speech synthesis of text corpora, which is costly and heavily dependent on synthetic data, or on large-scale proprietary speech datasets, which are not reproducible. As a result, there remains a need for more data-efficient alternatives for closing the text-speech understanding gap. In this work, we analyze the gap as driven by two factors: (i) forgetting of text capabilities during adaptation, and (ii) cross-modal misalignment between speech and text. Based on this analysis, we introduce SALAD--Sample-efficient Alignment with Learning through Active selection and cross-modal Distillation--which combines cross-modal distillation with targeted synthetic data to improve alignment while mitigating forgetting. Applied to 3B and 7B LLMs, SALAD achieves competitive performance with a strong open-weight model across broad-domain benchmarks in knowledge, language understanding, and reasoning, while training on over an order of magnitude less speech data from public corpora.

EBPO: Empirical Bayes Shrinkage for Stabilizing Group-Relative Policy Optimization

arXiv:2602.05165v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has proven effective for enhancing the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, dominant approaches like Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) face critical stability challenges: they suffer from high estimator variance under computational constraints (small group sizes) and vanishing gradient signals in saturated failure regimes where all responses yield identical zero rewards. To address this, we propose Empirical Bayes Policy Optimization (EBPO), a novel framework that regularizes local group-based baselines by borrowing strength from the policy's accumulated global statistics. Instead of estimating baselines in isolation, EBPO employs a shrinkage estimator that dynamically balances local group statistics with a global prior updated via Welford's online algorithm. Theoretically, we demonstrate that EBPO guarantees strictly lower Mean Squared Error (MSE), bounded entropy decay, and non-vanishing penalty signals in failure scenarios compared to GRPO. Empirically, EBPO consistently outperforms GRPO and other established baselines across diverse benchmarks, including AIME and OlympiadBench. Notably, EBPO exhibits superior training stability, achieving high-performance gains even with small group sizes, and benefits significantly from difficulty-stratified curriculum learning.
Received β€” 17 February 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

What Do We Mean by 'Pilot Study': Early Findings from a Meta-Review of Pilot Study Reporting at CHI

arXiv:2602.13488v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Pilot studies (PS) are ubiquitous in HCI research. CHI papers routinely reference 'pilot studies', 'pilot tests', or 'preliminary studies' to justify design decisions, verify procedures, or motivate methodological choices. Yet despite their frequency, the role of pilot studies in HCI remains conceptually vague and empirically underexamined. Unlike fields such as medicine, nursing, and education, where pilot and feasibility studies have well-established definitions, guidelines, reporting standards and even a dedicated research journal, the CHI community lacks a shared understanding of what constitutes a pilot study, why they are conducted, and how they should be reported. Many papers reference pilots 'in passing', without details about design, outcomes, or how the pilot informed the main study. This variability suggests a methodological blind spot in our community.
❌