arXiv subjects

Chanjun Park

Publications and source records attributed to Chanjun Park.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

DART: Draft-Agreement Routing for Training-Free Adaptive Thinking Budgets in Hybrid Reasoning Models

Hybrid reasoning models can answer directly or spend extra tokens on extended thinking. A practical router should choose between these modes for each query, so easy problems avoid unnecessary reasoning and hard problems receive enough budget to finish the answer. Existing routers move in this direction, but they typically require labeled training data or fix thinking budgets up front, ignoring answer-level evidence from the model itself. We introduce DART, a training-free routing framework that samples two cheap no-think drafts, accepts direct answering when the drafts agree, and predicts a thinking budget from draft entropy when they disagree. Across the main comparisons, DART preserves or improves always-thinking accuracy in most settings while reducing thinking-token use. Accuracy improves by up to +9.0 points on Olympiad-level math and by up to +22.5 points on code under execution-based equivalence, while thinking-token use drops by 32-73%. The Stage~1 signal extends across model scales (0.6B--32B), model families, and API-only hosted settings, with no labeled data and no gradient updates required. Our code is available at https://github.com/js-lee-AI/DART.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Skill Following: Evaluating Actual Skill Use in Retrieval-Enabled LLM Agents

Large Language Model (LLM) agents increasingly rely on external skills, yet standard evaluations obscure whether retrieving these skills actually helps. Aggregate metrics often compare retrieved versus non-retrieved tasks, introducing severe selection bias and failing to isolate the true effect of skill use. To measure this actual-use capability-which we formalize as Skill Following (SF)-we introduce the Retrieval-Invoked Actual-Use Effect (RAE). RAE computes the same-task outcome difference between matched skill-enabled and skill-disabled executions, conditioned exclusively on tasks where the agent actively retrieved a skill. Evaluating 17 LLMs across coding and mathematical domains, we uncover a stark evaluation paradox: models frequently show positive aggregate retrieval lift but negative RAE. On MBPP+, multiple models that appear to benefit system-wide actually harm their own performance on the exact tasks where retrieval occurred. These findings demonstrate that aggregate averages can create a misleading illusion of tool-use proficiency, whereas RAE directly measures whether the retrieval-to-answer pipeline genuinely rescues more outcomes than it harms.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Auditing MCQA Benchmarks through Probability Landscapes

As Large Language Models rapidly advance, performance on standard multiple-choice question answering (MCQA) benchmarks is reaching saturation. While the community has responded by developing increasingly difficult datasets, validating question quality and filtering flawed items remains a labor-intensive process. To provide a scalable diagnostic approach, we propose a two-component probabilistic framework for auditing MCQA benchmarks using model output distributions. First, for benchmark-level analysis, we characterize the probability landscape using the top prediction probability ($P_{top1}$) and normalized residual entropy ($H_{norm}$), summarized globally by Mean Pairwise Distance (MPD). Second, for item-level diagnostics, we introduce noise injection to reduce meaningful distractor competition, enabling us to flag candidate items for targeted human review and categorize residual failure patterns. Across four MCQA benchmarks, our landscape analysis reveals benchmark-level differences in model confidence and residual option competition. Concurrently, our noise-injection method flags potentially actionable item-level issues, showing alignment with expert error annotations from MMLU-Redux. These results suggest that our probability-based framework provides a lightweight audit lens for comparing macro-level benchmark structure and prioritizing individual items for targeted human review.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Beyond Consensus: Downward Bias and Role Asymmetry in Multi-Agent LLM Judges for Subjective Evaluation

Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) has been widely adopted to improve LLM-based evaluation by prompting multiple agents to negotiate and reach a consensus. However, for subjective rubric-based scoring, inter-agent agreement does not guarantee alignment with human judgments. In this paper, we compare a single-judge baseline against a consensus-based MAD protocol on subjective evaluation tasks and design three ablations to isolate the impact of role prompting, multi-round interaction, and explicit score sharing. Evaluations across six LLMs show that the single-judge baseline achieves the strongest human alignment on average across six judge models, whereas MAD shows degradation in human alignment on both tasks. Our ablations demonstrate that this performance drop stems primarily from asymmetric role prompting rather than the interaction itself. Specifically, assigning a strict judge role introduces a systematic downward bias that the consensus process fails to correct. The central finding is that this bias reflects strict-stance dominance beyond averaging: the consensus score falls well beyond the arithmetic midpoint of the standalone strict and lenient conditions, rather than averaging them out. Removing role asymmetry (Symmetric MAD) largely recovers baseline performance, while masking peer scores widens inter-agent disagreement on average and worsens average human alignment. These findings demonstrate that multi-agent consensus can enforce artificial agreement at the expense of true human alignment, revealing a structural limitation in consensus-style, role-specialized MAD protocols for subjective scoring.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Vision Is Not Overhead: One-Pass Block Drafting for Lossless Speculative Decoding in Vision-Language Models

Speculative decoding accelerates generation without changing its output, yet on vision-language models (VLMs) it has been caught in a self-defeating cycle. The drafter stays autoregressive, so it must stay small. A small drafter cannot afford the image at every step, so vision is compressed, pruned, or hidden. A drafter cut off from the image is then least reliable exactly where the image makes text predictable. We present GLANCE, the first one-pass block drafter that is lossless on an unmodified VLM target, and it breaks the cycle at both ends. A block-diffusion head reads the target's already-fused vision-language state, so vision costs the drafter nothing, and fills a whole block in one forward pass, so depth costs no sequential steps. A wide candidate tree is verified in one target pass, and every audited prompt reproduces greedy decoding exactly. Grounded workloads reward this most, entering a verbatim-copy regime whose long runs cost an autoregressive drafter a pass for every token and a block drafter one in total. Under one engine and one round budget, GLANCE decodes up to 2.93x faster than autoregression, from one draft pass a round where the production EAGLE3-VL head takes eight, and accepts 2.7x longer blocks than an EAGLE-3 head trained on the same corpus. One law organizes these results. Accepted length is set by the target's next-token entropy, with a fitted slope that steepens with grounding across all five tasks. The law transfers across targets and modalities and names its own boundary, since free-running text still favors a chain. Our code is available at https://github.com/js-lee-AI/GLANCE.

cs.AI↗