arXiv subjects

Qirong Guo

Publications and source records attributed to Qirong Guo.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

FFMT: Frequency-Factorized Multi-Rate Tokenization for Music-to-Dance Generation

Dance motion combines slowly varying body configurations with rapid local movements. We investigate how explicit temporal-frequency decomposition can guide the temporal resolution and codebook capacity of discrete motion representations. We introduce frequency-factorized motion tokenization (FFMT), which separates root-relative motion into a low-frequency choreographic scaffold and a complementary high-frequency residual. FFMT uses a lower token rate and a smaller codebook for the low-frequency component, and a higher token rate and a larger codebook for the high-frequency residual. This representation further induces a plan-then-articulate autoregressive factorization: low-frequency tokens establish coarse choreography, while high-frequency tokens realize local motion details conditioned on the generated plan and music. Experiments on AIST++ and FineDance show strong distributional fidelity while preserving realistic diversity and music--motion synchronization. Ablations consistently support frequency factorization, asymmetric temporal allocation, and low-to-high conditioning.

cs.SD↗

arXiv2026

Consistency Is the Attack Surface: Detecting Coordinated Retrieval Poisoning with Embedding Geometry

Consistency-based defenses for retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) rest on an assumption that a sparse adversary breaks: a poisoning campaign may modify a negligible fraction of the corpus, yet retrieval concentrates its passages into the reader's context. Across four Natural Questions retrieval seeds, at least one injection reaches the top-5 in 94.1% of targeted query--seed rows, and all three form a retrieved majority in 52.9%. Under our short-answer protocol, RobustRAG and ReliabilityRAG reach exposure-conditional attack success 0.512, against 0.576 for undefended RAG, while lowering clean accuracy from 0.328 to 0.216. Coordination, however, leaves a fingerprint: a dense, query-anchored component in the evidence embedding geometry. CoordGuard audits this structure from robustly normalized query-weighted affinities, without poison labels, correct answers, or reader gradients. Its always-filter mode suppresses the selected component whenever one forms; a benign-calibrated gate suppresses it only at unusually high scores and traces a robustness--utility frontier. Pooling four retrieval seeds, e5 always-filtering reduces $\mathrm{ASR}_{\mathrm{exp}}$ to 0.167 overall and 0.138 on parametrically unknown queries, at a 13.6-point clean cost, while a Contriever gate retains clean accuracy 0.315 at $\mathrm{ASR}_{\mathrm{exp}}=0.331$. The reduction transfers across two readers, three tasks, and multiple retriever--auditor pairs, and count-matched controls attribute it to component-targeted removal rather than deletion volume. These findings recast poison detection from judging truth to auditing the structure of retrieved evidence.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

New LoRA Skills Should Read but Never Write

Low-rank adapters (LoRA) make it cheap to fine-tune a large language model once per task, but combining several independently trained adapters into one model remains difficult: merging the updates in weight space causes interference, retraining on all task data is expensive, and routing between separate adapters gives up the goal of a single combined model. We trace the difficulty to two choices that every composition method makes implicitly. A LoRA update admits infinitely many equivalent factorizations; the choice among them is invisible while an adapter serves alone, but it determines what a learned interaction between adapters can see. A coupling between an old skill and a new one can likewise point in either direction, and the direction decides whether the old skills keep computing what they computed before. We introduce READ (Read-only Expansion of Adapter Deltas), which fixes both choices: each adapter is rewritten into a balanced canonical form that preserves its update exactly, and the coupling grows in one direction only, so a new skill can read the input subspaces of old skills but cannot write into their output subspaces. The only trainable object at each append is the new skill's row of the coupling matrix, and the composed update folds into the base weights with no inference cost, routing, or task-specific rules. We evaluate READ across four benchmark suites and two model families, adding skills one at a time. Across several families, READ improves every suite average over the strongest published baselines built from the same adapters---by more than twenty points on SuperGLUE and more than seven points on the domain suite---and nearly all complete addition sequences end above every direct baseline. Factor coordinates and coupling direction, which a lone adapter never exposes, are what decide whether composed skills survive.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Regime Boundary Alignment for Evidence-Gated Question Answering

Retrieval-augmented language models are expected to answer from the retrieved evidence, but in practice they often keep answering when that evidence is missing. We trace this behavior to the training signal: answer-focused fine-tuning assigns no target to unsupported contexts, so it cannot distinguish a reader that abstains from one that guesses, and unsupported answering stays near 100% even as supported accuracy improves. We introduce Regime Boundary Alignment (RBA), which trains a single reader on matched variants of the same question and gold answer. The reader is trained to produce the gold answer when the context supports it, including when conflicting evidence is also present, and to abstain when the correct support is removed; inference is ordinary decoding, with no verifier, threshold, or regime label. On three multi-hop QA datasets across three seeds, RBA reduces the unsupported-answer rate by more than sixty percentage points relative to conflict-focused training while matching its supported accuracy. On a held-out TriviaQA retrieval-miss slice, the same reader reduces unsupported answering from 100% to below 1% while also improving supported accuracy. These results indicate that evidence-gated answering must be learned on both sides of the support boundary.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

FDE-Bench: Evaluating LLM Agents for Deployment Environment Configuration

Deployment requires an agent to turn application code into a running system whose services connect, become ready, and remain observable. FDE-Bench evaluates this capability with 136 deployment-configuration tasks spanning Docker images, multi-service Compose stacks, and Kubernetes, in greenfield and diagnose-and-repair modes. Agents submit declarative artifacts that are collected, rebuilt, and redeployed in a pristine environment. Four gated binary check layers measure build, readiness, behavior, and conformance to the deployment specification, using programmatic checks without an LLM judge. A four-arm release gate requires a resolving reference solution and rejects tasks solved by do-nothing, specification-transcription, or generic-stub submissions. The released check annotations expose the link between 2,145 checks and their specifications, including seven documented gaps. Three additional adversarial strategies test shortcuts in the grading signals; none resolves any of the 135 tasks they cover, while a vacuous health probe passes readiness and exposes the need for downstream checks. On the 136-task evaluation grid, seven language models from four providers use the same four-tool scaffold and resolve 52.9-75.0 percent of tasks. The three zero-intelligence floors resolve none and reach a mean Deployment Score of at most 0.44. Readiness is the largest failure stage, accounting for 110 of 313 unresolved episodes. Mean resolution rate is 30.7 percentage points higher on the repair task group than on the disjoint greenfield group, with a positive gap for every model; ten tasks resist all seven. In a 25-task case study, one practicing engineer directing Claude-Sonnet-5 resolves 92 percent against 72 percent for the autonomous baseline. FDE-Bench links deployment success and failure to artifacts that can be inspected and replayed.

cs.SE↗