The convergence of online learning algorithms in games under self-play is a fundamental question in game theory and machine learning. Among various notions of convergence, last-iterate convergence is particularly desirable, as it reflects the actual decisions made by the learners and captures the day-to-day behavior of the learning dynamics. While many algorithms are known to converge in the average-iterate, achieving last-iterate convergence typically requires considerably more effort in both the design and the analysis of the algorithm. Somewhat surprisingly, we show in this paper that for a large family of games, there exists a simple black-box reduction that transforms the average iterates of an uncoupled learning dynamics into the last iterates of a new uncoupled learning dynamics, thus also providing a reduction from last-iterate convergence to average-iterate convergence. Our reduction applies to games where each player's utility is linear in both their own strategy and the joint strategy of all opponents. This family includes two-player bimatrix games and generalizations such as multi-player polymatrix games. By applying our reduction to the Optimistic Multiplicative Weights Update algorithm, we obtain new state-of-the-art last-iterate convergence rates for uncoupled learning dynamics in multi-player zero-sum polymatrix games: (1) an $O(\frac{\log d}{T})$ last-iterate convergence rate under gradient feedback, representing an exponential improvement in the dependence on the dimension $d$ (i.e., the maximum number of actions available to either player); and (2) an $\tilde{O}(d^{\frac{1}{5}}T^{-\frac{1}{5}})$ last-iterate convergence rate under bandit feedback, improving upon the previous best rates of $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{d}T^{-\frac{1}{8}})$ and $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{d}T^{-\frac{1}{6}})$.

Recent reasoning-focused language models achieve high accuracy by generating lengthy intermediate reasoning paths before producing final answers. While this approach is effective in solving problems that require logical thinking, long reasoning paths significantly increase memory usage and reduce throughput of token generation, limiting the practical deployment of such models. We propose Reasoning Path Compression (RPC), a training-free method that accelerates inference by leveraging the semantic sparsity of reasoning paths. RPC periodically compresses the KV cache by retaining cache entries that receive high importance score, which are computed using a selector window composed of recently generated queries. Experiments show that RPC improves generation throughput of QwQ-32B by up to 1.60 compared to the inference with full KV cache, with an accuracy drop of 1.2% on the AIME 2024 benchmark. Our findings demonstrate that semantic sparsity in reasoning traces can be effectively exploited for compression, offering a practical path toward efficient deployment of reasoning LLMs.

We perform a thorough analysis of the formal and informal statements in the miniF2F benchmark from the perspective of an AI system that is tasked to participate in a math Olympiad consisting of the problems in miniF2F. In such setting, the model has to read and comprehend the problems in natural language, formalize them in Lean language, then proceed with proving the problems, and it will get credit for each problem if the formal proof corresponds to the original informal statement presented to the model. Our evaluation results reveal that the best accuracy of such pipeline can be about 36% using the SoTA models in the literature, considerably lower than the individual SoTA accuracies, 97% and 69% reported in the autoformalization and theorem proving literature. Analyzing the failure modes, we trace back a considerable portion of this drop to discrepancies between the formal and informal statements for more than half of the problems in miniF2F. We proceed with correcting all the errors, discrepancies and simplifications in formal and informal statements, and present the miniF2F-v2 with fully verified formal and informal statements and proofs. Evaluating the full theorem proving pipeline on miniF2F-v2 leads to the best accuracy of 70%, a significant improvement from the 40% on the original miniF2F, yet indicating considerable misalignment between the autoformalization models and theorem provers. Our deep analysis suggests that a higher quality benchmark can help the community better evaluate progress in the field of formal reasoning and also better diagnose the failure and success modes of autoformalization and theorem proving models.

For correct answers within a serial group, rewards gradually decrease based on the exit positions along the reasoning path from front to back. This design encourages the model to produce more accurate and concise thoughts, while also incentivizing early thinking termination when appropriate. Empirical evaluations demonstrate that S-GRPO is compatible with state-of-the-art reasoning models, including Qwen3 and Deepseek-distill. Across diverse benchmarks such as GSM8K, AIME 2024, AMC 2023, MATH-500, and GPQA Diamond, SGRPO achieves a substantial reduction in sequence length (40.4% 61.1%) while simultaneously improving accuracy (absolute 0.72% 3.92%).

We study the tradeoff between sample complexity and round complexity in *on-demand sampling*, where the learning algorithm adaptively samples from $k$ distributions over a limited number of rounds. In the realizable setting of Multi-Distribution Learning (MDL), we show that the optimal sample complexity of an $r$-round algorithm scales approximately as $dk^{\Theta(1/r)} / \epsilon$. For the general agnostic case, we present an algorithm that achieves near-optimal sample complexity of $\widetilde O((d + k) / \epsilon^2)$ within $\widetilde O(\sqrt{k})$ rounds. Of independent interest, we introduce a new framework, Optimization via On-Demand Sampling (OODS), which abstracts the sample-adaptivity tradeoff and captures most existing MDL algorithms. We establish nearly tight bounds on the round complexity in the OODS setting. The upper bounds directly yield the $\widetilde O(\sqrt{k})$-round algorithm for agnostic MDL, while the lower bounds imply that achieving sub-polynomial round complexity would require fundamentally new techniques that bypass the inherent hardness of OODS.

Designing incentives for a multi-agent system to induce a desirable Nash equilibrium is both a crucial and challenging problem appearing in many decision-making domains, especially for a large number of agents $N$. Under the exchangeability assumption, we formalize this incentive design (ID) problem as a parameterized mean-field game (PMFG), aiming to reduce complexity via an infinite-population limit. We first show that when dynamics and rewards are Lipschitz, the finite-$N$ ID objective is approximated by the PMFG at rate $\mathcal{O}(\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}})$. Moreover, beyond the Lipschitz-continuous setting, we prove the same $\mathcal{O}(\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}})$ decay for the important special case of sequential auctions, despite discontinuities in dynamics, through a tailored auction-specific analysis. Built on our novel approximation results, we further introduce our Adjoint Mean-Field Incentive Design (AMID) algorithm, which uses explicit differentiation of iterated equilibrium operators to compute gradients efficiently. By uniting approximation bounds with optimization guarantees, AMID delivers a powerful, scalable algorithmic tool for many-agent (large $N$) ID. Across diverse auction settings, the proposed AMID method substantially increases revenue over first-price formats and outperforms existing benchmark methods.

We study the problem of robustly estimating the edge density of Erdos Renyi random graphs $\mathbb{G}(n, d^\circ/n)$ when an adversary can arbitrarily add or remove edges incident to an $\eta$-fraction of the nodes.

Binary classification in the classic PAC model exhibits a curious phenomenon: Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) learners are suboptimal in the realizable case yet optimal in the agnostic case. Roughly speaking, this owes itself to the fact that non-realizable distributions $\\mathcal{D}$ are more difficult to learn than realizable distributions -- even when one discounts a learner's error by $\\mathrm{err}(h^\\ast_\\mathcal{D})$, i.e., the error of the best hypothesis in $\\mathcal{H}$. Thus, optimal agnostic learners are permitted to incur excess error on (easier-to-learn) distributions $\\mathcal{D}$ for which $\\tau = \\mathrm{err}(h^\\ast_\\mathcal{D})$ is small.

We study the problem of learning in the presence of an adversary that can corrupt an $\eta$ fraction of the training examples with the goal of causing failure on a specific test point. In the realizable setting, prior work established that the optimal error under such instance-targeted poisoning attacks scales as $\Theta(d\eta)$, where $d$ is the VC dimension of the hypothesis class [Hanneke, Karbasi, Mahmoody, Mehalel, and Moran (NeurIPS 2022)]. In this work, we resolve the corresponding question in the agnostic setting. We show that the optimal excess error is $\widetilde\Theta(\sqrt{d\eta})$, answering one of the main open problems left by Hanneke et al. To achieve this rate, it is necessary to use randomized learners: Hanneke et al.\ showed that deterministic learners can be forced to suffer error close to $1$ even under small amounts of poisoning. Perhaps surprisingly, our upper bound remains valid even when the learner's random bits are fully visible to the adversary. In the other direction, our lower bound is stronger than standard PAC-style bounds: instead of tailoring a hard distribution separately for each sample size, we exhibit a single fixed distribution under which the adversary can enforce an excess error of $\Omega(\sqrt{d\eta})$ infinitely often.

We consider a common case of the combinatorial semi-bandit problem, the $m$-set semi-bandit, where the learner exactly selects $m$ arms from the total $d$ arms. In the adversarial setting, the best regret bound, known to be $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{nmd})$ for time horizon $n$, is achieved by the well-known Follow-the-Regularized-Leader (FTRL) policy. However, this requires to explicitly compute the arm-selection probabilities via optimizing problems at each time step and sample according to them. This problem can be avoided by the Follow-the-Perturbed-Leader (FTPL) policy, which simply pulls the $m$ arms that rank among the $m$ smallest (estimated) loss with random perturbation. In this paper, we show that FTPL with a Fr\'echet perturbation also enjoys the near optimal regret bound $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{nm}(\sqrt{d\log(d)}+m^{5/6}))$ in the adversarial setting and approaches best-of-both-world regret bounds, i.e., achieves a logarithmic regret for the stochastic setting. Moreover, our lower bounds show that the extra factors are unavoidable with our approach; any improvement would require a fundamentally different and more challenging method.