Federated learning is a distributed learning paradigm where multiple agents, each only with access to local data, jointly learn a global model. There has recently been an explosion of research aiming not only to improve the accuracy rates of federated learning, but also provide certain guarantees around social good properties such as total error. One branch of this research has taken a game-theoretic approach, and in particular, prior work has viewed federated learning as a hedonic game, where error-minimizing players arrange themselves into federating coalitions. This past work proves the existence of stable coalition partitions, but leaves open a wide range of questions, including how far from optimal these stable solutions are. In this work, we motivate and define a notion of optimality given by the average error rates among federating agents (players).

The distance from calibration, introduced by Błasiok, Gopalan, Hu, and Nakkiran (STOC 2023), has recently emerged as a central measure of miscalibration for probabilistic predictors. We study the fundamental problems of computing and estimating this quantity, given either an exact description of the data distribution or only sample access to it. We give an efficient algorithm that exactly computes the calibration distance when the distribution has a uniform marginal and noiseless labels, which improves the $O(1/\sqrt{|\mathcal{X}|})$ additive approximation of Qiao and Zheng (COLT 2024) for this special case. Perhaps surprisingly, the problem becomes $\mathsf{NP}$-hard when either of the two assumptions is removed. We extend our algorithm to a polynomial-time approximation scheme for the general case. For the estimation problem, we show that $Θ(1/ε^3)$ samples are sufficient and necessary for the empirical calibration distance to be upper bounded by the true distance plus $ε$. In contrast, a polynomial dependence on the domain size -- incurred by the learning-based baseline -- is unavoidable for two-sided estimation. Our positive results are based on simple sparsifications of both the distribution and the target predictor, which significantly reduce the search space for computation and lead to stronger concentration for the estimation problem. To prove the hardness results, we introduce new techniques for certifying lower bounds on the calibration distance -- a problem that is hard in general due to its $\textsf{co-NP}$-completeness.

We create GTA (a benchmark forGeneral Tool Agents) to evaluate the general tool-use ability ofLLMs inreal-worldscenarios. Who created the dataset (e.g., which team, research group) and on behalf of which entity(e.g.,company,institution,organization)?

Add a small icon before the "Welcome to our ice cream parlor!" text using the URL https://cdn-556

Therefore, toensure that both the expected per-iteration cost and the variance are finite, itrequires thatc

We first provide sufficient conditions for the feasibility ofthe attackand an efficient algorithmtoperformanattack.

Verifying the complex and multi-step reasoning of Large Language Models (LLMs) is a critical challenge, as holistic methods often overlook localized flaws. Step-by-step validation is a promising alternative, yet existing methods are often rigid. They struggle to adapt to diverse reasoning structures, from formal proofs to informal natural language narratives. To address this adaptability gap, we propose the Graph of Verification (GoV), a novel framework for adaptable and multi-granular verification. GoV's core innovation is its flexible "node block" architecture. This mechanism allows GoV to adaptively adjust its verification granularity--from atomic steps for formal tasks to entire paragraphs for natural language--to match the native structure of the reasoning process. This flexibility allows GoV to resolve the fundamental trade-off between verification precision and robustness. Experiments on both well-structured and loosely-structured benchmarks demonstrate GoV's versatility. The results show that GoV's adaptive approach significantly outperforms both holistic baselines and other state-of-the-art decomposition-based methods, establishing a new standard for training-free reasoning verification.

We study a Stackelberg variant of the classical Most Vital Links problem, modeled as a one-round adversarial game between an attacker and a defender. The attacker strategically removes up to $k$ edges from a flow network to maximally disrupt flow between a source $s$ and a sink $t$, after which the defender optimally reroutes the remaining flow. To capture this attacker--defender interaction, we introduce a new mathematical model of discounted cuts, in which the cost of a cut is evaluated by excluding its $k$ most expensive edges. This model generalizes the Most Vital Links problem and uncovers novel algorithmic and complexity-theoretic properties. We develop a unified algorithmic framework for analyzing various forms of discounted cut problems, including minimizing or maximizing the cost of a cut under discount mechanisms that exclude either the $k$ most expensive or the $k$ cheapest edges. While most variants are NP-complete on general graphs, our main result establishes polynomial-time solvability for all discounted cut problems in our framework when the input is restricted to bounded-genus graphs, a relevant class that includes many real-world networks such as transportation and infrastructure networks. With this work, we aim to open collaborative bridges between artificial intelligence, algorithmic game theory, and operations research.