arXiv (All)
open access
Context Injection and Long-Horizon Reliability: Separating Duplicate Recognition, Local Processing, and Counter Tracking
Long-horizon failures of language models are usually measured as end-task success or as a horizon length. We instead score, step by step, three components of a 400-step ledger task in which every step is easy in isolation and the model's own answers are re-injected into its context: recognising a re
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Cross-Entropy Risk Estimation for Language Models: Inconsistency Must Be Dense, and the Holdout Method Is No Exception#616936
- Cross-Entropy Risk Estimation for Language Models: Inconsistency Must Be Dense, and the Holdout Method Is No Exception#616436
- RoPE at the End of Its Rope? Theory, Diagnosis, and Mitigation of Long-Context Failures#1145096
- Truth-tracking profiles: What large language models participate in#708922
- Beyond Fluency: A Human-Centered Evaluation Rubric for Grounding, Answerability, and Reliability in LLM Outputs#118367
Record · ID 1355622
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive