NeurIPS 2026 论文列表

Recent Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have achieved strong performance on general video understanding benchmarks, yet their ability to reason about participant roles in aggressive interactions remains largely unexplored. Existing violence and crime datasets primarily evaluate whether aggression occurs, without testing whether models can identify who performed the action, who received it, and how participants are related within the scene. To address this gap, we introduce **A$^3$Bench**, a benchmark to study *aggressive action and association* in videos. The benchmark evaluates whether models can jointly recognize aggressive actions, distinguish aggressors from victims and bystanders, and correctly bind actions to participants under challenging distractor settings. We benchmark 15 recent MLLMs and find that current models struggle substantially on fine-grained aggressive-scene understanding. Performance degrades consistently as reasoning complexity increases, with models frequently confusing aggressors with victims or bystanders, revealing a systematic failure in role-action association rather than coarse aggression recognition alone. We further observe that increasing model scale or applying generic reasoning prompts provides limited improvement. Finally, we explore a simple role-graph prompting strategy that encourages structured reasoning over participant interactions, leading to consistent gains on compositional reasoning. Our findings highlight that reliable aggressive-scene understanding remains a major challenge for current MLLMs and motivate future research on role-aware video reasoning beyond coarse violence detection.

Humans, animals, and modern machine learning models exhibit impressive abilities to learn complex behaviors and generalize these behaviors to unseen situations. This ability requires us to learn rules and regularities that allow for such generalizations. At the same time, in most complex environments, any rule will have its exceptions. How do learning systems balance between learning general regularities and memorizing exceptions? We argue that a lack of task paradigms has hindered the study of this essential ability. To address this gap, we introduce a novel task, transitive inference with exceptions, that tests for relational generalization and memorization of an exception to the relational rule. We then analytically characterize the behavior of a simple, theoretically tractable model of neural network learning (kernel ridge regression) across a broad family of representations and task parameters. We find that these models can balance between relational generalization and memorization, but unlike for transitive inference without an exception, successful generalization is sensitive to the specific representational geometry. We explain why this task is more challenging mechanistically by drawing on our analytical theory. Finally, we validate our theoretical insights in pretrained language models that are finetuned on ordered relations, finding that these models successfully generalize according to the transitive rule, but also make the kinds of systematic mistakes predicted by our theory. Overall, our theory shows how learning systems can balance between relational generalization and memorization, explains how this can go wrong, and emphasizes the need for new task paradigms designed to probe this ability.

Autoregressive generation lies in the heart of the mechanism of large language models. It can be viewed as the repeated application of a next-token generator: starting from an input string (prompt), the generator is applied for $M$ steps, and the last generated token is taken as the final output. [Joshi et al., 2025] proposed a PAC model for studying the learnability of the input-output maps arising from this process. We develop an online analogue of this framework, focusing on the mistake bound of learning the final output induced by an unknown next-token generator. We distinguish between two forms of feedback. In the End-to-End model, after each round the learner observes only the final token produced after M autoregressive steps. In the Chain-of-Thought model, the learner is additionally shown the entire $M$-step trajectory. Our goal is to understand how the optimal mistake bound depends on the generation horizon $M$, and to what extent observing intermediate tokens can reduce this dependence. Our main results show that the online theory of autoregressive learning exhibits a qualitative picture analogous to the statistical one found by [Hanneke et al., 2026], but with a different scale of dependence on the generation horizon. In the End-to-End model, we prove a taxonomy of possible mistake-bound growth rates in the generation horizon $M$: subject to mild regularity conditions, every rate between constant and logarithmic can arise. We also show that this logarithmic ceiling is unavoidable for the online setting, in the sense that every class of finite Littlestone dimension exhibits at most logarithmic dependence on $M$. In the Chain-of-Thought model, the parallel is even sharper: as in the statistical setting, access to the full generated trajectory eliminates the dependence on $M$ altogether. We also analyze autoregressive linear threshold classes. For autoregressive linear thresholds in \(\mathbb{R}^d\), we prove that the optimal mistake bound is \(\Theta(d^2)\) under both End-to-End and Chain-of-Thought feedback, and for any generation length $M$. The methods developed for this analysis also yield new lower bounds in the statistical setting. Along the way, our results resolve several questions left open by [Joshi et al., 2025]. In particular, we show that even for classes of finite Littlestone dimension, the End-to-End statistical sample complexity can depend on the generation length M.

Language models often produce high-quality individual samples but poor sets, with repeated samples clustering around the same semantic modes. We formalize diverse generation as sampling a size-$K$ subset of complete strings from a determinantal point process (DPP), where the likelihood encodes item quality, and the embedding geometry encodes repulsion between similar outputs. Exact inference over all strings is intractable, so we propose \algname: draw a finite candidate pool from a tractable proposal, importance-weight candidates toward a globally tempered quality distribution, and run either $K$-DPP sampling or greedy MAP selection on the induced pool kernel. We prove a finite-sample bound showing that the KL bias of the pooled sampler decays as $\mathcal{O}(1/N)$ in the pool size. Empirically, \algname improves the quality--diversity Pareto frontier over temperature sampling, diverse beam search, $K$-means reranking, and LLM-based selection on open-ended generation, ambiguous text-to-SQL (Ambrosia), and mathematical reasoning (GSM8K) tasks.

Reasoning has become a central capability in large language models. Recent research has shown that reasoning performance can be improved by looping an LLM’s layers in the latent dimension, resulting in looped reasoning language models. Despite promising results, few works have investigated how their internal dynamics differ from those of standard feedforward models. In this paper, we conduct a mechanistic analysis of latent states and layer behavior in looped language models, focusing in particular on how the stages of inference observed in feedforward models compare to those observed in looped ones. We analyze cyclic recurrence and show that for many of the studied models each layer in the cycle converges to a distinct fixed point; consequently, the recurrent block follows a consistent cyclic trajectory in the latent space. We provide evidence that as these fixed points are reached, attention-head behavior stabilizes, leading to constant behavior across recurrences. Empirically, we discover that recurrent blocks learn stages of inference that closely mirror those of feedforward models, repeating these stages in depth with each iteration. We study how architectural choices influence the emergence and stability of these cyclic fixed points and stages of inference, providing practical guidance for looped language model design.

The evolution of mathematics is shaped importantly by interestingness: researchers choose which problems to pursue, and students choose which problems to engage with, based on expectations of interest and challenge. As AI systems, particularly large language models (LLMs) that operate flexibly over natural language and formal mathematics, are increasingly used in mathematics research and education, it becomes crucial to characterize how closely their judgments align with people from different mathematical backgrounds. We study whether LLMs align with human interestingness judgments by comparing LLM ratings with those of two populations, crowdsourced participants with college math experience and International Math Olympiad competitors. Although many LLMs broadly agree with human notions of interestingness, they largely fail to match the distribution of human judgments. They also weakly align with why humans find problems interesting, with low correlation to human-selected rationales. Finally, we evaluate LLMs’ ability to generate interesting problems and find that, after filtering for validity, LLMs are able to generate engaging problems. We conclude with takeaways, including the need for multi-LLM human-AI collaborative systems, that highlight both the promise and current limits of LLMs as partners in mathematical reasoning.

Many modern learning approaches are still struggling with spatial reasoning tasks, i.e. they lack the ability to utilize geometric information of perceived entities and their spatial relation to each other to solve problems. We introduce a novel Adaptive Neural Cellular Automata (aNCA) architecture which uses deformable convolutions to dynamically adapt the perceptive field and iteratively reason over 2D spatial relations on grid-like data structures (e.g. images). Empirical results on public benchmarks show state of the art comprehensible results with high generalization abilities for solving image based puzzles like Sudoku or finding the shortest path in a maze.