The Inference Report

Reasoning over text-attributed graphs (TAGs) requires large language models (LLMs) to combine a node's text with evidence distributed across its neighbourhood. Existing methods fix the set of accessible neighbours before generation, forcing reasoning to operate over a static context and preventing the model from acquiring missing evidence during inference. We argue that neighbour selection should itself be part of the reasoning process. To this end, we propose Call Neighbours Yourself (CNY), a framework that enables LLMs to proactively explore graph neighbourhoods through topology-constrained graph-walk actions. Instead of reasoning over a pre-selected neighbour set, CNY exposes lightweight neighbour previews and learns when to expand candidate neighbours for additional evidence. To address the delayed-credit challenge of neighbour exploration, we introduce destination-conditioned on-policy self-distillation, which retrospectively evaluates a selected neighbour after its content is revealed and converts the resulting change in action preference into an action-level training signal. Experiments on standard TAG reasoning benchmarks under a unified raw-text setting show that CNY consistently outperforms fixed-context post-training baselines. Furthermore, the learned exploration policy transfers to unseen graphs and to a graph-level task not encountered during training. Code is available at https://github.com/superallen13/CNY.

Text-to-image (T2I) safety guardrails fail to generalize equitably to non-standard dialects. Evaluating 23,080 paired prompts across five English dialects, we formalize this failure as the dialect penalty, where filters trigger based on linguistic surface features rather than semantic intent. Text-level filters fail in opposing directions: NSFW-T over-flags benign dialect prompts and LatentGuard over-flags toxic ones (bias gaps up to +28.29 pp), while the OpenAI Moderation API under-detects them. A controlled typo ablation confirms this penalty originates from flagging dialectal features, not generic out-of-distribution sensitivity. The pixel-level generator is largely dialect-agnostic; the penalty enters at text processing and cascades unevenly to post-hoc guardrails. We show this bias tracks training data imbalance and is mitigable via group-balanced retraining, with an ablation attributing the gain to balanced exposure rather than to the worst-group objective of GroupDRO (group distributionally robust optimization). Current pipelines systematically fail dialect speakers, an equity failure masked by mean accuracy benchmarks. Our official code and dataset are publicly available at https://github.com/minguinho26/dialect-penalty-t2i. Content Warning: This paper contains offensive, toxic, or disturbing text prompts and generated images.

Autonomous large language model (LLM) agents increasingly face reliability, context consumption, and execution stability bottlenecks when deployed on complex, long-horizon tasks. While monolithic prompt engineering and stateless tool-calling paradigms struggle to scale, the field is rapidly converging toward \emph{agentic skills}: modular procedural abstractions that externalize execution knowledge into reusable, executable, and portable artifacts. This paper establishes a unified systems foundation and reference architecture for the agentic skills ecosystem. We formalize skills as externalized procedural knowledge bridging high-level cognitive planning with deterministic execution environments, and systematically delineate the architecture across a nine-stage lifecycle: autonomous discovery, authoring and representation formats, memory storage, dynamic retrieval and routing, composition and orchestration, execution and repair, lifelong adaptation, empirical evaluation, and security governance. We further examine marketplace dynamics, public registries, and emerging adversarial threat vectors, alongside runtime verification and defense mechanisms. Finally, we categorize system implementations across software engineering, operating system navigation, embodied robotics, and scientific discovery, while highlighting critical open challenges in continual learning and benchmark realism. This work establishes agentic skills as a foundational paradigm for building scalable, robust, and verifiable autonomous language agents.

Sustained scientific work requires a knowledge substrate that carries interpretation across tasks and preserves paths to source evidence. We call this process \emph{scientific knowledge compilation} and implement it in ASKS, the \emph{Agent-Driven Scientific Knowledge System}. For each source, an LLM produces a readable Wiki view and machine-facing semantics. Deterministic checks convert the latter into a document-local GraphDelta, and embedding geometry together with explicit graph rules integrates the proposed changes into persistent state. Each ingest is an inspectable state transition over accumulated knowledge, with compiled Wiki and graph views linked to the preserved source record. We examine this process by chronologically compiling 56 published papers from one research program. Branch survival, cross-paper support, lineage, coverage, and churn yield a source-traceable author research portrait centered on tensor-network methods, with branches into quantum many-body research, tensor-network machine learning, and quantum-AI-oriented directions. In this run, higher-level Hub organization remains stable and low-churn. Canonical-node growth is predominantly additive. Graph-level measurements and navigation paths retain links to the source records from which they were compiled.

Large language model (LLM)-based agents have shown strong potential in solving complex tasks through multi-step reasoning, yet they remain vulnerable to execution failures. Accurate failure attribution is therefore critical for improving agent reliability. Existing topology- and spectrum-based methods exploit trajectory structures but often overlook fine-grained semantics, while LLM-based attribution methods capture semantic cues but suffer from long-context degradation over lengthy trajectories. To address these challenges, we propose DUOTRACE, a plug-and-play detection filter for LLM-based failure attribution. DUOTRACE follows a detect-before-attribute paradigm: it first detects anomalous executions and then supplies focused trajectory evidence to downstream LLM-based attribution methods. For effective VAE-based anomaly detection on agent trajectories, DUOTRACE integrates dual-view semantic-structural node representations, a Tree-LSTM-based trajectory encoder, and prefix-chain- and LLM-based data augmentation to handle heterogeneous nodes, hierarchical execution structures, and limited failure data. Experiments with six LLM-based attribution baselines show that DUOTRACE improves agent-level and step-level attribution accuracy by 8.7% and 7.0%, respectively.

Evaluating research ideas generated by LLMs is difficult because their scientific value cannot be fully determined by objective criteria, and no single reference answer specifies what counts as a good idea. To address this challenge, we introduce Ideation Arena, a battle style platform that evaluates research ideas through pairwise human assessment. Ideation Arena evaluates ideas generated by 14 frontier LLMs and 5 research agent architectures built on 2 base models. To ensure a common starting point, Ideation Arena builds shared literature contexts from papers familiar to the participating researchers and provides the same contexts to all LLMs and agents. We collect over 6,000 double blind pairwise comparisons from 105 active computer science researchers and construct an Elo rating leaderboard of proposal-stage expert preferences in computer science under a shared closed-context protocol. We validate the rankings through interrater agreement and robustness analyses, showing that the leaderboard remains stable under changes in annotator composition and domain coverage. Our results show substantial variation in agent effectiveness, with some frameworks improving ideation quality over their backbones and others offering little benefit or even underperforming their base models. We further construct Ideation Arena Eval, a benchmark for assessing whether automated evaluators align with human preferences in research ideation. Experiments with current LLM judges show that they still cannot reliably reproduce expert preferences, with the best judge reaching 72.56% Soft Accuracy on Overall Quality. Our code, data, and leaderboards are available at https://github.com/foss12138/Research-Ideation-Arena.