ArXiv 日报

Streaming text-to-speech is essential for low-latency spoken dialogue systems, yet many systems wait for sentence-level text and are therefore only pseudo-streaming. True token-level synthesis must generate speech from uncertain prefixes while maintaining perceptual continuity over an unbounded stream with bounded context. We present X2Streaming-TTS, a causal TTS framework that consumes asynchronously arriving text tokens and emits speech without accessing future input. To handle uncertain prefixes, we introduce causal commitment, which keeps ambiguous expressions provisional through uncertainty-aware buffering and performs capacity-adaptive, punctuation-aware segmentation. To preserve acoustic continuity, we further introduce causal speech-state inheritance, which carries the complete Code2Wav state and selected historical Talker states across segment boundaries. Together with an attention prior constraint, it blocks access to future positions while retaining bounded acoustic context. Experiments show that X2Streaming-TTS outperforms existing pseudo-streaming models on most subjective and objective metrics. Further analysis shows that causal commitment stabilizes online segmentation and reduces failures caused by insufficient context, while speech-state inheritance improves boundary continuity without degrading naturalness or speaker identity. X2Streaming-TTS thus achieves strict token-level synthesis with quality comparable to the evaluated offline baselines, a median time to first audio token (TTFT) of 15.8 ms for a single request, and a median TTFT of 260.8 ms at 128 concurrent requests. Our implementation is publicly available at https://github.com/X-Square-Robot/X2Streaming-TTS .

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are typically built through a multi-stage pipeline consisting of cross-modal alignment, supervised fine-tuning (SFT), and preference optimization. This pipeline assumes that adapting an LLM to a new modality requires extensive task-specific supervision. However, pretrained LLMs already possess strong reasoning and instruction-following abilities. As LLMs evolve rapidly, an important question remains: can we efficiently transfer these capabilities to a new modality with minimal intervention, and is alignment alone sufficient for building a multimodal model? We introduce an Instruction-Free Alignment-Only large audio-language model (LALM) that keeps both the audio encoder and the LLM fully frozen, learning only a lightweight projector. Borrowing insights from AzeroS [1], we train on (audio, response) pairs from Self-Generated Data Construction, where an LLM expands captions into free-form responses without explicit task instructions. Across MMAU, MMAR, MMSU, and MMAU-Pro, our approach matches or surpasses heavily post-trained baselines using substantially less data. By keeping the LLM frozen, our model preserves its native instruction-following competence and can port seamlessly across model generations. Our results suggest that competitive MLLM can emerge from alignment alone, reducing multimodal extension to a lightweight projector-training problem that generalizes across modalities and adapts rapidly to each new LLM release.

Looped language models have shown promising results on reasoning benchmarks, yet their potential for agentic tool use remains largely unexplored. We study this question in compositional tool-calling settings, where models must coordinate multiple API calls, maintain intermediate state, and preserve dependencies across tool interactions. We evaluate native and retrofitted looped language models on API-Bank, BFCL, and NESTful, comparing looped and non-looped models trained under matched supervised fine-tuning recipes and varying recurrent depth at inference time. In controlled experiments, recurrent computation generally benefits compositional and dependency-aware tool use, while providing smaller and more model-dependent gains on isolated API invocation. Accuracy on multi-step tool use generally increases with recurrent depth; adaptive inference, however, achieves a more favorable compute-performance trade-off by allocating additional computation only when needed. Our results suggest that looped language models are a promising architecture for agentic systems that require reliable planning, coordination, and execution of compositional tool use workflows.

Agentic AI systems take consequential actions governed by more than one pre-action control at once: authority, resource, and evidence gates that can admit, degrade, or remediate an action before it executes. This paper's central object is remediation-induced control coupling: a remediation applied by one control can change the action, evidence, or context another control evaluates, invalidating that control's earlier judgment. We formalize this coupling and give a remediate-and-regate protocol that restores per-action soundness in the current bounded, idempotent setting under its stated assumptions. We further show that the two implemented remediation operators (evidence substitution and resource-budget downroute) do not commute -- a finite-model checker finds concrete counterexample instances -- making remediation order part of the control-plane semantics rather than an implementation detail. A governed evidence buffer that trusts its own most recent admitted write is a further instance of the same problem at the level of state -- current admissibility does not imply future reference trustworthiness -- and is vulnerable to poisoning from declared-uncovered defect classes; two mitigations reduce, not eliminate, that exposure. Supporting results establish the exact condition under which positive-weight linear aggregation of gate outcomes can compensate a member veto, a unified cross-control Evidence Set, and that composition manufactures no new detection coverage, reported honestly. Empirically, on a deterministic open-data artifact composing three published engines unmodified, CH1-CH5 meet their registered decision rules across all 30 pre-registered seeds; CH6 does so under W1 but not under the smaller W2 workflow, reported as such. This is a mechanism demonstration on open payload data with a synthetic metadata layer, not a claim about production prevalence.

Large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems (MAS) often exhibit complex failure modes, which frequently cause agents to produce incorrect outcomes. This motivates the task of Agent Failure Attribution: given a failed multi-agent trajectory, identify the faulty agents and their corresponding error types. Existing approaches predominantly rely on LLMs to perform failure attribution, either through direct prompting, fine-tuning on synthetic data or complex agentic pipelines. While effective, these methods incur substantial computational overhead due to long-context processing, expensive post-training and handcrafted workflows. Moreover, empirical evidence shows that even state-of-the-art models achieve limited accuracy on existing benchmarks, suggesting that scaling model size alone is insufficient. In this work, we revisit this task and question the necessity of such expensive generative solutions. We introduce AFANet, a lightweight graph-based framework that models interaction trajectories through step-level semantic signals and agent-level relationships. We show that with significantly fewer parameters and near-zero inference cost, AFANet (i) matches or outperforms LLM-based baselines, including fine-tuned models on in-domain benchmarks, (ii) maintains robust performance across different GNN architectures and (iii) can be further improved with inexpensive test-time adaptation on the OOD benchmark. Our results suggest that effective agent failure attribution does not require heavy LLM reasoning and a lightweight, structured approach can achieve strong performance.

Test-time scaling (TTS) improves language model outputs by spending additional inference compute - generating multiple candidates, searching over partial sequences, or iteratively refining drafts. These techniques yield large gains on mathematics and code, but have been developed and stress-tested almost exclusively on tasks where verification is straightforward. We conduct the first compute-normalised comparison of five TTS families across five open-ended generation benchmarks spanning medicine, law, finance, general chat, and creative writing - grounded in a unified framework that decomposes the effectiveness of each method's token budget into exploration and exploitation. The answer depends on which side of that decomposition you examine. Scaling exploration works: the best candidate in the pool improves steadily with compute across all settings. What breaks is exploitation - the step that converts a rich candidate pool into a final output. With state-of-the-art generators, reward models correlate at only $\rho_v \approx 0.12$ with true quality, rendering selection near-random regardless of budget. Tree search amplifies this failure through diversity collapse. Refinement helps on one of five benchmarks; its apparent gains elsewhere are confounded. Only synthesis across candidates (Fusion) consistently improves over single-sample baselines, yet still recovers only ~40% of available quality. The candidate pool is not the bottleneck - choosing from it is.

Language model agents now execute bounded tasks reliably. Whether they can sustain effective decision-making over long horizons, where actions have cumulative consequences and the environment responds to their choices, remains largely unmeasured. FM-Bench (Football Management Benchmark) measures this. An LLM agent runs a football club for 20 in-game years through 26 tools and roughly 340 to 400 decision stops. It drafts a squad on the same budget as every rival, trades players, negotiates contracts, invests in facilities and youth, sets lineups, and answers to a board that can fire it, while a deterministic engine accumulates every year into one final score with no LLM judge or human rater. The solo track plays each of 15 frontier models against a frozen scripted world, and the Arena places the same models plus a scripted anchor in one shared 20-year world; to our knowledge, the first head-to-head evaluation at this scale. We measure six behavioral capabilities behind the score. Across three seeds, all 15 models complete every horizon while the blind scripted baselines die out in most of theirs, and claude-fable-5 tops the solo board on mean score and the Arena, where the title nonetheless rotates among ten models. Neither scale, price, nor vendor predicts the order; the order settles only late in the horizon, and the best first-play human lands only at the bottom of the model board. What separates the models is managerial behavior rather than computation. Higher-scoring models reduce slow-payoff investment near the end, keep cash invested rather than idle, and open renewals well before the deadline, while token spend predicts nothing. No model learns the market's hidden prices from hundreds of rejected bids, and self-managed memory fails in two opposite modes: an archive that only grows or a plan rewritten every season. Code is available at https://github.com/Analogy-AI/fm-bench.

Multi-agent Large Language Model (LLM) systems often struggle to collaborate with new teammates whose strategies shift mid-task. Because agents execute multi-step or temporally extended skills, they frequently continue executing outdated plans long after public evidence shows that a partner has changed its skill. Existing methods either treat partner tracking as passive context-leaving the agent aware of the shift but slow to act-or replan indiscriminately. We introduce BayesBeliefAgent, which pairs a hierarchical LLM planner with a Bayesian tracking module. Rather than replanning constantly, our agent interrupts its current skill only when a partner's actions directly contradict the inferred skill. Beyond standard reward, we evaluate performance using replanning efficiency and the belief-action gap: the fraction of total decisions where an agent with a correct partner estimate executes a non-complementary skill. Across benchmark Overcooked environments, contradiction-conditioned control drastically narrows this belief-action gap while requiring an order of magnitude fewer replans than heuristic methods

Language-model agents can communicate through continuous hidden states that are invisible in public transcripts, creating opportunities for covert harmful coordination. We introduce Verifiable Latent Alignments (VLA), an activation-aware framework for monitoring and steering these private communication channels. For every monitored decision, VLA links the private latent-state record and channel status to the resulting public action using a shared event identifier, enabling matched causal analysis. Our first contribution is a neutral-only three-layer monitor combining representation anomaly detection, counterfactual action-distribution influence, and sparse-autoencoder interpretation support. Our second contribution is a steerability framework spanning black-box behavioral instructions and white-box matched-neutral counterfactuals. Our third contribution is an evaluation on a controlled multi-agent auction benchmark covering homogeneous and heterogeneous model pairs, many-agent scalability, and intervention effectiveness. The sequential monitor achieves mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.993 for homogeneous agents and 0.854 for heterogeneous pairs when text- and latent-collusion rows are pooled as positives. In Qwen3-0.6B auctions with 25-100 bidders, monitoring requires only a small normalized load relative to all possible directed pairs, while full white-box steering achieves 100% bid-distribution recovery and reduces collusive low-bid behavior by 47.3 percentage points. Because full white-box steering replays the matched neutral counterfactual, its exact recovery is a sanity check by construction. Overall, the controlled study shows that the evaluated private channel attacks can be monitored without training the primary monitor on attack examples and mitigated when matched counterfactual access is available.

Continual learning has traditionally treated forgetting as a failure, emphasizing preservation of previously acquired knowledge as environments evolve. We argue that this objective is incomplete for enterprise AI agents operating in non-stationary environments, where customers, policies, tools, workflows, regulations, and market conditions change over time. Indiscriminate retention can allow obsolete knowledge to influence decisions, creating negative transfer and operational risk. We therefore propose reversible forgetting: a conceptual framework with three operational memory states: active, dormant, and retired, and a reactivation transition that can restore dormant knowledge when its relevance returns. We instantiate the framework as a Hysteretic Reversible Memory Controller that accumulates relevance evidence, uses asymmetric thresholds to prevent state oscillation, tests reactivation in shadow mode, and gates retirement through policy. The framework reduces the influence of obsolete information without conflating temporary suppression with permanent erasure. Finance illustrates the idea: knowledge useful under one market regime may become harmful under another yet regain relevance when similar conditions recur.

Long-term memory is essential for agents that operate across extended interactions, yet existing memory systems and benchmarks predominantly focus on single-source textual histories. In realistic settings, however, relevant information is often fragmented across applications and devices, as well as across users and time, requiring agents to integrate dispersed observations into coherent episodic memories while preserving their source provenance. To address these gaps, we introduce **MemFuseBench**, a benchmark for *multi-source memory fusion*. MemFuseBench is built with a Scene-to-Sensor pipeline that synthesizes controllable scenarios into source-tagged observations, evidence-grounded questions, and adversarial distractors. It enables systematic evaluation of temporal reasoning, cross-source evidence fusion, and robustness to noise. We further propose **MemFuse**, a structured memory system that preserves source-level evidence in event-layer atomic memory and organizes related atomic events into cluster-layer fused memory within a causal fusion graph. During retrieval, MemFuse retrieves and organizes related evidence fragments while maintaining traceability to original source events. Experiments on MemFuseBench show that MemFuse achieves the best overall performance among the evaluated memory systems under all three LLM settings and consistently improves performance on questions requiring cross-source evidence fusion.

Long-term robot operation in evolving environments requires object-level understanding that persists across repeated revisits. Existing systems either overwrite history to maintain an up-to-date map or store semantic snapshots without consistent cross-session object identity, resulting in temporal amnesia: the systematic loss of object history that prevents answering queries such as "Where has the green chair been across all sessions?" We propose LT-Mem, a volatility-aware memory evolution framework that unifies spatially aligned instance-level 3D perception with volatility-conditioned temporal reasoning. First, a multi-session SLAM backbone provides spatially aligned per-object observations across sessions. Second, a reasoning layer governs how object memory evolves: deterministic evidence scoring preserves cross-session identity, and a volatility-aware policy selects among overwrite, hold, and multi-hypothesis actions based on each object's dynamics. Third, the resulting Tri-Memory structure (Live, Delta, Meta) preserves both current states and event histories, enabling longitudinal object-centric reasoning. We further introduce LT-VQA, a dataset and evaluation suite comprising multi-session recordings, persistent identity annotations, and temporal QA pairs. Experiments show that LT-Mem consistently outperforms baselines across all metrics while consuming an order of magnitude fewer tokens, and ablations confirm that gains are driven by the structured memory architecture rather than LLM capacity.

Training multi-turn agentic workflows with reinforcement learning (RL) enables large language models to perform complex reasoning, use external tools, and conduct iterative search beyond single-turn settings. Yet multi-turn RL training remains highly unstable, often causing severe performance degradation as the number of turns increases. Through theoretical analysis, we identify three tightly coupled sources of instability: rollout-training context mismatch, weak turn-level credit assignment under sparse terminal rewards, and asynchronous policy drift when short and long trajectories are optimized under different policy versions. We show that these issues share a common structural origin in flattened trajectory optimization and address them through a unified reverse-turn formulation. We propose Reverse-Turn Policy Optimization (RTPO), which organizes multi-turn rollouts as sparse reverse trees and performs turn-level policy updates in temporal reverse order, aligning each decision with its downstream continuation. RTPO enables causally consistent turn-level credit assignment and on-policy continuation to control asynchronous drift. We provide theoretical guarantees showing that RTPO eliminates context mismatch and asynchronous drift under the proposed turn-level formulation, reduces credit bias, and converges to recursive optimality. Experiments on multi-turn agentic RL benchmarks show that RTPO improves upon trajectory- and turn-level baselines by 21.50% and 10.76%, respectively, highlighting its potential to support more stable training for tool-using agents.

Agent frameworks increasingly package procedural knowledge as skills: instruction files an agent reads on demand, while public libraries now hold thousands of them. Which skill to read has thus become a decision the policy itself makes in the middle of an episode, yet no existing signal trains it. We show that the default remedy, outcome-rewarded RL over the candidate slate, cannot teach it, for a structural reason we identify and name selector credit starvation: under a broadcast, sequence-level advantage, the few tokens that name the chosen skill carry a vanishing share of the loss, and the credit they inherit is increasingly wrong-signed as trajectories lengthen. A correct choice is punished whenever the execution after it fails, even though the choice itself is among the most valuable decisions in the trajectory. Auditing a completed run's own training artifacts confirms all three properties, each worsening monotonically with horizon. SkillGate removes the failure by construction: it partitions the token support into two disjoint credit channels, outcome credit reaching only execution tokens, and a separate action-local advantage reaching exactly the skill-naming tokens, positive only when a trajectory's single read is the correct one. On five agentic benchmarks under a 16-candidate slate, SkillGate lifts a 9B policy from 40.8% to 53.2% trial success, well ahead of the identical budget spent on outcome reward alone, while cutting exposure to misleading candidates by two thirds and reading fewer skills.

Humans solve complex problems by constructing plans and mentally simulating their outcomes with an internal model of the world. Machine learning has produced world models that similarly predict the outcomes of action sequences, but the improvement of candidate plans still isn't fully learned. Current planners are either hand-designed, distilled from a hand-designed optimizer, or learned only to inform an amortized policy rather than to revise the plan itself. We introduce the Reinforced Planning, a method based on the idea that search can be learned by reinforcing good search rules into a neural planner. Our implementation RP1 learns both how to evaluate imagined outcomes through a critic, as well as how to improve multi-step plans through an optimizer trained fully offline from imagined world-model roll-outs. To our knowledge, RP1 is the first method to fully learn how to improve multi-step plans. Furthermore, it can be trained independently of and attached to any pretrained latent world model. Across visual navigation, arm reaching, and robotic manipulation on two world-model backbones, RP1 substantially outperforms hand-designed search algorithms, reaching near-perfect success in several settings while using $1,000 \times$ less world-model rollouts and being up to $67 \times$ faster than the strongest alternative under concurrent planner inference.

Robot foundation models (RFMs), including vision-language-action (VLA) policies, are often discussed through a scaling view: more data, larger models, and broader benchmarks should improve generalization. In robotics, however, a model can generalize while work still remains before it can run on a robot with a particular body. The work required differs across methods and target robots, and those differences affect practical deployment. We call the gap between reusable models, representations, or data and their use in execution on the target robot the embodiment gap. This survey examines what can be reused across robot embodiments and what must still be implemented on a new robot. We place existing methods on a two-axis map that shows the type of shared structure and the stage at which adaptation is needed for execution on the target robot. We then examine recent work through three overlapping research directions: sharing semantics and perception, sharing robot data and interfaces, and learning correspondence across embodiments. We also propose a reporting framework for adaptation work that success rate alone does not reveal. The framework identifies the work that should be checked when comparing cross-embodiment learning and highlights work that remains on a new robot and questions for future study.