ICML 2026 论文列表

Large language models (LLMs) exhibit persistent miscalibration, especially after instruction tuning and preference alignment. Modified training objectives can improve calibration, but retraining is expensive. Inference-time steering offers a lightweight alternative, yet most existing methods optimize proxies for correctness rather than correctness itself. We introduce CORAL (Correctness-Optimized Residual Activation Lens), a regularized inference-time steering method that captures distributed correctness signals from model internal activations using weight-decay MLP probes. We evaluate CORAL across three 7B-parameter models and find that it consistently improves accuracy by 10\% and expected calibration error (ECE) by 50\% on average. We additionally demonstrate that these gains transfer without retraining to the complete published test sets of four held-out benchmarks (ARC-Challenge, HellaSwag, Math-MC, OpenBookQA), averaging 14\% accuracy improvements and 49\% ECE improvements. Our results support the hypothesis that distributed information in model internals can be extracted using regularized probes when individual neurons are insufficient. CORAL thus provides a compute-efficient, transferable, and calibration-aware approach to improve MCQA performance during inference.

Safe reinforcement learning (RL) is a standard paradigm for safety-critical decision making. However, real-world safety constraints can be complex, subjective, and even hard to explicitly specify. Existing works on constraint inference rely on restrictive assumptions or extensive expert demonstrations, which are not realistic in many real-world applications. How to cheaply and reliably learn these constraints is the major challenge we focus on in this study. While inferring constraints from human preferences offers a data-efficient alternative, we identify popular Bradley-Terry (BT) models fail to capture the asymmetric, heavy-tailed nature of safety costs, resulting in risk underestimation. It is still rare in the literature to understand the impacts of BT models on the downstream policy learning. To address the above knowledge gaps, we propose a novel approach namely Preference-based Constrained Reinforcement Learning (PbCRL). We introduce a novel dead zone mechanism into preference modeling and theoretically prove that it encourages heavy-tailed cost distributions, thereby achieving better constraint alignment. Additionally, we incorporate a Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) loss to encourage exploration by cost variances, which is found to benefit policy learning. Further, two-stage training strategy is deployed to lower online labeling burdens while adaptively enhancing constraint satisfaction. Empirical results demonstrate that PbCRL achieves superior alignment with true safety requirements and outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in terms of safety and reward. Our work explores a promising and effective way for constraint inference in Safe RL, with great potential in various safety-critical applications.

As larger language models deliver stronger capabilities, their autoregressive inference becomes increasingly expensive. *Speculative decoding* accelerates generation by letting a fast draft propose tokens that the target model verifies in parallel. Yet under sampling ($T>0$), observed speedups consistently lag behind those under greedy decoding, as the classical lossless verification rule tends to over-reject low-risk drafts, leading to lower acceptance rates and limited acceleration. To address this gap, we propose **ARC-Decode** (**A**cceptance with **R**isk **C**ontrol), a training-free method that augments speculative decoding without extra forward passes. ARC-Decode enables \textbf{relaxed} acceptance by identifying drafts whose acceptance preserves the output distribution of the target model, under a risk-controlled criterion based on Jensen--Shannon divergence. It combines confidence-based pre-verification filtering with a risk-bounded acceptance criterion derived from an analytic upper bound on the potential distributional deviation. Integrated into the state-of-the-art EAGLE-3 pipeline, ARC-Decode increases accept length per cycle and reduces verification compute, achieving up to **1.6**$\times$ end-to-end speedup over EAGLE-3 under sampling with negligible quality change across benchmarks.

Existing alignment methods directly use the reward model learned from user preference data to optimize an LLM policy, subject to KL regularization with respect to the base policy. This practice is suboptimal for maximizing user's utility because the KL regularization may cause the LLM to inherit the bias in the base policy that conflicts with user preferences. While amplifying rewards for preferred outputs can mitigate this bias, it also increases the risk of reward hacking. This tradeoff motivates the problem of optimally designing reward models under KL regularization. We formalize this reward model optimization problem as a Stackelberg game, and show that a simple reward shaping scheme can effectively approximate the optimal reward model. We empirically evaluate our method in inference-time alignment settings and demonstrate that it integrates seamlessly into existing alignment methods with minimal overhead. Our method consistently improves average reward and achieves win–tie rates exceeding 66\% against all baselines, averaged across evaluation settings.

Observational studies are a key resource for causal inference but are often affected by systematic biases. Prior work has focused mainly on detecting these biases, via sensitivity analyses and comparisons with randomized controlled trials, or mitigating them through debiasing techniques. However, there remains a lack of methodology for uncovering the underlying mechanisms driving these biases, *e.g.*, whether due to hidden confounding or selection of participants. In this work, we show that the relationship between bias magnitude and the predictive performance of nuisance function estimators (in the observational study) can help distinguish among common sources of bias. We validate our methodology through extensive synthetic experiments and a real-world case study, demonstrating its effectiveness in revealing the mechanisms behind observed biases. Our framework offers a new lens for understanding and characterizing bias in observational studies, with practical implications for improving causal inference.