Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.36178

3, 7, 14, 17, 42: Instruction Tuning Installs and Sharpens Number-Choice Heuristics in Language Models

Abstract

We measure, without sampling error, the probability a language model assigns to each integer from 1 to N when asked for a random number. For a fixed prompt the model defines one probability vector, which we compute by summing over each integer's scored spellings rather than estimate by sampling, removing the noise that limits earlier studies [1, 4]. We evaluate 18 open-weight model lines at five ranges up to N = 100, under 29 decoding configurations, on two inference stacks; 15 of them have matched base and instruction-tuned checkpoints that both give usable answers. Instruction tuning makes the distribution less uniform in all 15 pairs. It installs one heuristic, round-number avoidance, and sharpens another, endpoint avoidance. Base checkpoints do not avoid round numbers once the endpoints are removed from those sets; tuned checkpoints avoid them, multiples of 10 almost completely. Base checkpoints return the endpoints 1 and N at 0.30 to 0.60 of the interior rate; tuned checkpoints almost never return them. A preference for odd numbers is consistent across tuned checkpoints only at N = 100, where base checkpoints also show it weakly. Endpoint avoidance and the odd preference fit the account Kubovy and Psotka [6] proposed for human number choice; round-number avoidance is not part of that account, and the midpoint avoidance it predicts is essentially absent, with one slight exception at N = 100. Tuning does not install a new favourite integer shared across models: above N = 10 no modal integer is shared by more than 42 percent of tuned conditions, and P (17) rises in 10 of 15 pairs and falls in 5. The concentration is present in the model's own distribution: at temperature 1.0, nucleus truncation at top-p 0.95 adds a median of 0.035 to the total variation distance.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Samar Ansari. 2026-10-26. 3, 7, 14, 17, 42: Instruction Tuning Installs and Sharpens Number-Choice Heuristics in Language Models. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.36178

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Counting Clues: A Lightweight Probabilistic Baseline Can Match an LLM

Large language models (LLMs) excel on multiple-choice clinical diagnosis benchmarks, yet it is unclear how much of this performance reflects underlying probabilistic reasoning. We study this through questions from MedQA that ask for the most likely diagnosis. We introduce Frequency-Based Probabilistic Ranker (FBPR), a lightweight method that scores options with a smoothed Naive Bayes over concept-diagnosis co-occurrence statistics from a large corpus. When co-occurrence statistics are sourced from Dolma, the pretraining corpus for OLMo, and RedPajama, an open reproduction of the LLaMA pretraining-data recipe, FBPR achieves comparable performance to the corresponding LLMs. Furthermore, direct LLM inference and FBPR exhibit complementary strengths, correctly answering largely different subsets of questions with overlap barely above chance. Combining them with a simple hybrid method yields a notable gain over either method alone. These findings show that explicit probabilistic baselines can account for a substantial portion of the benchmark performance on diagnosis questions, while serving as historically grounded reference points and complementary signals for hybridization.

cs.CL↗

TextCloak: Safeguarding Data from Unauthorized LLM Fine-Tuning via RL-Driven Unlearnable Examples

The development of Large Language Models (LLMs) has led to significant advances across a wide range of language tasks, while simultaneously raising growing concerns about unauthorized online data exploitation and privacy leakage. Unlearnable examples (UEs) emerge as a promising defense by injecting crafted perturbations into data such that models trained on them exhibit degraded utility. However, existing methods for text protection are primarily designed for classification tasks and discriminative language models, which limits their broad applicability (e.g., instruction following or reasoning) in LLMs. In this work, we propose **TextCloak**, an RL-driven data synthesis framework that safeguards textual data against unauthorized LLM fine-tuning. TextCloak employs a *UE generative policy* that transforms clean text into unlearnable examples while preserving semantic fidelity and linguistic naturalness. To optimize the policy, we introduce **GRPO-UE**, which simulates the attacker's LLM fine-tuning and rewards downstream degradation via group-relative policy optimization. This overall formulates a bi-level optimization loop, allowing the generator to discover effective protective patterns. Comprehensive experiments on six publicly available datasets and nine state-of-the-art LLMs demonstrate that TextCloak consistently impairs unauthorized LLM fine-tuning while maintaining text utility for legitimate use. Further analyses confirm its transferability and robustness across model architectures, training configurations, and adaptive attacks, highlighting its broad applicability as a practical defense for online content.

cs.CL↗

ReMCTS: Reflection-Enhanced Monte Carlo Tree Search for Code Generation

Open-weight large language models (LLMs) can generate function-level programs from natural-language prompts, but plausible candidates still fail on hidden semantics and repeat mistakes across repair attempts. We present ReMCTS, an execution-grounded, memory-augmented, LLM-guided MCTS-style search framework. It organizes program candidates as tree states, retains branch-local debugging context, retrieves failure experience across branches, and distinguishes failed checks from unavailable evidence. On HumanEval and MBPP-Sanitized, visible-test ReMCTS improves over direct generation in 8 of 10 model-dataset pairs under held-out evaluation, whereas proxy-only search is less stable. Controlled tree-search, sampling, repair, and memory ablations characterize the source and limits of these gains. A 30-task HumanEval-X C++ pilot further demonstrates compatibility with compiler-backed execution, but does not constitute a broad multilingual evaluation.

cs.CL↗