Does the way we write a theory change the program an LLM builds from it? A prospective randomized study of renderer format in LLM theory-to-program translation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.10314v1
• Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 23:37:47 GMT
• Title: Does the way we write a theory change the program an LLM builds from it? A prospective randomized study of renderer format in LLM theory-to-program translation
• Abstract summary: A verbal theory does not run: translating it into an executable model requires choices about variables, interventions, and interactions.<n>We tested whether the presentation of otherwise identical theoretical content systematically changes the programs produced by theoretical language models.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: A verbal theory does not run: translating it into an executable model requires choices about variables, interventions, and interactions. We tested whether the presentation of otherwise identical theoretical content systematically changes the programs produced by large language models. In a prospective preregistered randomized experiment, 16 independent assignment bits allocated 32 paired renderer slots between a structured intervention contract and connected prose. Two pinned LLM snapshots translated five anonymous theoretical accounts, yielding 320 preauthorized single-shot programs in a frozen sparse quadratic language. A deterministic evaluator measured atomic finite-difference responses (H1) and mixed interaction responses (H2). Two primary endpoints assessed cross-model matched-distance reduction and closed-set same-account identifiability, with exact randomization inference and 27 preregistered support criteria evaluated across signed-linear and magnitude-rank pipelines. Both H1 and H2 returned the registered verdict NOT_SUPPORTED; only 19 of 108 criterion evaluations passed. Same-account identifiability remained near chance (AUC 0.469-0.523, against a registered 0.80 threshold). One H2 matched-distance endpoint moved and survived multiplicity correction in the signed-linear pipeline, but the corresponding magnitude-rank result missed the registered effect-size floor, so it did not satisfy the joint support rule. Thus renderer format did not produce the uniform, family-invariant, classifiable behavioral geometry predicted in advance. The result places a concrete boundary on specification-format effects in LLM theory-to-program translation and provides a fully auditable randomized design, datasets, and software for studying executable formalization.

Related papers

• Transformed in Translation: Two-Stage Structural Uncertainty in LLM-Based Scientific Autoformalization [0.0]
  Autoformalization turns accounts into executable mathematics, but executable code does not settle which model has been constructed.<n>We examine two sources of structural uncertainty: the formalizer that generates a response law, and recurrence that turns that law into trajectories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-13T21:47:46Z)
• SeGDeP: Semantic- and Geometric-Aware Decoupled Prompts for Reasoning Segmentation [51.46828526392219]
  Reasoning segmentation converts an implicit linguistic conclusion into a precise mask.<n>Existing MLLM-segmenter interfaces either use a special trigger or compress both signals into one context.<n>We present SeGDeP, an explicit what-where interface.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-08T15:11:32Z)
• Architecture-Dependent Causal Transfer of Activation States Across Large Language Models [51.56484100374058]
  Internal language activation states can be transferred causally between different large language models.<n>Injecting projected activations into a target model during generation produces a statistically significant, preregistered causal effect.<n>We conclude that end-to-end activation-state transfer between LLMs, as currently implemented, is architecture-dependent rather than universal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-17T09:53:27Z)
• A Pre-Specified Construction-Confirmation Test of Operation-Level Causal Transfer Across Finite Isomorphic Symbolic Domains [0.0]
  We ask if the hidden-state difference between two operations is estimated separately for each source input, does adding that difference move the model toward the corresponding recipient answer?<n>The design compares this input-specific intervention with wrong-operation, norm-matched random, and no-op controls, and separates candidate construction from an independently isolated confirmation split.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-16T15:37:26Z)
• GenOS: Compositional Certificates for Semantic Robustness in AI Code Generation [0.0]
  GenOS is a probabilistic operational semantics for replacing a prompt, contract, generator, or program.<n>We prove that equivalence-compatible kernels descend to quotient classes and that quotienting commutes with distributional extension and sequential composition.<n>We also establish workflow bi-commit safety under sound validation, total-variation non-expansiveness, and an additive bound.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-04T12:42:11Z)
• Speculative Refinement: A Hybrid Autoregressive Diffusion Decoding Strategy and Its Behavior Across Benchmarks [1.9800951131982487]
  We use Speculative Refinement (SpecRef) to warm-start a masked diffusion language model from an AR draft.<n>We evaluate SpecRef across six benchmarks (HumanEval, MBPP, GSM8K, BBH, ARC-Challenge, HellaSwag) with three distinct evaluation protocols.<n>These observations apply to any multi-stage or non-autoregressive generation pipeline and point toward more diagnostic evaluation practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-25T18:52:24Z)
• Teaching Diffusion to Speculate Left-to-Right [3.205247598097648]
  Large language models (LLMs) achieve remarkable performance across a wide range of tasks, but their autoregressive decoding process incurs substantial inference costs.<n> Speculative decoding addresses this bottleneck by employing a lightweight draft model to propose multiple future tokens that are subsequently verified in parallel by a larger target model.<n>Recent work has demonstrated that diffusion language models are well suited for this setting, as they can generate entire blocks of draft tokens in parallel.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-10T01:21:56Z)
• The Deterministic Horizon: Impossibility Results as Design Specifications for Trustworthy AI Systems [0.0]
  This thesis turns impossibility results from curiosities into design rules.<n>Its flagship result proves an accuracy ceiling set by architecture alone.<n>The same argument recasts across subfields.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-21T20:48:35Z)
• Reject, Resample, Repeat: Understanding Parallel Reasoning in Language Model Inference [60.48486820968353]
  Inference-time methods that aggregate and prune multiple samples have emerged as a powerful paradigm for steering large language models.<n>We introduce a route to rigorously study such approaches using the lens of *particle filtering* algorithms such as Sequential Monte Carlo (SMC)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-09T01:50:31Z)
• Blockwise SFT for Diffusion Language Models: Reconciling Bidirectional Attention and Autoregressive Decoding [60.06816407728172]
  Discrete diffusion language models have shown strong potential for text generation.<n>Standard supervised fine-tuning misaligns with semi-autoregressive inference.<n>We propose Blockwise SFT, which partitions responses into fixed-size blocks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-27T02:49:33Z)
• Datarus-R1: An Adaptive Multi-Step Reasoning LLM for Automated Data Analysis [0.0]
  We present Datarus-R1-14B, a language model fine-tuned from Qwen 2.5-14B-Instruct to act as a virtual data analyst and graduate-level problem solver.<n>Datarus is trained not on isolated question-answer pairs but on full analytical trajectories including reasoning steps, code execution, error traces, self-corrections, and final conclusions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-18T21:58:18Z)
• Reviving Any-Subset Autoregressive Models with Principled Parallel Sampling and Speculative Decoding [55.2480439325792]
  In arbitrary-order language models, it is an open question how to sample tokens in parallel from the correct joint distribution.<n>We find that a different class of models, any-subset autoregressive models (AS-ARMs), holds the solution.<n>We show that AS-ARMs achieve state-of-the-art performance among sub-200M parameter models on infilling benchmark tasks, and nearly match the performance of models 50X larger on code generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-29T06:33:13Z)
• Conformal Language Modeling [61.94417935386489]
  We propose a novel approach to conformal prediction for generative language models (LMs) Standard conformal prediction produces prediction sets with rigorous, statistical guarantees. We demonstrate the promise of our approach on multiple tasks in open-domain question answering, text summarization, and radiology report generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-16T21:55:08Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.