Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2605.28864

The Cognitive Categorical Transformer: Category-Theoretic Inductive Biases for Language Modeling

Al Kari
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The Cognitive Categorical Transformer (CCT) is a 306M-parameter architecture that augments a pretrained GPT-2 Small backbone with cognitively grounded components derived from category theory and several inspirations from cognitive science. Under a matched-step protocol (215,000 optimizer steps, matched data, matched optimizer and schedule) on WikiText-103, CCT reaches 21.27 validation perplexity, compared with 24.19 for an identically fine-tuned GPT-2 Small baseline. The architecture therefore contributes a 2.92 PPL (12% relative) reduction beyond what in-domain fine-tuning alone provides. A retrain-from-scratch ablation that holds GT-Full simplicial message passing bypassed across the entire seven-phase activation schedule reaches 23.72 PPL, localizing 84% of the architectural improvement (2.45 of 2.92 PPL) to GT-Full. We present the first ablation-validated evidence that simplicial message passing improves language-model perplexity at the 306M-parameter scale on WikiText-103. Published GPT-2 Large reaches 22.05 zero-shot PPL on WikiText-103 with 6.2x more parameters than GPT-2 Small; this paper treats that number as an external published reference, not as the architectural benchmark. Three negative results on consistency-style categorical priors (sheaf smoothing, adjunction round-trip, curvature regularization) and the joint structural-prior result for GT-Full and PrecisionWeightedPP together support an empirical pattern termed the *structure/consistency distinction*, in which categorical priors that add new topology improve language modeling and those that enforce a consistency identity do not.

Explore related subjects

cs.AIcs.CL

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Al Kari. 2026-05-22. The Cognitive Categorical Transformer: Category-Theoretic Inductive Biases for Language Modeling. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.28864

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

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↗
arXiv2026

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↗
arXiv2026

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↗