arXiv:2605.25133v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reliably knowing when a language model is correct is almost as important as being correct. We introduce prover-verifier deliberation (PVD), an inference-time protocol grounded in interactive proof theory, as a mechanism for selective prediction: the protocol produces both an answer and a structured confidence verdict, allowing a system to report high-confidence answers while abstaining on uncertain cases. In each dialogue, a prover defends a candidate answer through checkable sub-claims while a verifier issues targeted challenges and returns \textsc{Accept}, \textsc{Challenge}, or \textsc{Reject}. Because frozen language models are imperfect provers and verifiers operating over a noisy channel, formal soundness and completeness guarantees do not transfer; instead, we characterize the protocol empirically through its coverage-precision behavior. Our main experiment uses Claude Sonnet 4.6 as prover and Claude Haiku 4.5 as verifier on GPQA Diamond. Questions accepted with no answer revision, which we call Accept + No Change (ANC), are reported as the high-confidence subset; we evaluate this subset by its precision and coverage. ANC separates reliable from unreliable answers, yielding a $\sim$30pp HC-Prec gap over the non-ANC complement. Robustness experiments with GPT and Gemini pairings show that high HC-Prec can transfer across model families, while verifier strictness and domain competence largely determine the size of the selection gap. On Humanity's Last Exam, weaker prover-verifier pairings can collapse or invert the ANC signal, illustrating a practical failure mode when the verifier operates outside its effective region. Comparisons with self-consistency, universal self-consistency, multi-agent debate, and Reflexion suggest that prover-verifier deliberation supplies a distinct argument-defensibility signal for selective prediction.

arXiv:2605.24958v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Despite the strong performance of deep neural networks in modern Web and language applications, they remain vulnerable to adversarial attacks, especially transferable attacks that generate adversarial examples using surrogate models without accessing the victim model. Transferable attacks in the text domain are still under-explored, with only a few studies addressing this challenging issue, often with suboptimal results due to equal treatment of submodels or inaccurate estimation of importance scores. To address these challenges, we propose a simple yet effective paradigm for transfer-based textual adversarial attack, named SEP-Attack. Specifically, we employ the Determinantal Point Process (DPP) to generate diverse surrogate ensemble weights, representing the transferability of submodels. Using these weights, we introduce a new metric to evaluate prediction confidence scores, which in turn are used to calculate word importance scores and generate adversarial candidates. Finally, we quantify the transferability score for each candidate and select the top ones as the final transferable adversarial examples. Experiments conducted on four datasets and two real-world APIs validate the efficacy of SEP-Attack, significantly outperforming state-of-the-art baselines.

arXiv:2605.25267v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Safe in-context reinforcement learning (ICRL) adapts online from interaction history without test-time parameter updates while controlling episode cost under a safety budget. Under out-of-distribution (OOD) deployment shifts, pretraining-only safe ICRL can give poor reward-safety tradeoffs because the remaining budget affects behavior only through frozen policy conditioning, not an explicit action-level check against predicted future cost. We propose a latent Q-Barrier shield that learns a context representation, latent dynamics, and an ensemble cost critic before deployment. Without parameter updates, the shield infers context from history and filters or softly reweights candidate actions using the remaining budget and predicted future cost. We prove a conditional, error-decomposed barrier-margin result: a Q-Barrier-satisfying action leaves the next latent-budget state with an approximately budget-safe continuation under the learned critic, up to Bellman and latent-prediction errors. Across five safe ICRL benchmarks, the shield improves deployment-time reward-safety tradeoffs over a strong safe-ICRL baseline: after a short context window, it achieves higher return in four of five benchmarks while matching or lowering average episode cost in all five.

arXiv:2605.26089v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We present Channel-wise Vector Quantization (CVQ), a novel image tokenization paradigm that replaces patch-wise tokens with channel-wise tokens. Unlike conventional vector quantization, which assigns a discrete token to each patch feature vector, CVQ quantizes each channel of the feature map. This formulation represents an image as discrete levels of visual details, rather than as a grid of spatial patches. Based on CVQ, we introduce a new visual autoregressive framework with "next-channel prediction". Instead of rendering images patch by patch in raster order, our Channel-wise Autoregressive (CAR) model predicts image channels sequentially, producing progressively enriched visual details. Specifically, it first sketches global structure and then refines fine-grained attributes, akin to a human artist's workflow. Empirically, we show that: (1) CVQ achieves 100% codebook utilization with a 16K+ codebook size without any bells and whistles, and substantially improves reconstruction quality over conventional VQ; and (2) CAR attains a DPG score of 86.7 and a GenEval score of 0.79, demonstrating strong effectiveness for text-to-image generation.

arXiv:2605.20025v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Automating scientific discovery requires more than generating papers from ideas. Real research is iterative: hypotheses are challenged from multiple perspectives, experiments fail and inform the next attempt, and lessons accumulate across cycles. Existing autonomous research systems often model this process as a linear pipeline: they rely on single-agent reasoning, stop when execution fails, and do not carry experience across runs. We present AutoResearchClaw, a multi-agent autonomous research pipeline built on five mechanisms: structured multi-agent debate for hypothesis generation and result analysis, a self-healing executor with a \textsc{Pivot}/\textsc{Refine} decision loop that transforms failures into information, verifiable result reporting that prevents fabricated numbers and hallucinated citations, human-in-the-loop collaboration with seven intervention modes spanning full autonomy to step-by-step oversight, and cross-run evolution that converts past mistakes into future safeguards. On ARC-Bench, a 25-topic experiment-stage benchmark, AutoResearchClaw outperforms AI Scientist v2 by 54.7%. A human-in-the-loop ablation across seven intervention modes reveals that precise, targeted collaboration at high-leverage decision points consistently outperforms both full autonomy and exhaustive step-by-step oversight. We position AutoResearchClaw as a research amplifier that augments rather than replaces human scientific judgment. Code is available at https://github.com/aiming-lab/AutoResearchClaw.

arXiv:2601.10201v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) is widely used for critic-free Large Language Model (LLM) post-training, but its KL regularization is usually implemented as a local loss-side token penalty. We show that this misses the policy-gradient signal induced by autoregressive KL regularization. Unlike standard KL-regularized Reinforcement Learning (RL) objectives, GRPO's group normalization induces a non-linear prompt-level utility; for binary verifier rewards, this utility is $2\arcsin\sqrt p$. As a result, reward and KL cannot be fused before normalization without changing the implicit objective. We derive the on-policy gradient of GRPO-style objectives with token-wise $f$-divergence regularization. The reward term recovers the standardized GRPO advantage, while the regularizer term includes a causal future-regularization return-to-go omitted by local KL losses. For reverse KL, this yields a simple future KL correction: add a reverse cumulative sum of per-token log ratios after advantage construction. The resulting method, Future-KL Regularized Policy Optimization (FRPO), requires no critic or extra model passes. On mathematical reasoning tasks, FRPO improves pass@16 in our main large-model setting while maintaining higher entropy and lower policy drift than conventional loss-side KL baselines.