Zayne Sprague retweeted
Can an LLM write your research report?
🚨Not well! They tend to oversimplify things: “method A beats method B” turning mixed/conditional findings into stronger and broader conclusions.
In our work, we call this smoothing and introduce SmoothScore to analyze and quantify this effect! 🧵
Zayne Sprague retweeted
📣✨Updated results on CREATE!
In March, we proposed CREATE to benchmark LLMs at associative creativity.
We claimed that CREATE was not saturated. This holds up when we run LLMs today: GPT-6.1-Sol scores 23.8 on creative utility, up from 18.5 for GPT-5.5 and 11.2 for GPT-4.1!
Zayne Sprague retweeted
🚨 New Paper! 🚨
Multiple-choice benchmarks use accuracy (boring), but education has way cooler scoring schemes! 🤩
👎 Lose points if wrong
🔁 Try until you're right
🃏 Wager points
At #EMNLP2026, we show these schemes shift LLM ranks, align with LLM Arena, + unmask LLM quirks
Zayne Sprague retweeted
Could long-context architectures “find all contradictions” in a science literature? Not yet! 🧵
We study a new class of "high-complexity” tasks whose difficulty scales quadratically with corpus size (as opposed to linearly), reversing common LCLM decisions! (block-sparse attention, hybrid models…)
Zayne Sprague retweeted
🚨 New Paper! 🚨
Your agent is writing code faster than you can understand it 😬
In our controlled online study, coding agents helped users finish tasks quickly, but reduced how well they understood the code they just “wrote”
We also find three ways to avoid this tradeoff 👇🧵
Zayne Sprague retweeted
Harness evolution brings a 0.8B model to 100% on ALFWorld. But how much is generalizable improvement vs. overfitting or test-time scaling?
Our method, Harness Delta Attribution, analyzes gains and attributes them to these categories. On 4 benchmarks, lots of the gain is overfitting or due to higher compute usage. Future evaluation should study this more!
Post: wenwen-d.github.io/blog/harn…
Zayne Sprague retweeted
Most assume unlearnable examples never get positive reward. They do.
In our ICML paper, We reveal that a hard problem can receive positive reward during RLVR but remain unlearned.
We show the phenomenon is more likely a representation issue rather than RL optimization artifact.
Zayne Sprague retweeted
🚨 New Paper! 🚨
One of my first Ph.D. papers found that LLMs can answer multiple-choice questions without seeing the question 🤔
At #ACL2026, I'm presenting a follow-up showing that current reasoning LLMs can still do this! And quite similarly to a clever test-taker 🧑🎓🧵
Zayne Sprague retweeted
Context Tuning accepted to ICML 2026 🎉
See you in Seoul.
arxiv.org/abs/2507.04221
It’s a neat LLM adaptation method with minimal implementation overhead and great scaling behavior. Hoping to add it in the PEFT library, and will do a follow-up post with lots of new results.
Also excited to share my new LLM reasoning/adaptation work 🔜
This quoted post is unavailable.
Zayne Sprague retweeted
Can LLMs generate diverse outputs for open-ended questions? Is it helpful if we ensemble outputs from multiple models? We study 18 LLMs on 4 datasets and find that no single model is best at generating diverse outputs 👇/ 🧵
Zayne Sprague retweeted
In Rio 🇧🇷 for #ICLR2026! Presenting SkillFactory (teapaw.org/ZayneSprague/status/20…)
I am working on creativity and exploration in reasoning, especially for tasks like scientific ideation/creative writing, and also on evals in these spaces. Would love to chat/connect if you are interested!
Zayne Sprague retweeted
🎉🎉🎉We have released a technical report, A Systematic and Comprehensive Analysis of Claude Code, in which we present our analysis together with discussions and possible future directions for today's and next-generation AI agent systems. The arXiv submission is still pending, but the paper is currently accessible on our GitHub:
GitHub: github.com/VILA-Lab/Dive-int…
Paper: github.com/VILA-Lab/Dive-int…
Welcome to check it out and share feedback!
SkillFactory will be at ICLR this year!
We study how self-distillation can create synthetic data that primes models for RLVR through SFT.
We built a recipe for teaching your model new capabilities it doesn’t have yet, matching and sometimes outperforming teacher distillation.
Come talk to me at ICLR about skills (RL training, markdowns, agentic harnesses, the works!) and anything else reasoning / agentic!
Big shoutout to my coauthors:
@Jacklu_me, @ManyaWadhwa1, @sedrickkeh2, @mengyer, and @gregd_nlp
Zayne Sprague retweeted
Wow, this tweet went very viral!
I wanted share a possibly slightly improved version of the tweet in an "idea file". The idea of the idea file is that in this era of LLM agents, there is less of a point/need of sharing the specific code/app, you just share the idea, then the other person's agent customizes & builds it for your specific needs.
So here's the idea in a gist format: gist.github.com/karpathy/442…
You can give this to your agent and it can build you your own LLM wiki and guide you on how to use it etc. It's intentionally kept a little bit abstract/vague because there are so many directions to take this in. And ofc, people can adjust the idea or contribute their own in the Discussion which is cool.
LLM Knowledge Bases
Something I'm finding very useful recently: using LLMs to build personal knowledge bases for various topics of research interest. In this way, a large fraction of my recent token throughput is going less into manipulating code, and more into manipulating knowledge (stored as markdown and images). The latest LLMs are quite good at it. So:
Data ingest:
I index source documents (articles, papers, repos, datasets, images, etc.) into a raw/ directory, then I use an LLM to incrementally "compile" a wiki, which is just a collection of .md files in a directory structure. The wiki includes summaries of all the data in raw/, backlinks, and then it categorizes data into concepts, writes articles for them, and links them all. To convert web articles into .md files I like to use the Obsidian Web Clipper extension, and then I also use a hotkey to download all the related images to local so that my LLM can easily reference them.
IDE:
I use Obsidian as the IDE "frontend" where I can view the raw data, the the compiled wiki, and the derived visualizations. Important to note that the LLM writes and maintains all of the data of the wiki, I rarely touch it directly. I've played with a few Obsidian plugins to render and view data in other ways (e.g. Marp for slides).
Q&A:
Where things get interesting is that once your wiki is big enough (e.g. mine on some recent research is ~100 articles and ~400K words), you can ask your LLM agent all kinds of complex questions against the wiki, and it will go off, research the answers, etc. I thought I had to reach for fancy RAG, but the LLM has been pretty good about auto-maintaining index files and brief summaries of all the documents and it reads all the important related data fairly easily at this ~small scale.
Output:
Instead of getting answers in text/terminal, I like to have it render markdown files for me, or slide shows (Marp format), or matplotlib images, all of which I then view again in Obsidian. You can imagine many other visual output formats depending on the query. Often, I end up "filing" the outputs back into the wiki to enhance it for further queries. So my own explorations and queries always "add up" in the knowledge base.
Linting:
I've run some LLM "health checks" over the wiki to e.g. find inconsistent data, impute missing data (with web searchers), find interesting connections for new article candidates, etc., to incrementally clean up the wiki and enhance its overall data integrity. The LLMs are quite good at suggesting further questions to ask and look into.
Extra tools:
I find myself developing additional tools to process the data, e.g. I vibe coded a small and naive search engine over the wiki, which I both use directly (in a web ui), but more often I want to hand it off to an LLM via CLI as a tool for larger queries.
Further explorations:
As the repo grows, the natural desire is to also think about synthetic data generation + finetuning to have your LLM "know" the data in its weights instead of just context windows.
TLDR: raw data from a given number of sources is collected, then compiled by an LLM into a .md wiki, then operated on by various CLIs by the LLM to do Q&A and to incrementally enhance the wiki, and all of it viewable in Obsidian. You rarely ever write or edit the wiki manually, it's the domain of the LLM. I think there is room here for an incredible new product instead of a hacky collection of scripts.
Neat project + post. This line of work is making me think of harnesses as transient reasoning scaffolds. Reminds me of earlier “XoT as intermediate structure” work (SatLM, Program-of-Thought, Tree-of-Thought, etc.), but now in an agentic regime with much more room for optimization.
I keep wondering about this idea of meta-optimization: how broad should we expect that optimization to get? Should a meta-agent mostly do local search over prompts/tools/hyperparameters, or should it sometimes pursue riskier, longer-horizon interventions? Wilder example, but if we pointed something like AutoResearch at "coding", should we expect it to rediscover higher-level workflows or abstractions akin to Claude Code?
My guess is that “meta” agents, or even deeper recursive optimizers, will tend to favor local improvements over sweeping pipeline redesigns. Very targeted and precise changes, even when broader features might help in the long run. Measuring that “meta-scope”, where do agents spend their time optimizing these harnesses, seems worth studying.
Zayne Sprague retweeted
ICML reviews have you considering this? Please look at our final submission instructions for COLM below!

































