CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.LGcs.CL2026-07-09

Gauge dependence and structured-output corruption in sign-branched repetition penalties: measurements across models, inference stacks, and alternative repetition controls

Peter Hollows

The multiplicative repetition penalty shipped across the LLM inference ecosystem (HuggingFace, vLLM, llama$.$cpp, and a dozen further engines) branches on the sign of each raw logit (divide positives by theta, multiply negatives). But the softmax is unchanged by adding a constant to every logit, so a model's logit zero-point is arbitrary, and the sign-branch reads that arbitrary point. The sign-branch is itself the accepted fix for an earlier bug, so the accepted fix branches on a quantity the training objective leaves unconstrained. Two measurable consequences follow. (1) The penalty is not well-defined: re-centring a model's logits by a constant is a provable no-op at theta=1, yet at a routine theta=1.3 it changes 58-96% of greedy tokens, where subtractive and normalized penalties change none; real checkpoints sit at widely different zero-points, so a fixed repetition_penalty is a different operation on every model. (2) It corrupts structured output: on 200 real-world JSON schemas, theta=1.3 drops the rate of valid, schema-conformant output from 97% to 23%. In our measurements, applying the penalty to normalized log-probabilities instead of raw logits removes both effects. HuggingFace already ships that operator (LogitNormalization); today it is off by default and applied after the penalty. This note gives the mechanism, the measurements (five models up to 7B, base and RLHF, on WikiText-103 prefixes; two code models on HumanEval and JSONSchemaBench; both effects replicated inside vLLM and llama$.$cpp through their own samplers on the same inputs), and the normalized variant.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.LGcs.AIcs.CL2026-07-23

Training Large Language Models for Self-Explanation Faithfulness

Yeoktatt Cheah, María Pérez-Ortiz, Noah Y. Siegel, Oana-Maria Camburu

We propose a Reinforcement Learning (RL) method to directly optimize the faithfulness of self-explanations - the extent to which a model's generated reasoning accurately reflects its internal decision-making process. While existing work focuses on evaluating faithfulness or using…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.LGcs.AIcs.CL2026-07-23

LeAct: Learning to Reason from Expert Actions

Ziran Yang, Chengshuai Shi, Raj Ghugare, Benjamin Eysenbach, Karthik Narasimhan, Chi Jin

Modern reasoning models depend on reasoning data, today sourced from human annotations or distilled from stronger LLMs. However, a rich and largely untapped source of supervision lies in expert systems (e.g., game engines, classical planners, theorem provers), which routinely pro…

View free PDFSource page