Wenhao Huang

Xingwei Qu, Shaowen Wang, Zihao Huang et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) apply uniform computation to all tokens, despite language exhibiting highly non-uniform information density. This token-uniform regime wastes capacity on locally predictable spans while under-allocating computation to semantically critical transitions. We propose $\textbf{Dynamic Large Concept Models (DLCM)}$, a hierarchical language modeling framework that learns semantic boundaries from latent representations and shifts computation from tokens to a compressed concept space where reasoning is more efficient. DLCM discovers variable-length concepts end-to-end without relying on predefined linguistic units. Hierarchical compression fundamentally changes scaling behavior. We introduce the first $\textbf{compression-aware scaling law}$, which disentangles token-level capacity, concept-level reasoning capacity, and compression ratio, enabling principled compute allocation under fixed FLOPs. To stably train this heterogeneous architecture, we further develop a $\textbf{decoupled $μ$P parametrization}$ that supports zero-shot hyperparameter transfer across widths and compression regimes. At a practical setting ($R=4$, corresponding to an average of four tokens per concept), DLCM reallocates roughly one-third of inference compute into a higher-capacity reasoning backbone, achieving a $\textbf{+2.69$\%$ average improvement}$ across 12 zero-shot benchmarks under matched inference FLOPs.

Jiayun Wu, Jiashuo Liu, Zhiyuan Zeng et al.

LLM deployment in critical domains is currently impeded by persistent hallucinations--generating plausible but factually incorrect assertions. While scaling laws drove significant improvements in general capabilities, theoretical frameworks suggest hallucination is not merely stochastic error but a predictable statistical consequence of training objectives prioritizing mimicking data distribution over epistemic honesty. Standard RLVR paradigms, utilizing binary reward signals, inadvertently incentivize models as good test-takers rather than honest communicators, encouraging guessing whenever correctness probability exceeds zero. This paper presents an exhaustive investigation into behavioral calibration, which incentivizes models to stochastically admit uncertainty by abstaining when not confident, aligning model behavior with accuracy. Synthesizing recent advances, we propose and evaluate training interventions optimizing strictly proper scoring rules for models to output a calibrated probability of correctness. Our methods enable models to either abstain from producing a complete response or flag individual claims where uncertainty remains. Utilizing Qwen3-4B-Instruct, empirical analysis reveals behavior-calibrated reinforcement learning allows smaller models to surpass frontier models in uncertainty quantification--a transferable meta-skill decouplable from raw predictive accuracy. Trained on math reasoning tasks, our model's log-scale Accuracy-to-Hallucination Ratio gain (0.806) exceeds GPT-5's (0.207) in a challenging in-domain evaluation (BeyondAIME). Moreover, in cross-domain factual QA (SimpleQA), our 4B LLM achieves zero-shot calibration error on par with frontier models including Grok-4 and Gemini-2.5-Pro, even though its factual accuracy is much lower.