SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2510.04817

Natural Language Edge Labelling: Decoupling Intent from Execution in Structured LM Reasoning

Abstract

Controllers for structured LM reasoning (e.g., Chain-of-Thought, self-consistency, and Tree-of-Thoughts) often entangle what to try next with how to execute it, exposing only coarse global knobs and yielding brittle, compute-inefficient, and hard-to-audit behavior. We introduce Natural Language Edge Labelling (NLEL), a labeller-tuner overlay that attaches a free-form natural-language directive to each search edge and translates it into a schema-bounded control vector for decoding, search (branch quotas, exploration $\beta$), generation bundle size, retrieval mixtures, and verification passes. A labeller $\Lambda$ emits labels from the parent state and a compact context; a tuner $\Psi$ maps $(P, L, C)\to \Pi$, with strict schema validation and trust-region projection around safe defaults. Downstream selection remains ToT-style with score $S=\mu+\beta\sigma$ and depth-annealed $\beta$. We show NLEL strictly generalizes CoT/ToT, prove an anytime-monotonicity property for top-$k$ selection under label-conditioned bundles, and bound selector shortfall by control-vector distortion, providing decision-relevant justification for guards like trust regions and verification passes. We instantiate $\Psi$ as a prompt-only JSON Parameter Emitter and preregister an evaluation on GSM8K, MATH (subset), StrategyQA, and ARC-Challenge with compute-aware reporting (success@compute, tokens-per-success) and ablations over $\Lambda$, $\Psi$, trust-region radius, and control quantization; preregistered forecasts anticipate accuracy gains at comparable token budgets and improved success@compute under constraints. NLEL offers an interpretable, model-agnostic interface that separates intent from execution for controllable, auditable LM inference.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Abhinav Madahar. 2025-10-06. Natural Language Edge Labelling: Decoupling Intent from Execution in Structured LM Reasoning. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.04817

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI