arXiv:2603.02217v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models scale capacity efficiently, but their massive parameter footprint creates a deployment-time memory bottleneck. We organize retraining-free MoE compression into three paradigms - Expert Pruning, Expert Editing, and Expert Merging - and show that persistent post-compression degradation largely stems from a neglected factor: router-expert mismatch when experts are changed but the router is left untouched. We argue that effective retraining-free compression should avoid updating expert parameters while allowing lightweight router calibration. To this end, we propose Router Knowledge Distillation (Router KD), which updates only a tiny fraction of parameters (the router) by distilling the original model's next-token distribution on unlabeled calibration data. Experiments across representative methods in all three paradigms demonstrate consistent performance recovery, with substantially larger gains in fine-grained MoEs (many small experts) than in coarse-grained MoEs due to their more complex routing decision boundaries.

arXiv:2602.17053v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) exhibit strong performance, yet often produce rationales that sound plausible but fail to reflect their true decision process, undermining reliability and trust. We introduce a formal framework for reasoning faithfulness, defined by two testable conditions: stance consistency (a coherent stance linking reasoning to answer) and causal influence (the stated reasoning causally drives the answer under output-level interventions), explicitly decoupled from accuracy. To operationalize this, we present RFEval, a benchmark of 7,186 instances across seven tasks that probes faithfulness via controlled, output-level counterfactual interventions. Evaluating twelve open-source LRMs, we find unfaithfulness in 49.7% of outputs, predominantly from stance inconsistency. Failures are concentrated in brittle, convergent domains such as math and code, and correlate more with post-training regimes than with scale: within-family ablations indicate that adding current RL-style objectives on top of supervised fine-tuning can reduce reasoning faithfulness, even when accuracy is maintained. Crucially, accuracy is neither a sufficient nor a reliable proxy for faithfulness: once controlling for model and task, the accuracy-faithfulness link is weak and statistically insignificant. Our work establishes a rigorous methodology for auditing LRM reliability and shows that trustworthy AI requires optimizing not only for correct outcomes but also for the structural integrity of the reasoning process. Our code and dataset can be found at project page: https://aidaslab.github.io/RFEval/