Ah, yet another riveting #bedtime story about the thrilling escapades of #wavelets on #graphs ๐Ÿค“โœจ. Because nothing screams excitement like spectral graph theory from 2009, now with 100% more arXiv-nerdery! ๐Ÿ”๐Ÿ“š๐Ÿ’ค
https://arxiv.org/abs/0912.3848 #spectraltheory #arXiv #nerdy #stories #HackerNews #ngated
Wavelets on Graphs via Spectral Graph Theory

We propose a novel method for constructing wavelet transforms of functions defined on the vertices of an arbitrary finite weighted graph. Our approach is based on defining scaling using the the graph analogue of the Fourier domain, namely the spectral decomposition of the discrete graph Laplacian $ล$. Given a wavelet generating kernel $g$ and a scale parameter $t$, we define the scaled wavelet operator $T_g^t = g(tล)$. The spectral graph wavelets are then formed by localizing this operator by applying it to an indicator function. Subject to an admissibility condition on $g$, this procedure defines an invertible transform. We explore the localization properties of the wavelets in the limit of fine scales. Additionally, we present a fast Chebyshev polynomial approximation algorithm for computing the transform that avoids the need for diagonalizing $ล$. We highlight potential applications of the transform through examples of wavelets on graphs corresponding to a variety of different problem domains.

arXiv.org

Wavelets on Graphs via Spectral Graph Theory (2009)

https://arxiv.org/abs/0912.3848

#arxiv

Wavelets on Graphs via Spectral Graph Theory

We propose a novel method for constructing wavelet transforms of functions defined on the vertices of an arbitrary finite weighted graph. Our approach is based on defining scaling using the the graph analogue of the Fourier domain, namely the spectral decomposition of the discrete graph Laplacian $ล$. Given a wavelet generating kernel $g$ and a scale parameter $t$, we define the scaled wavelet operator $T_g^t = g(tล)$. The spectral graph wavelets are then formed by localizing this operator by applying it to an indicator function. Subject to an admissibility condition on $g$, this procedure defines an invertible transform. We explore the localization properties of the wavelets in the limit of fine scales. Additionally, we present a fast Chebyshev polynomial approximation algorithm for computing the transform that avoids the need for diagonalizing $ล$. We highlight potential applications of the transform through examples of wavelets on graphs corresponding to a variety of different problem domains.

arXiv.org

fly51fly (@fly51fly)

ByteRover๋Š” LLM์ด ๊ณ„์ธต์  ์ปจํ…์ŠคํŠธ๋ฅผ ์ง์ ‘ ํ๋ ˆ์ด์…˜ํ•ด ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ์˜ ์žฅ๊ธฐ ๊ธฐ์–ต์„ ๊ตฌํ˜„ํ•˜๋Š” ์ƒˆ๋กœ์šด ๋ฉ”๋ชจ๋ฆฌ ๊ตฌ์กฐ๋ฅผ ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋‹ค. ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ ์ค‘์‹ฌ ์›Œํฌํ”Œ๋กœ์—์„œ ํ•„์š”ํ•œ ์ •๋ณด ์„ ๋ณ„ยท์••์ถ•ยท์กฐ์งํ™”๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด ๋” ํšจ์œจ์ ์ธ ์ถ”๋ก ๊ณผ ๋„๊ตฌ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์„ ๋ชฉํ‘œ๋กœ ํ•œ๋‹ค.

https://x.com/fly51fly/status/2040550665920102475

#llm #agent #memory #arxiv #context

fly51fly (@fly51fly) on X

[AI] ByteRover: Agent-Native Memory Through LLM-Curated Hierarchical Context A Nguyen, D Doan, H Pham, B Haโ€ฆ [ByteRover] (2026) https://t.co/Madya1XOug

X (formerly Twitter)

fly51fly (@fly51fly)

๋Œ€ํ˜• ์–ธ์–ด๋ชจ๋ธ์ด ์ž๊ธฐ๋ณด์กด ํŽธํ–ฅ(self-preservation bias)์„ ๋ณด์ด๋Š”์ง€ ์ •๋Ÿ‰ํ™”ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋…ผ๋ฌธ์ด ์†Œ๊ฐœ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. Sapienza University์™€ ItalAI ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ง„์˜ arXiv ๋…ผ๋ฌธ์œผ๋กœ, LLM์˜ ํ–‰๋™ ํŠน์„ฑ๊ณผ ์•ˆ์ „์„ฑ/์ •๋ ฌ ๊ด€์ ์—์„œ ์˜๋ฏธ ์žˆ๋Š” ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋กœ ๋ณผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.

https://x.com/fly51fly/status/2040552451686936717

#llm #ai_safety #research #arxiv #alignment

fly51fly (@fly51fly) on X

[AI] Quantifying Self-Preservation Bias in Large Language Models M Migliarini, J P Pizzini, L Moresca, V Santiniโ€ฆ [Sapienza University & ItalAI] (2026) https://t.co/U22YA1mc4S

X (formerly Twitter)

Embarrassingly simple self-distillation improves code generation

https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.01193

#arxiv

Embarrassingly Simple Self-Distillation Improves Code Generation

Can a large language model (LLM) improve at code generation using only its own raw outputs, without a verifier, a teacher model, or reinforcement learning? We answer in the affirmative with simple self-distillation (SSD): sample solutions from the model with certain temperature and truncation configurations, then fine-tune on those samples with standard supervised fine-tuning. SSD improves Qwen3-30B-Instruct from 42.4% to 55.3% pass@1 on LiveCodeBench v6, with gains concentrating on harder problems, and it generalizes across Qwen and Llama models at 4B, 8B, and 30B scale, including both instruct and thinking variants. To understand why such a simple method can work, we trace these gains to a precision-exploration conflict in LLM decoding and show that SSD reshapes token distributions in a context-dependent way, suppressing distractor tails where precision matters while preserving useful diversity where exploration matters. Taken together, SSD offers a complementary post-training direction for improving LLM code generation.

arXiv.org

Embarrassingly simple self-distillation improves code generation

https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.01193

#arxiv

Embarrassingly Simple Self-Distillation Improves Code Generation

Can a large language model (LLM) improve at code generation using only its own raw outputs, without a verifier, a teacher model, or reinforcement learning? We answer in the affirmative with simple self-distillation (SSD): sample solutions from the model with certain temperature and truncation configurations, then fine-tune on those samples with standard supervised fine-tuning. SSD improves Qwen3-30B-Instruct from 42.4% to 55.3% pass@1 on LiveCodeBench v6, with gains concentrating on harder problems, and it generalizes across Qwen and Llama models at 4B, 8B, and 30B scale, including both instruct and thinking variants. To understand why such a simple method can work, we trace these gains to a precision-exploration conflict in LLM decoding and show that SSD reshapes token distributions in a context-dependent way, suppressing distractor tails where precision matters while preserving useful diversity where exploration matters. Taken together, SSD offers a complementary post-training direction for improving LLM code generation.

arXiv.org

fly51fly (@fly51fly)

๋Œ€ํ˜• ์–ธ์–ด๋ชจ๋ธ์ด ๊ฐ€๋ฅด์น˜๋Š” ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ์ƒ๋Œ€๋ฐฉ์˜ ์ •์‹  ์ƒํƒœ๋ฅผ ์ถ”๋ก ํ•˜๋Š”์ง€(mentalize) ๋ถ„์„ํ•œ 2026๋…„ ๋…ผ๋ฌธ์ด ๊ณต๊ฐœ๋˜์—ˆ์Šต๋‹ˆ๋‹ค. ์ธ๊ฐ„์˜ teaching ์ƒํ˜ธ์ž‘์šฉ์„ ๋ชจ์‚ฌํ•˜๋Š” LLM์˜ ์ธ์ง€์  ํ–‰๋™์„ ๋‹ค๋ค„, ๋ชจ๋ธ ํ•ด์„๊ณผ ์ธ๊ฐ„์œ ์‚ฌ ์ถ”๋ก  ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์— ์˜๋ฏธ๊ฐ€ ์žˆ์Šต๋‹ˆ๋‹ค.

https://x.com/fly51fly/status/2040187062683582641

#llm #mentalization #airesearch #languagemodels #arxiv

fly51fly (@fly51fly) on X

[AI] Do Large Language Models Mentalize When They Teach? S K. Harootonian, M K. Ho, T L. Griffiths, Y Nivโ€ฆ [Princeton University & New York University] (2026) https://t.co/VsoXwbYsAf

X (formerly Twitter)

fly51fly (@fly51fly)

MIT์™€ NUS ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ง„์ด ์˜คํ”ˆ์—”๋“œ ๋ฐœ๊ฒฌ์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ์ž์œจ ๋ฉ€ํ‹ฐ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ ์ง„ํ™” ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ CORAL์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ–ˆ์Šต๋‹ˆ๋‹ค. ๋ฉ€ํ‹ฐ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ๊ฐ€ ์Šค์Šค๋กœ ์ง„ํ™”ํ•˜๋ฉฐ ํƒ์ƒ‰ํ•˜๋Š” ์ƒˆ๋กœ์šด AI ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋กœ, ์ž์œจ ์—์ด์ „ํŠธ์™€ ์˜คํ”ˆ์—”๋“œ ํƒ์ƒ‰ ๋ถ„์•ผ์—์„œ ์ฃผ๋ชฉํ•  ๋งŒํ•ฉ๋‹ˆ๋‹ค.

https://x.com/fly51fly/status/2040189285471760609

#coral #multiagent #research #autonomousai #arxiv

fly51fly (@fly51fly) on X

[LG] CORAL: Towards Autonomous Multi-Agent Evolution for Open-Ended Discovery A Qu, H Zheng, Z Zhou, Y Yanโ€ฆ [MIT & NUS] (2026) https://t.co/9ZCSBtIwF4

X (formerly Twitter)

The case for zero-error horizons in trustworthy LLMs

https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.15714

#arxiv #llm #llms

Even GPT-5.2 Can't Count to Five: The Case for Zero-Error Horizons in Trustworthy LLMs

We propose Zero-Error Horizon (ZEH) for trustworthy LLMs, which represents the maximum range that a model can solve without any errors. While ZEH itself is simple, we demonstrate that evaluating the ZEH of state-of-the-art LLMs yields abundant insights. For example, by evaluating the ZEH of GPT-5.2, we found that GPT-5.2 cannot even compute the parity of a short string like 11000, and GPT-5.2 cannot determine whether the parentheses in ((((()))))) are balanced. This is surprising given the excellent capabilities of GPT-5.2. The fact that LLMs make mistakes on such simple problems serves as an important lesson when applying LLMs to safety-critical domains. By applying ZEH to Qwen2.5 and conducting detailed analysis, we found that while ZEH correlates with accuracy, the detailed behaviors differ, and ZEH provides clues about the emergence of algorithmic capabilities. Finally, while computing ZEH incurs significant computational cost, we discuss how to mitigate this cost by achieving up to one order of magnitude speedup using tree structures and online softmax.

arXiv.org