Mark C. Jeffrey

Pavel Golikov, Evgenii Opryshko, Gennady Pekhimenko et al.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve high performance on standard mathematical benchmarks, their underlying reasoning processes remain highly overfit to standard textual formatting. We propose a perturbation pipeline consisting of 14 techniques to evaluate robustness of LLM reasoning. We apply this pipeline to AIME 2024 dataset and evalute 8 state-of-the-art models on the resulting benchmark. While frontier models exhibit resilience, open weights reasoning models suffer catastrophic collapses (up to 55% average accuracy drops across perturbations and up to 100% on some), exposing structural fragility. To further disentangle mechanical parsing failures from downstream reasoning failures, we strictly isolate the models' working memory capacity by forcing models to solve multiple unperturbed mathematical problems sequentially within a single context window. Our results indicate that open weight models ranging from 7B to 120B parameters and Claude Opus 4.6 exhibit accuracy decay on subsequent problems. This degradation demonstrates that intermediate reasoning steps permanently pollute standard dense attention mechanisms. We argue that to achieve reliable reasoning, future reasoning architectures must integrate explicit contextual resets within a model's own Chain-of-Thought, leading to fundamental open questions regarding the optimal granularity of atomic reasoning tasks.

Kiwan Maeng, Shivam Bharuka, Isabel Gao et al.

The paper proposes and optimizes a partial recovery training system, CPR, for recommendation models. CPR relaxes the consistency requirement by enabling non-failed nodes to proceed without loading checkpoints when a node fails during training, improving failure-related overheads. The paper is the first to the extent of our knowledge to perform a data-driven, in-depth analysis of applying partial recovery to recommendation models and identified a trade-off between accuracy and performance. Motivated by the analysis, we present CPR, a partial recovery training system that can reduce the training time and maintain the desired level of model accuracy by (1) estimating the benefit of partial recovery, (2) selecting an appropriate checkpoint saving interval, and (3) prioritizing to save updates of more frequently accessed parameters. Two variants of CPR, CPR-MFU and CPR-SSU, reduce the checkpoint-related overhead from 8.2-8.5% to 0.53-0.68% compared to full recovery, on a configuration emulating the failure pattern and overhead of a production-scale cluster. While reducing overhead significantly, CPR achieves model quality on par with the more expensive full recovery scheme, training the state-of-the-art recommendation model using Criteo's Ads CTR dataset. Our preliminary results also suggest that CPR can speed up training on a real production-scale cluster, without notably degrading the accuracy.