arXiv subjects

Sunishchal Dev

Publications and source records attributed to Sunishchal Dev.

24 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2025

DuoLens: A Framework for Robust Detection of Machine-Generated Multilingual Text and Code

The prevalence of Large Language Models (LLMs) for generating multilingual text and source code has only increased the imperative for machine-generated content detectors to be accurate and efficient across domains. Current detectors, predominantly utilizing zero-shot methods, such as Fast DetectGPT or GPTZero, either incur high computational cost or lack sufficient accuracy, often with a trade-off between the two, leaving room for further improvement. To address these gaps, we propose the fine-tuning of encoder-only Small Language Models (SLMs), in particular, the pre-trained models of RoBERTA and CodeBERTa using specialized datasets on source code and other natural language to prove that for the task of binary classification, SLMs outperform LLMs by a huge margin whilst using a fraction of compute. Our encoders achieve AUROC $= 0.97$ to $0.99$ and macro-F1 $0.89$ to $0.94$ while reducing latency by $8$-$12\times$ and peak VRAM by $3$-$5\times$ at $512$-token inputs. Under cross-generator shifts and adversarial transformations (paraphrase, back-translation; code formatting/renaming), performance retains $\geq 92%$ of clean AUROC. We release training and evaluation scripts with seeds and configs; a reproducibility checklist is also included.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

AgentChangeBench: A Multi-Dimensional Evaluation Framework for Goal-Shift Robustness in Conversational AI

Goal changes are a defining feature of real world multi-turn interactions, yet current agent benchmarks primarily evaluate static objectives or one-shot tool use. We introduce AgentChangeBench, a benchmark explicitly designed to measure how tool augmented language model agents adapt to mid dialogue goal shifts across three enterprise domains. Our framework formalizes evaluation through four complementary metrics: Task Success Rate (TSR) for effectiveness, Tool Use Efficiency (TUE) for reliability, Tool Call Redundancy Rate (TCRR) for wasted effort, and Goal-Shift Recovery Time (GSRT) for adaptation latency. AgentChangeBench comprises 2,835 task sequences and five user personas, each designed to trigger realistic shift points in ongoing workflows. Using this setup, we evaluate several frontier models and uncover sharp contrasts obscured by traditional $\text{pass}@k$ scores: for example, GPT-4o reaches $92.2\%$ recovery on airline booking shifts while Gemini collapses to $48.6\%$, and retail tasks show near perfect parameter validity yet redundancy rates above $80\%$, revealing major inefficiencies. These findings demonstrate that high raw accuracy does not imply robustness under dynamic goals, and that explicit measurement of recovery time and redundancy is essential. AgentChangeBench establishes a reproducible testbed for diagnosing and improving agent resilience in realistic enterprise settings.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

Limits of Emergent Reasoning of Large Language Models in Agentic Frameworks for Deterministic Games

Recent work reports that Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) undergo a collapse in performance on solving puzzles beyond certain perplexity thresholds. In subsequent discourse, questions have arisen as to whether the nature of the task muddles an evaluation of true reasoning. One potential confound is the requirement that the model keep track of the state space on its own. We provide a large language model (LLM) with an environment interface for Tower of Hanoi problems, allowing it to make a move with a tool call, provide written justification, observe the resulting state space, and reprompt itself for the next move. We observe that access to an environment interface does not delay or eradicate performance collapse. Furthermore, LLM-parameterized policy analysis reveals increasing divergence from both optimal policies and uniformly random policies, suggesting that the model exhibits mode-like collapse at each level of complexity, and that performance is dependent upon whether the mode reflects the correct solution for the problem. We suggest that a similar phenomena might take place in LRMs.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

PALADIN: Self-Correcting Language Model Agents to Cure Tool-Failure Cases

Tool-augmented language agents frequently fail in real-world deployment due to tool malfunctions--timeouts, API exceptions, or inconsistent outputs--triggering cascading reasoning errors and task abandonment. Existing agent training pipelines optimize only for success trajectories, failing to expose models to the tool failures that dominate real-world usage. We propose \textbf{PALADIN}, a generalizable framework for equipping language agents with robust failure recovery capabilities. PALADIN trains on 50,000+ recovery-annotated trajectories constructed via systematic failure injection and expert demonstrations on an enhanced ToolBench dataset. Training uses LoRA-based fine-tuning to retain base capabilities while injecting recovery competence. At inference, PALADIN detects execution-time errors and retrieves the most similar case from a curated bank of 55+ failure exemplars aligned with ToolScan's taxonomy, then executes the corresponding recovery action. This approach generalizes to novel failures beyond the training distribution, retaining 95.2\% recovery performance on unseen tool APIs. Evaluation across PaladinEval and ToolReflectEval demonstrates consistent improvements in Recovery Rate (RR), Task Success Rate (TSR), Catastrophic Success Rate (CSR), and Efficiency Score (ES). PALADIN improves RR from 32.76% to 89.68% (+57% relative) over ToolBench and outperforms the strongest baseline CRITIC (76.34%) by +13.3%. Against vanilla agents, PALADIN achieves 89.86\% RR (+66% relative improvement from 23.75%). These results establish PALADIN as an effective method for building fault-tolerant agents capable of robust recovery in real-world tool environments.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

FRIT: Using Causal Importance to Improve Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness

Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning has emerged as a powerful tool for improving large language model performance on complex tasks, but recent work shows that reasoning steps often fail to causally influence the final answer, creating brittle and untrustworthy outputs. Prior approaches focus primarily on measuring faithfulness, while methods for systematically improving it remain limited. We introduce Faithful Reasoning via Intervention Training (FRIT), a scalable alignment method that trains models to produce causally consistent reasoning by learning from systematically corrupted examples. FRIT generates synthetic training data by intervening on individual reasoning steps in model-generated CoTs, creating faithful/unfaithful pairs that highlight when reasoning breaks down. We then apply Direct Preference Optimization to teach models to prefer causally consistent reasoning paths. Evaluating on Qwen3-8B and Mistral-7B-v0.1 across factual and symbolic reasoning tasks, FRIT increases faithful reasoning by $3.4$ percentage points for Mistral on GSM8K while improving accuracy by $7.6$ percentage points. Our approach provides the first scalable, supervision-free method for training language models to produce more reliable and interpretable reasoning, addressing a critical gap between reasoning performance and trustworthiness. We release our code at \href{https://github.com/Anut-py/frit}.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

Recommendations and Reporting Checklist for Rigorous & Transparent Human Baselines in Model Evaluations

In this position paper, we argue that human baselines in foundation model evaluations must be more rigorous and more transparent to enable meaningful comparisons of human vs. AI performance, and we provide recommendations and a reporting checklist towards this end. Human performance baselines are vital for the machine learning community, downstream users, and policymakers to interpret AI evaluations. Models are often claimed to achieve "super-human" performance, but existing baselining methods are neither sufficiently rigorous nor sufficiently well-documented to robustly measure and assess performance differences. Based on a meta-review of the measurement theory and AI evaluation literatures, we derive a framework with recommendations for designing, executing, and reporting human baselines. We synthesize our recommendations into a checklist that we use to systematically review 115 human baselines (studies) in foundation model evaluations and thus identify shortcomings in existing baselining methods; our checklist can also assist researchers in conducting human baselines and reporting results. We hope our work can advance more rigorous AI evaluation practices that can better serve both the research community and policymakers. Data is available at: https://github.com/kevinlwei/human-baselines

cs.AI↗