让下一篇重要论文，不再错过。

Coding agents tackle successive tasks on an evolving repository, carrying forward edits and writing memory before the next task is known. Selecting memory for unknown next tasks requires balancing future usefulness against the costs of writing and reading it. The actor must also decide when acting on available memory saves effort as the task unfolds. We introduce Coding-Repository Memory (CoReMem), a cost-internalizing framework that guides memory design and actor adaptation through measured memory value on the next task. Prospective segment valuation compares runs of the next task with and without individual trajectory segments from the same inherited repository state, guiding a compact memory built around anchors: repository locations and executable checks. Actor adaptation estimates on-policy memory value within rollout groups with and without memory, using a reward that prioritizes resolution and penalizes step count in successful runs. Provenance-gated value credit assigns the additional value term to steps identified as using memory-supplied anchors, while every step retains outcome credit. On ChainSWE, CoReMem raises the 27B actor's resolve rate from 21.0% to 25.7%, with 17% fewer steps and 11% fewer total cache-aware tokens, including memory-module calls, relative to the untrained actor model without memory.

We investigate whether and how LLMs encode goals: internal neural representations that precede and guide action, and that are flexible enough to be realized through many different execution paths. We construct a coding setting with multiple sub-tasks that allows us to evaluate goal-seeking behavior and the selection of sub-goals. In this setting, we localize an encoding of the next sub-goal in the outputs of a sparse set of attention heads. The same heads can be used to decode the LM's future actions in natural language (e.g., "I'm checking if a word is a palindrome"). We verify that this encoding is causal for next action and is plastic: transplanting it into a different environment, e.g., another programming language, triggers the same operation realized with a different sequence of tokens. The LM also sustains the encoding throughout the action's execution, which is puzzling because a transformer LM without recurrence cannot carry a state forward for more tokens than it has layers left. We propose that it does not need to. Under a non-recurrent goal-seeking (NRGS) account, the LM frequently re-reads the goal from the task specification, compares it with the progress visible in the growing context, and pursues what remains. We test the predictions of this account with targeted causal interventions.

Large language models (LLMs) achieve remarkable performance across a wide range of tasks, but their autoregressive decoding process incurs substantial inference costs due to inherently sequential token generation. 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. 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 and thereby alleviate the sequential constraints of autoregressive drafting. A subtlety of this regime is that block-diffusion drafters generate tokens bidirectionally within a block, whereas verification is performed by an autoregressive target model that evaluates tokens in a strictly left-to-right manner, leaving a gap between the symmetric training-time objective and the asymmetric verification-time reward. In this work, we offer an empirical analysis of three training-time interventions that narrow this gap: token positional weighting, a first-error focal loss that targets the position that breaks the accepted prefix within each block, and a chain loss term that substitutes a differentiable surrogate for the expected accepted length. The three interventions act along orthogonal axes (position, block-conditional first error, joint prefix) and compose additively; they are likewise orthogonal to test-time alignment mechanisms such as multi-draft self-selection, with which they can in principle be combined. Across four target models and six reasoning, code, and dialogue benchmarks, the three interventions raise accepted draft length by 21-76% per benchmark over a position-uniform baseline, without adding additional forward passes and without changing the inference pipeline or the rejection-sampling exactness contract.

LLM agents use context compaction to manage growing interaction histories, but summarizing long histories with large models can introduce substantial delays. Compaction therefore requires balancing information retention against latency. We observe that structured summary slots can retain information when generated independently. Based on this observation, we present SpecCompact, a framework that accelerates compaction through slot-parallel semantic speculation. SpecCompact fine-tunes a small drafter and generates slots in parallel. The target model verifies each proposed line and repairs rejected content, while subsequent drafting uses the updated slot prefix. System optimizations further reduce repeated context processing and model calls. Across AppWorld and $τ^3$ benchmarks with two target models, SpecCompact achieves $2.04$--$5.63\times$ compaction speedups over Hermes-style summarization. Separate downstream evaluations reveal model- and task-dependent performance trade-offs. A user study within Hermes further shows an $8.68\times$ median compaction speedup.

Undesired model behaviors can emerge or re-emerge at any stage of training. Once observed, how effectively can we suppress them? To study this question, we first construct two model organisms--language models deliberately trained to exhibit a specific misalignment--that differ in what triggers the behavior. The narrow-trigger organism misbehaves only when the prompt contains a specific cue: it cheats on multiple-choice questions by following a planted hint that points to a wrong answer, and behaves normally otherwise. The broad-trigger organism has no such cue: after fine-tuning on insecure code, it gives harmful responses across a wide range of open-ended prompts. We then formalize post-hoc behavioral suppression and evaluate methods along three criteria: immediate suppression of the target behavior, durability under further training, and preservation of general capability. We compare standard methods--SFT, GRPO, and gradient-ascent unlearning--along these dimensions. Building on prior work on alignment shallowness, we hypothesize that more durable suppression requires the ability to recover from a wider range of misalignment states. We introduce Prefix-Expanded Adversarial Reinforcement Learning (PEARL), a GRPO variant that augments rollouts with continuations from intermediate states sampled along cached organism trajectories. Across both organism settings and two model families (Qwen3-4B, GPT-OSS-20B), PEARL achieves strong immediate suppression while preserving task accuracy, and remains durable under further fine-tuning on either the organism's data or unrelated data. It obtains the greatest benefit when the undesirable behavior is broad and cannot be addressed through targeted SFT. Together, our framework and method offer a step toward more durable post-hoc removal of undesired behaviors.