Han Chen | arXiv Science

arXiv2026

RW-TTT: Batched Serving for Request-Owned Test-Time Training State

Test-time training (TTT) adapts an LLM during generation by reading and updating request-owned state, such as fast weights, low-rank deltas, or streaming learner state. This breaks batched LLM serving, which assumes shared static weights: serial execution is correct but slow, while naive batching can corrupt request state. We formulate this problem as read-write TTT serving and present RW-TTT , which tags each decode step with its owner, version, and READ/WRITE effect, batches only compatible phases, and commits updates only to the owner. On one GPU with eight fast-weight InPlace-TTT streams, RW-TTT reaches 274.61 aggregate tok/s, 9.31x over sequential serving and 3.44x over per-stream replicas under the same memory budget. It preserves behavior on RULER, a long-context benchmark, and passes owner/version checks.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

TempCloze: Can Video-LLMs Identify the Missing Middle?

Temporal reasoning benchmarks for Video-LLMs are often mediated by language, leaving room for linguistic shortcuts from option wording, answer correlations, or language priors. To reduce such shortcuts, we introduce TempCloze, a video cloze benchmark for evaluating visual temporal reasoning in Video-LLMs. Given the beginning and ending clips of a video, models must identify the true missing middle from four candidates. TempCloze contains 1,521 carefully filtered videos from seven sources, mainly long-take and egocentric videos. We construct same-source distractors along three dimensions: Semantic asks what event should happen, Alignment probes when it should occur, and Progression tests how it should unfold, while shared scenes and objects reduce appearance cues. Our evaluation of 10 proprietary and 21 open-source Video-LLMs reveals Alignment as the primary bottleneck: models often recognize plausible semantic content and local event progression but struggle with temporal alignment. We further conduct error pattern and behavioral sensitivity analyses on TempCloze-Mixed and TempCloze-Hard with four representative models to examine where errors arise and how candidate order, context direction, visible span, frame density, and test-time scaling influence model choices.

cs.CV↗