CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 35Topic ModelingNatural Language Processing TechniquesArtificial Intelligence Applications

Kimi K2: Open Agentic Intelligence

Open access
Kimi Team, Bai, Yifan, Bao, Yiping, Charles, Y., Chen, Cheng, Chen, Guanduo, Chen, Haiting, Chen, Huarong +192 more·2025·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2507.20534arXiv 2507.20534
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We introduce Kimi K2, a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) large language model with 32 billion activated parameters and 1 trillion total parameters. We propose the MuonClip optimizer, which improves upon Muon with a novel QK-clip technique to address training instability while enjoying the advanced token efficiency of Muon. Based on MuonClip, K2 was pre-trained on 15.5 trillion tokens with zero loss spike. During post-training, K2 undergoes a multi-stage post-training process, highlighted by a large-scale agentic data synthesis pipeline and a joint reinforcement learning (RL) stage, where the model improves its capabilities through interactions with real and synthetic environments. Kimi K2 achieves state-of-the-art performance among open-source non-thinking models, with strengths in agentic capabilities. Notably, K2 obtains 66.1 on Tau2-Bench, 76.5 on ACEBench (En), 65.8 on SWE-Bench Verified, and 47.3 on SWE-Bench Multilingual -- surpassing most open and closed-sourced baselines in non-thinking settings. It also exhibits strong capabilities in coding, mathematics, and reasoning tasks, with a score of 53.7 on LiveCodeBench v6, 49.5 on AIME 2025, 75.1 on GPQA-Diamond, and 27.1 on OJBench, all without extended thinking. These results position Kimi K2 as one of the most capable open-source large language models to date, particularly in software engineering and agentic tasks. We release our base and post-trained model checkpoints to facilitate future research and applications of agentic intelligence.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2507.20534

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Kimi K3 is pre-trained on a curated corpus spanning four primary text domains-Web Text, Code, Mathematics, and Knowledge-together with a large-scale vision corpus covering captions, interleaved image-text documents, OCR, perception, video, and visual coding data.

    “Kimi K3 is pre-trained on a curated corpus spanning four primary text domains-Web Text, Code, Mathematics, and Knowledge-together with a large-scale vision corpus.The vision data covers captions, interleaved image-text documents, OCR, perception, video, and visual coding data.”

    From Kimi K3: Open Frontier Intelligence (2026) · cites this paper as [59]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Building on the SFT pipeline of previous Kimi models, the SFT dataset for Kimi K3 is expanded, substantially broadening its coverage of complex agentic tasks.

    “Building on the SFT pipeline of previous Kimi models [58,59], we expand the SFT dataset for Kimi K3, substantially broadening its coverage of complex agentic tasks.”

    From Kimi K3: Open Frontier Intelligence (2026) · cites this paper as [59]

  • In Kimi K2.5, the Decoupled Encoder Process (DEP) splits ViT and text training into separate stages and balances vision forward and backward passes across PP stages.

    “In Kimi K2.5, we introduced the Decoupled Encoder Process (DEP) [59], which splits ViT and text training into separate stages and balances vision forward and backward passes across PP stages.”

    From Kimi K3: Open Frontier Intelligence (2026) · cites this paper as [59]

    The cited paper describes Kimi K2's training and pipeline parallelism (Section 2.4.2, pp. 7–8), but the passages do not address a Decoupled Encoder Process or balancing vision passes across pipeline stages. Searches for DEP, ViT, Kimi K2.5, and vision forward and backward passes found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 82

  1. [1][1] Jacob Austin et al. Program Synthesis with Large Language Models . 2021. arXiv: 2108.07732 [cs.PL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.07732 . - · arXiv
  2. [2][2] Yushi Bai et al. LongBench v2: Towards Deeper Understanding and Reasoning on Realistic Long-context Multitasks . 2025. arXiv: 2412.15204 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.15204 . - · arXiv
  3. [3][3] Victor Barres et al. τ 2 -Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environment . 2025. arXiv: 2506.07982 [cs.AI] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.07982 . - · arXiv
  4. [4][4] Stella Biderman et al. 'Lessons from the trenches on reproducible evaluation of language models'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14782 (2024). - · arXiv
  5. [5][5] Greg Brockman et al. OpenAI Gym . 2016. arXiv: 1606.01540 [cs.LG] . URL: https://arxiv.org/ abs/1606.01540 . - · arXiv
  6. [6][6] Federico Cassano et al. 'MultiPL-E: A Scalable and Polyglot Approach to Benchmarking Neural Code Generation'. In: IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 49.7 (2023), pp. 3675-3691. DOI: 10.1109/TSE. 2023.3267446 . - · DOI
  7. [7][7] Chen Chen et al. 'ACEBench: Who Wins the Match Point in Tool Learning?' In: arXiv e-prints (2025), arXiv2501. -
  8. [8][8] Mark Chen et al. 'Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code'. In: (2021). arXiv: 2107.03374 [cs.LG] . - · arXiv
  9. [9][9] Peter Clark et al. 'Think you have solved question answering? try arc, the ai2 reasoning challenge'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.05457 (2018). - · arXiv
  10. [10][10] Karl Cobbe et al. Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems . 2021. arXiv: 2110.14168 [cs.LG] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.14168 . - · arXiv
  11. [11][11] DeepSeek-AI. DeepSeek-V3 Technical Report . 2024. arXiv: 2412.19437 [cs.CL] . URL: https:// arxiv.org/abs/2412.19437 . - · arXiv
  12. [12][12] Mostafa Dehghani et al. 'Scaling vision transformers to 22 billion parameters'. In: International conference on machine learning . PMLR. 2023, pp. 7480-7512. -
  13. [13][13] Guanting Dong et al. Self-play with Execution Feedback: Improving Instruction-following Capabilities of Large Language Models . 2024. arXiv: 2406.13542 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2406. 13542 . - · arXiv
  14. [14][14] Xinrun Du et al. 'Supergpqa: Scaling llm evaluation across 285 graduate disciplines'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.14739 (2025). - · arXiv
  15. [15][15] Dheeru Dua et al. 'DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphs'. In: CoRR abs/1903.00161 (2019). arXiv: 1903.00161 . URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1903. 00161 . - · arXiv
  16. [16][16] Kazuki Fujii et al. Rewriting Pre-Training Data Boosts LLM Performance in Math and Code . 2025. arXiv: 2505.02881 [cs.LG] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.02881 . - · arXiv
  17. [18][18] Aryo Pradipta Gema et al. 'Are we done with mmlu?' In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.04127 (2024). - · arXiv
  18. [19][19] Alex Gu et al. 'Cruxeval: A benchmark for code reasoning, understanding and execution'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.03065 (2024). - · arXiv
  19. [20][20] Daya Guo et al. 'Deepseek-r1: Incentivizing reasoning capability in llms via reinforcement learning'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12948 (2025). - · arXiv
  20. [21][21] Zhicheng Guo et al. 'StableToolBench: Towards Stable Large-Scale Benchmarking on Tool Learning of Large Language Models'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07714 (2025). - · arXiv
  21. [23][23] Y He et al. 'Chinese simpleqa: A chinese factuality evaluation for large language models, 2024a'. In: URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2411.07140 (). -
  22. [24][24] Dan Hendrycks et al. 'Measuring massive multitask language understanding'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2009.03300 (2020). - · arXiv
  23. [25][25] Dan Hendrycks et al. Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset . 2021. arXiv: 2103. 03874 [cs.LG] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.03874 . - · arXiv
  24. [26][26] Shengding Hu et al. 'Minicpm: Unveiling the potential of small language models with scalable training strategies'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.06395 (2024). <!-- image --> <!-- image --> - · arXiv
  25. [27][27] Jiaxin Huang et al. 'Large language models can self-improve'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.11610 (2022). - · arXiv
  26. [28][28] Siming Huang et al. OpenCoder: The Open Cookbook for Top-Tier Code Large Language Models . 2025. arXiv: 2411.04905 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.04905 . - · arXiv
  27. [29][29] Yanping Huang et al. 'Gpipe: Efficient training of giant neural networks using pipeline parallelism'. In: Advances in neural information processing systems 32 (2019). -
  28. [30][30] Yuzhen Huang et al. C-Eval: A Multi-Level Multi-Discipline Chinese Evaluation Suite for Foundation Models . 2023. arXiv: 2305.08322 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.08322 . - · arXiv
  29. [31][31] Alon Jacovi et al. The FACTS Grounding Leaderboard: Benchmarking LLMs' Ability to Ground Responses to Long-Form Input . 2025. arXiv: 2501.03200 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501. 03200 . - · arXiv
  30. [32][32] Naman Jain et al. 'Livecodebench: Holistic and contamination free evaluation of large language models for code'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07974 (2024). - · arXiv
  31. [33][33] Carlos E Jimenez et al. 'SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-world Github Issues?' In: The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations . 2024. URL: https://openreview.net/forum? id=VTF8yNQM66 . -
  32. [35][35] Mandar Joshi et al. TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehension . 2017. arXiv: 1705.03551 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.03551 . - · arXiv
  33. [36][36] Kimi Team. 'Kimi k1. 5: Scaling reinforcement learning with llms'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12599 (2025). - · arXiv
  34. [37][37] Diederik P. Kingma and Jimmy Ba. 'Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization'. In: 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2015, San Diego, CA, USA, May 7-9, 2015, Conference Track Proceedings . Ed. by Yoshua Bengio and Yann LeCun. 2015. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980 . - · arXiv
  35. [38][38] Satyapriya Krishna et al. Fact, Fetch, and Reason: A Unified Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation . 2025. arXiv: 2409.12941 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.12941 . - · arXiv
  36. [39][39] Joel Lamy-Poirier. 'Breadth-first pipeline parallelism'. In: Proceedings of Machine Learning and Systems 5 (2023), pp. 48-67. -
  37. [40][40] Dmitry Lepikhin et al. 'Gshard: Scaling giant models with conditional computation and automatic sharding'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.16668 (2020). - · arXiv
  38. [41][41] Haonan Li et al. CMMLU: Measuring massive multitask language understanding in Chinese . 2024. arXiv: 2306.09212 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.09212 . - · arXiv
  39. [43][43] Tianle Li et al. 'From Crowdsourced Data to High-Quality Benchmarks: Arena-Hard and BenchBuilder Pipeline'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.11939 (2024). - · arXiv
  40. [44][44] Bill Yuchen Lin et al. ZebraLogic: On the Scaling Limits of LLMs for Logical Reasoning . 2025. arXiv: 2502. 01100 [cs.AI] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.01100 . - · arXiv
  41. [45][45] Aixin Liu et al. 'Deepseek-v2: A strong, economical, and efficient mixture-of-experts language model'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.04434 (2024). - · arXiv
  42. [46][46] Jiawei Liu et al. 'Is your code generated by chatgpt really correct? rigorous evaluation of large language models for code generation'. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2023), pp. 21558-21572. -
  43. [47][47] Jingyuan Liu et al. 'Muon is scalable for LLM training'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.16982 (2025). - · arXiv
  44. [49][49] Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. 'Decoupled Weight Decay Regularization'. In: International Conference on Learning Representations . 2019. URL: https://openreview.net/forum?id=Bkg6RiCqY7 . -
  45. [50][50] Pratyush Maini et al. Rephrasing the Web: A Recipe for Compute and Data-Efficient Language Modeling . 2024. arXiv: 2401.16380 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.16380 . - · arXiv
  46. [51][51] Samuel Miserendino et al. 'SWE-Lancer: Can Frontier LLMs Earn $1 Million from Real-World Freelance Software Engineering?' In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.12115 (2025). - · arXiv
  47. [52][52] Arindam Mitra et al. 'Agentinstruct: Toward generative teaching with agentic flows'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.03502 (2024). <!-- image --> - · arXiv
  48. [53][53] Ivan Moshkov et al. 'Aimo-2 winning solution: Building state-of-the-art mathematical reasoning models with openmathreasoning dataset'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.16891 (2025). - · arXiv
  49. [54][54] Deepak Narayanan et al. 'Efficient large-scale language model training on gpu clusters using megatron-lm'. In: Proceedings of the international conference for high performance computing, networking, storage and analysis . 2021, pp. 1-15. -
  50. [55][55] Long Ouyang et al. 'Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback'. In: Advances in neural information processing systems 35 (2022), pp. 27730-27744. -
  51. [56][56] Bowen Peng et al. 'Yarn: Efficient context window extension of large language models'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.00071 (2023). - · arXiv
  52. [57][57] Long Phan et al. Humanity's Last Exam . 2025. arXiv: 2501.14249 [cs.LG] . URL: https://arxiv. org/abs/2501.14249 . - · arXiv
  53. [58][58] Penghui Qi et al. 'Zero bubble pipeline parallelism'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.10241 (2023). - · arXiv
  54. [59][59] Yujia Qin et al. 'Toolllm: Facilitating large language models to master 16000+ real-world apis'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.16789 (2023). - · arXiv
  55. [60][60] Qwen et al. Qwen2.5 Technical Report . 2025. arXiv: 2412.15115 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv. org/abs/2412.15115 . - · arXiv
  56. [61][61] Samyam Rajbhandari et al. 'Zero: Memory optimizations toward training trillion parameter models'. In: SC20: International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis . IEEE. 2020, pp. 1-16. -
  57. [62][62] David Rein et al. 'Gpqa: A graduate-level google-proof q&amp;a benchmark'. In: First Conference on Language Modeling . 2024. -
  58. [63][63] Keisuke Sakaguchi et al. 'Winogrande: An adversarial winograd schema challenge at scale'. In: Communications of the ACM 64.9 (2021), pp. 99-106. -
  59. [65][65] Ved Sirdeshmukh et al. MultiChallenge: A Realistic Multi-Turn Conversation Evaluation Benchmark Challenging to Frontier LLMs . 2025. arXiv: 2501.17399 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501. 17399 . - · arXiv
  60. [66][66] Giulio Starace et al. 'PaperBench: Evaluating AI's Ability to Replicate AI Research'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.01848 (2025). - · arXiv
  61. [67][67] Hao Sun et al. ZeroSearch: Incentivize the Search Capability of LLMs without Searching . 2025. arXiv: 2505. 04588 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.04588 . - · arXiv
  62. [68][68] Mirac Suzgun et al. Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Them . 2022. arXiv: 2210.09261 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.09261 . - · arXiv
  63. [69][69] Manveer Singh Tamber et al. 'Benchmarking LLM Faithfulness in RAG with Evolving Leaderboards'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.04847 (2025). - · arXiv
  64. [70][70] Gemma Team et al. 'Gemma 2: Improving open language models at a practical size'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.00118 (2024). - · arXiv
  65. [73][73] Ashish Vaswani et al. 'Attention is All you Need'. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems . Ed. by I. Guyon et al. Vol. 30. Curran Associates, Inc., 2017. URL: https://proceedings.neurips. cc/paper\_files/paper/2017/file/3f5ee243547dee91fbd053c1c4a845aa-Paper.pdf . -
  66. [75][75] Joshua Vendrow et al. 'Do large language model benchmarks test reliability?' In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.03461 (2025). - · arXiv
  67. [76][76] Yizhong Wang et al. 'Self-instruct: Aligning language models with self-generated instructions'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.10560 (2022). - · arXiv
  68. [77][77] Yubo Wang et al. MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmark . 2024. arXiv: 2406.01574 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.01574 . - · arXiv
  69. [78][78] Zhexu Wang et al. OJBench: A Competition Level Code Benchmark For Large Language Models . 2025. arXiv: 2506.16395 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.16395 . <!-- image --> - · arXiv
  70. [79][79] Jason Wei et al. 'Measuring short-form factuality in large language models'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.04368 (2024). - · arXiv
  71. [80][80] Tianwen Wei et al. CMATH: Can Your Language Model Pass Chinese Elementary School Math Test? 2023. arXiv: 2306.16636 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.16636 . - · arXiv
  72. [81][81] Colin White et al. 'LiveBench: A Challenging, Contamination-Free LLM Benchmark'. In: The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations . 2025. -
  73. [82][82] Mitchell Wortsman et al. 'Small-scale proxies for large-scale transformer training instabilities, 2023'. In: URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2309.14322 (). -
  74. [83][83] Can Xu et al. WizardLM: Empowering large pre-trained language models to follow complex instructions . 2025. arXiv: 2304.12244 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.12244 . - · arXiv
  75. [84][84] Zhangchen Xu et al. KodCode: A Diverse, Challenging, and Verifiable Synthetic Dataset for Coding . 2025. arXiv: 2503.02951 [cs.LG] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.02951 . - · arXiv
  76. [85][85] John Yang et al. SWE-smith: Scaling Data for Software Engineering Agents . 2025. arXiv: 2504.21798 [cs.SE] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.21798 . - · arXiv
  77. [86][86] Shunyu Yao et al. 'tau-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.12045 (2024). - · arXiv
  78. [87][87] Daoguang Zan et al. 'Multi-swe-bench: A multilingual benchmark for issue resolving'. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.02605 (2025). - · arXiv
  79. [88][88] Eric Zelikman et al. 'Star: Bootstrapping reasoning with reasoning'. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), pp. 15476-15488. -
  80. [89][89] Rowan Zellers et al. 'Hellaswag: Can a machine really finish your sentence?' In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.07830 (2019). - · arXiv
  81. [91][91] Jeffrey Zhou et al. 'Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Models'. In: ArXiv abs/2311.07911 (2023). URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.07911 . - · arXiv
  82. [92][92] Qin Zhu et al. AutoLogi: Automated Generation of Logic Puzzles for Evaluating Reasoning Abilities of Large Language Models . 2025. arXiv: 2502.16906 [cs.CL] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502. 16906 . · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kimi Team, Bai, Y., Bao, Y., Charles, Y., Chen, C., Chen, G., Chen, H., Chen, H., Chen, J., Chen, N., Chen, R., Chen, Y., Chen, Y., Chen, Y., Chen, Z., Cui, J., Ding, H., Dong, M., Du, A., Du, C., Du, D., Du, Y., Fan, Y., Feng, Y., Fu, K., Gao, B., Gao, C., Gao, H., Gao, P., Gao, T., Ge, Y., Geng, S., Gu, Q., Gu, X., Guan, L., Guo, H., Guo, J., Hao, X., He, T., He, W., He, W., He, Y., Hong, C., Hu, H., Hu, Y., Hu, Z., Huang, W., Huang, Z., Huang, Z., Jiang, T., Jiang, Z., Jin, X., Kang, Y., Lai, G., Li, C., Li, F., Li, H., Li, M., Li, W., Li, Y., Li, Y., Li, Y., Li, Z., Li, Z., Lin, H., Lin, X., Lin, Z., Liu, C., Liu, C., Liu, H., Liu, J., Liu, J., Liu, L., Liu, S., Liu, T. Y., Liu, T., Liu, W., Liu, Y., Liu, Y., Liu, Y., Liu, Y., Liu, Z., Lu, E., Lu, H., Lu, L., Luo, Y., Ma, S., Ma, X., Ma, Y., Mao, S., Mei, J., Men, X., Miao, Y., Pan, S., Peng, Y., Qin, R., Qin, Z., Qu, B., Shang, Z., Shi, L., Shi, S., Song, F., Su, J., Su, Z., Sui, L., Sun, X., Sung, F., Tai, Y., Tang, H., Tao, J., Teng, Q., Tian, C., Wang, C., Wang, D., Wang, F., Wang, H., Wang, H., Wang, J., Wang, J., Wang, J., Wang, S., Wang, S., Wang, S., Wang, X., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Wang, Z., Wang, Z., Wang, Z., Wang, Z., Wei, C., Wei, Q., Wu, H., Wu, W., Wu, X., Wu, Y., Xiao, C., Xie, J., Xie, X., Xiong, W., Xu, B., Xu, J., Xu, L. H., Xu, L., Xu, S., Xu, W., Xu, X., Xu, Y., Xu, Z., Xu, J., Xu, J., Yan, J., Yan, Y., Yang, H., Yang, X., Yang, Y., Yang, Y., Yang, Z., Yang, Z., Yang, Z., Yao, H., Yao, X., Ye, W., Ye, Z., Yin, B., Yu, L., Yuan, E., Yuan, H., Yuan, M., Yuan, S., Zhan, H., Zhang, D., Zhang, H., Zhang, W., Zhang, X., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Z., Zhao, H., Zhao, Y., Zhao, Z., Zheng, H., Zheng, S., Zhong, L., Zhou, J., Zhou, X., Zhou, Z., Zhu, J., Zhu, Z., Zhuang, W., & Zu, X.
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2507.20534
arXiv
2507.20534
OpenAlex
W7077044503
Cited by
15
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
mixture of experts, large language models, training instability, reinforcement learning, open-source language models, software engineering tasks, coding, mathematical reasoning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review