<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="/v2/static/oai2.xsl"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-10-14T04:39:02Z</responseDate>
  <request identifier="oai:figshare.com:article/34045929" metadataPrefix="oai_dc" verb="GetRecord">https://api.figshare.com/v2/oai</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <record>
      <header>
        <identifier>oai:figshare.com:article/34045929</identifier>
        <datestamp>2026-10-01T13:05:41Z</datestamp>
        <setSpec>category_28864</setSpec>
        <setSpec>item_type_12</setSpec>
        <setSpec>month_year_10_2026</setSpec>
      </header>
      <metadata>
        <oai_dc:dc xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"  xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
          <dc:title>When Judgements Gain Control</dc:title>
          <dc:creator>Yibo Chen (24724807)</dc:creator>
          <dc:subject>Artificial intelligence not elsewhere classified</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>LLM Reasoning Strategies</dc:subject>
          <dc:description>&lt;p dir="ltr"&gt;Language models can learn the right intermediate judgement and the right final action&lt;br&gt;without using the former to produce the latter. This raises a training question more specific&lt;br&gt;than whether a cognition is represented: when, and under what objective pressure, does&lt;br&gt;represented information acquire causal control over downstream policy? We study the&lt;br&gt;acquisition of judgement-like control routes in scientific result triage. At the endpoint of&lt;br&gt;ordinary joint supervision, raw task context directly drives a nonlinear action policy, while&lt;br&gt;hidden states that strongly control the model’s own consequence report are nearly inert for&lt;br&gt;action at the tested sites. We then train matched replicas from the same base model under&lt;br&gt;ordinary judgement-plus-action supervision (T1) and a dependency-oriented objective that&lt;br&gt;additionally rewards judgement-sensitive action (T3), saving dense checkpoints throughout&lt;br&gt;training. With raw scene text fixed, changing only supplied consequence judgement becomes&lt;br&gt;action-effective substantially earlier under T3 and reaches a much larger final gain: the correct&lt;br&gt;high-minus-low intervention is positive by step 48 under T3 and reaches +3.48 pp, versus&lt;br&gt;a late, weak +0.54 pp effect under T1. The learned route is not a clean ( field, item, value )&lt;br&gt;variable. At T3 step 240, a wrong-item value retains +2.63 pp of active-action effect, while a&lt;br&gt;wrong-field value yields −0.71 pp and redirects probability toward measurement and evidence-&lt;br&gt;collection actions. We therefore propose a control-routing view of training: optimization&lt;br&gt;does not merely learn what to output; it determines which information is routed to which&lt;br&gt;downstream reader, how much gain that route receives, and how precisely the route is typed.&lt;br&gt;Functional field routing can emerge before exact item binding, while endogenous report states&lt;br&gt;may remain outside the action path. These results separate representation learning, routing&lt;br&gt;learning, and binding learning as distinct stages of policy formation.&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
          <dc:date>2026-10-01T13:05:41Z</dc:date>
          <dc:type>Text</dc:type>
          <dc:type>Preprint</dc:type>
          <dc:identifier>10.6084/m9.figshare.34045929.v1</dc:identifier>
          <dc:relation>https://figshare.com/articles/preprint/When_Judgements_Gain_Control/34045929</dc:relation>
          <dc:rights>CC BY 4.0</dc:rights>
        </oai_dc:dc>
      </metadata>
    </record>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
