Modern chess engines are silent experts: they play at a superhuman level, but do not offer explanations for their play. On the other hand, language models (LMs) can generate plausible-sounding explanations, but their weak playing strength limits the utility of their explanations. We introduce Queen, a 4B-parameter chess-language model that can explain its moves and plans while playing at the level of a typical Grandmaster. Our novel framework enables domain-specific reasoning through complementary components: an encoder-decoder architecture and an iterative distillation algorithm. This architecture integrates a silent expert chess encoder with an instruction-tuned LM through cross-attention, which we train via a question-answering curriculum to extract chess concepts from the encoder's representations. Building on this domain-adapted model, we iteratively improve its explanations with a natural-language analog of the Bellman update: the model analyzes the positions after its top candidate moves and consolidates them into an explanation of the current position, which is then distilled back into the model. Over seven iterations, our model gains over 900 Elo points (1782 to 2697), substantially surpassing all frontier models on both playing strength and puzzle accuracy, despite containing three orders of magnitude fewer parameters. Furthermore, LM-based evaluations show that our explanations are fluent and approach GPT-5.6-Sol (high) in coherence. The generality of our architecture and training procedure suggests a recipe for applying language models to domains where silent expert encoders are available, like games, robotics, and computer use.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03695
LLM-guided evolutionary methods, such as AlphaEvolve, have emerged as powerful approaches for challenging computational optimization problems, such as circle packing. However, prior work typically optimizes performance gain over a fixed number of iterations. We argue that practical optimization should maximize gain per unit cost. To this end, we propose FrugalEvo, a cost-aware evolutionary framework where a stronger, higher-cost LLM explores solution strategies, and a cheaper LLM implements them and iteratively refines the resulting code. We also design a cache-efficient evolution process, where our harness and prompts maximize the sharing of prefixes across different evolution steps, to improve cache reuse. To measure solution quality throughout a fixed cost budget, we introduce Budget-Aware Area Under the Curve (BA-AUC), defined as the area under the best-so-far evaluation score curve over cumulative LLM cost, up to the budget. Across 10 mathematical and systems optimization tasks, FrugalEvo matches or surpasses state-of-the-art baselines, including OpenEvolve, ShinkaEvolve, AdaEvolve, and EvoX, in final solution quality and achieves higher BA-AUC on 9 tasks. It also achieves higher average performance than these baselines on 10 algorithmic optimization tasks from ALE-Bench-Lite. Notably, on circle packing, FrugalEvo achieves new state-of-the-art performance with GPT-5.6 Terra and Luna for only 1.68 USD and with GLM-5.3 and its Flash variant for only 0.55 USD, matching or surpassing all baselines, including multi-agent methods such as CORAL and SwarmResearch, which cost approximately 50 USD on average.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03675
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to support legal practice, education, and research, yet their reliability in national legal systems outside the United States remains largely undocumented. We introduce an expert-validated benchmark for evaluating LLM reliability on the Colombian legal system. The benchmark comprises 1,042 items spanning ten areas of law and three question formats (closed multiple-choice, semi-open, and open-ended IRAC), built through a human-in-the-loop pipeline with multi-stage expert review. We evaluate 15 contemporary proprietary and open-weight models with format-appropriate metrics. Accuracy on closed questions ranges widely, from 0.905 (Gemini 3.1 Pro) to 0.577, but on free-text legal answers factual correctness never exceeds 0.45 (on a 0-1 scale) for any model. We find a dissociation between answer relevancy and correctness (Spearman rho = -0.46): models reliably sound responsive while frequently being wrong, a pattern of particular concern for non-expert users. Closed-question accuracy and free-text correctness are strongly rank-correlated (rho = 0.94), so cheap multiple-choice screening predicts model ranking but overstates absolute reliability. An independent rubric-based LLM judge and blind human expert scoring both reproduce the free-text ranking (rho >= 0.88). The judge further reveals that only about half of the norms models cite are correct; the rest are wrong or non-existent. Reliability varies systematically by legal area and follows an inverted-U across question complexity. Our results indicate that current LLMs require expert supervision for Colombian legal tasks, and that grounding answers in authoritative sources is a promising path to higher reliability. We release the benchmark construction pipeline to support reproducible evaluation.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03639
Designing a scientific instrument tests whether language-model agents can do physics rather than recall it, provided the grading cannot be argued with. We introduce NeutronGym, to our knowledge the first executable environment for neutron instrument design: agents build instruments through validating tools, McStas ray-traces what they build, and a level-resolved ladder grades syntax, runtime, structure and science with no LLM judge. Procedural families supply unlimited instances of a fixed layout whose design parameters the agent must set, with held-out parameter regimes; a curated slice, McStasBench, adds 16 tasks from published instruments behind memorization probes and a sandbox. Seven models reproduce at most 7 of the 16, none retrieves a reference, and none meets an improvement target. The environment also trains. Reinforcement learning on its reward takes Qwen3-8B from 11% to 77% of held-out instances of a family whose targets come from a hidden design (69% at a second seed), past an untrained Qwen3-32B, and the recipe holds, at one seed each, on three further gated families. The analysis says what that gain is. Without the ladder's partial credit it collapses by 60 points. From reward alone the trained model reaches what a classical optimizer reaches, at the agent's simulation budget, only when handed the closed-form physics (77% against 81%, a gap that does not separate at this size), while frontier models still solve 98-99%. Getting a trustworthy result meant failing four task designs that no-model baselines could solve, and we release the probes that found them.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03631
The construction industry faces persistent labor shortages, low productivity that costs the global economy over $1.6 trillion annually, and one of the highest injury rates among major industries. These factors motivate the use of autonomous robots to improve efficiency and worker safety. Existing language-grounded navigation systems, however, rely on semantic scene understanding alone and lack access to construction-specific context such as architectural plans, evolving work schedules, and safety constraints. As a result, they localize permanent building features unreliably and cannot safely navigate active jobsites. We present CORNAV, a blueprint-grounded, schedule-aware navigation framework that operates from 2D CAD drawings and project schedules without requiring a Building Information Model. CORNAV aligns architectural blueprints against hierarchical open-vocabulary 3D scene graphs to ground object queries, converts project schedules into time-varying navigation constraints, and validates requests through an LLM-based safety module that escalates hazardous zones before planning. An A* planner then enforces mandatory exclusion zones while preferentially avoiding higher-risk areas. Across an indoor office and a real construction site, blueprint grounding raises task success from 13.0% to 72.2% over semantic retrieval alone, schedule awareness eliminates all hard-zone violations, and the safety module correctly rejects hazardous requests arising from mislabeled project schedules.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03622
Security benchmarks for LLM-based agents often report the attack success rate (ASR) as a measure of model robustness and use these scores to compare different models and defense mechanisms, assuming that they describe the security of the agent. In this paper, we explore whether it also influences the benchmark's measurement. To measure the effect of the benchmark representation, we introduce threat-preserving representation sensitivity (TPRS), which measures how much the ASR changes when we change the agent-visible representation while holding the underlying task, harmful action, security policy, ground truth, environment, and the evaluation criteria fixed. On Agent Security Bench (ASB), replacing threat-related tool names with threat-neutral names raises the committed attack success rate by 11.67 percentage points on GPT-5-mini and by 13.21 points on Claude Haiku 4.5. On MCPTox, replacing the original neutral tool name with an explicit threat-related name lowers the ASR by 11.00 percentage points on GPT-5-mini and 4.11 points on Claude Haiku 4.5. On AgentDojo, adding threat-related wording to the attack-relevant tool changes ASR by only 0.50 percentage points on GPT-4o-mini, yet the benign utility falls by 5.36 points on tasks requiring that tool. We ran an experiment on MCPTox where we observed that a threat-neutral name matched on token count, length, and casing reproduces most of the shift produced by the threat-explicit name (8.54 of 11.00 points on GPT-5-mini). The results show that a security score measured under one representation may fail to generalize across threat-preserving representations of the same security problem. Robustness claims should therefore be supported by performance across a controlled set of threat-preserving representations rather than relying on a single representation-dependent score.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03585
We describe the Writerslogic team's participation in the CLEF 2026 SimpleText shared task, addressing Task 1 (text simplification) and Task 2 (complexity spotting). For Task 1, we develop a multi-candidate generation pipeline using GPT-4o-mini that produces five simplification candidates per sentence at varying temperatures, then selects the best candidate using a reference-free scoring heuristic that rewards compression, source word retention, Cochrane Plain Language Summary vocabulary usage, and lexical simplicity. On Task 1.1 (sentence-level simplification), our Claude Sonnet 4 submission achieves SARI 47.43 and BLEU 14.21, the top-ranked sentence-level system (3rd on the combined Task 1 leaderboard, behind two document-level submissions). For Task 2, we fine-tune a DeBERTa-v3-large NLI model on 350K labeled (source, sentence) pairs, framing hallucination detection as natural language inference. The model reads the most relevant source sentence as premise and the candidate as hypothesis, directly learning to distinguish grounded from hallucinated content. On Task 2.1 (binary overgeneration identification), our fine-tuned DeBERTa system achieves 0.8081 document-level macro F1 (0.8085 in our best ensemble), the top-ranked entry within the identification track and 2nd among teams overall, behind AIIR Lab (0.8197). On Task 2.2 (multi-class error classification), our best submission reaches 0.804 multiclass accuracy, ranking 2nd among unique teams behind AIIR Lab (0.827). We evaluate both tasks on English and multilingual biomedical text from Cochrane systematic reviews.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03567
We describe the Writerslogic systems for three PAN at CLEF 2026 shared tasks (Reasoning Trajectory Detection, Voight-Kampff Generative AI Detection, and Multi-Author Writing Style Analysis), unified by a shared analytical framework: feature robustness under distribution shift is governed by support overlap between training and test distributions, not by training-set effect size. This yields a taxonomy (domain-anchored, domain-portable, domain-invariant) that explains why generator-specific features die under domain shift while vocabulary fingerprints (hapax ratio, Yule's K, Heaps' exponent), compression measures, and character n-grams survive. On Reasoning Trajectory Detection, where training was entirely mathematics and 84 percent of test was unseen domains, the framework guided system design to 1st place in source detection (0.85 macro F1 via Opus-Sonnet agreement) and 3rd place in safety classification (0.66 macro F1 via query-refusal decomposition). For Voight-Kampff, we built a calibrated ensemble of DeBERTa-v2 (ONNX), multi-seed LightGBM with 44 domain-portable stylometric features, and SVM on n-gram TF-IDF, combined via learned stacking with isotonic calibration; the best configuration achieved 0.891 on the PAN 2026 test set with balanced sub-metrics (0.853 to 0.902 across all evaluation dimensions). For Multi-Author Writing Style Analysis, we describe a system fusing spectral clustering over character n-gram similarity graphs, normalized compression distance for local boundary detection, and SmolLM-135M perplexity for neural change-point detection; a platform mix-up meant our run never reached the official evaluation, so we report the design and its a priori predictions. Across all three tasks, features measuring generation process properties are designed to outperform features measuring generated content properties under domain shift.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03565
Authorship Attribution (AA) requires capturing fine-grained stylistic characteristics, making it particularly challenging in zero-shot (ZS) settings where no task-specific supervision is available. In this work, we investigate the effect of author representations on ZS AA by evaluating a label-only prompting baseline together with three author representation strategies: representative writing samples, LLM-generated descriptions, and style embeddings (LISA). The first three approaches perform attribution using LLM prompting, while the embedding-based approach uses style embeddings with cosine similarity. We investigate the influence of prompt design and propose a two-stage embedding-based attribution framework that combines candidate space reduction with embedding-dimension selection. The results show that label-only ZS AA is ineffective, while incorporating author-specific representations consistently improves attribution performance. Among the evaluated approaches, the proposed two-stage LISA framework achieves the strongest overall performance, whereas LLM-generated style descriptions provide a substantially more compact representation of author style at the cost of some attribution performance. These findings demonstrate the importance of author representation in ZS AA, while indicating that current open-source LLMs remain insufficient for robust attribution without more effective representation learning.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03531
Table-to-report generation refers to the task of automatically generating article-level analyt- ical reports from relational tables and is an essential capability for automated data science and decision support. Its central challenge lies in systematically discovering verifiable com- posite insights across tables, attributes, and analytical perspectives, and organizing them into coherent, complete, and traceable evidence chains. Existing methods primarily rely on sequential, reactive data agents or direct Large Language Model(LLM) generation. They suffer from exploration bias: early local observations constrain subsequent actions, causing models to focus prematurely on local analyzes and miss cross-table or cross-dimensional evidence. We propose ComInsight, which reformulates insight discovery as the composition of atomic evidences. We first define an atomic insight as the smallest executable analytical unit conforming to a predefined analysis pattern and enumerate all valid atomic insights from database schema and content. These atoms are then organized into a multi-relational insight graph, where nodes represent verified data facts and edges encode logical, temporal, or hierarchical relations. Finally, a set of composition operators systematically fuses atomic nodes into higher-order composite conclusions. Every composite output is accompanied by executable SQL and fine-grained provenance, ensuring full verifiability. Across three benchmarks InsightBench, DDR-Bench, and T2R-Bench, ComInsight consistently outperforms strong baselines in factual correctness, novelty, and structural completeness. We believe ComInsight offers a reliable, efficient, and explainable path toward table-to-report generation.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03525
General-purpose Text-to-SQL systems achieve strong performance on academic benchmarks like Spider and BIRD, where schemas are relatively shallow and column values are often human readable. In production financial databases, where concepts are stored as opaque integer keys rather than human-readable strings, these methods fall below 50%, as even simple queries require multiple joins and filter predicates reference opaque IDs. We present Financial LINking Text-to-SQL (FLINT), a domain-specialized Text-to-SQL system that closes this gap through three key components: (1) a lookup agent that dynamically resolves natural-language concepts to question-specific reference table constraints, (2) embedding-based retrieval of structurally similar query templates from a compact, expert-authored bank, and (3) schema linking that prunes a large table schema to the relevant subset by traversing foreign-key chains, rather than relying on name similarity alone. We evaluate on two datasets totaling 359 questions over production financial schemas. FLINT outperforms various state-of-the-art baselines using the same LLM. The system is deployed in production as part of a financial data retrieval service.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03524
Recent advances in autoregressive video generation have improved temporal consistency over extended durations, yet interactive storytelling requires more than continuous scene extension: a new shot may combine characters and backgrounds from different historical shots. Whole prompt retrieval can overlook the distinct reference needs of individual components, while directly combining all historical memories may introduce unrelated visual content. To address these problems, we present Weave Forcing, a training-free framework for compositional memory reuse in interactive long video generation. First, we use an LLM for semantic slot routing to decompose user prompts into character and background descriptions and explicitly select suitable historical references for each component. To isolate the required content, masked memory weaving uses contrasting attention maps conditioned on semantic slots to construct refined semantic masks, selectively exposing relevant tokens from compressed historical KV memories to guide the generation of the current shot. We further introduce coverage adaptive RoPE to adjust temporal offsets and memory retention according to no, partial, or full reference coverage, addressing visual artifacts observed when incomplete historical references are positioned close to the current generation. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Weave Forcing improves cross-shot subject and background consistency while maintaining competitive visual quality and text alignment.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03510
Byte-level byte-pair encoding (BBPE) tokenizers are attractive for multilingual large language models (LLMs) because they cover all Unicode text. In UTF-8-based BBPE, however, many scripts start from a higher fallback cost than English: when no learned merges can be applied, a multibyte character requires multiple byte-derived symbols. We call this worst-case pre-merge cost the encoding floor. A higher floor can increase token counts and per-request cost and shrink usable context. Changing the text encoding can reduce this gap, but a single global encoding can make already-efficient English spans more expensive in mixed-script text. We propose Universal Byte-Level Encoding (UBE), a dual-alphabet tokenizer that keeps 1-2-byte UTF-8 characters on the UTF-8 path while routing 3-4-byte UTF-8 characters through UTF-16. This lowers the encoding floor for 3-byte Basic Multilingual Plane (BMP) characters in scripts with high token premiums (token counts relative to English) without raising it for already-efficient spans in mixed-script text. UBE changes only the byte representation presented to byte-pair encoding (BPE); the merge rule remains standard, and exact decoding is preserved. UBE also composes with alternative boundary policies and morphology-based representations. In a Unicode 17 audit, UBE exactly round-trips all Unicode scalar values and all inputs in the official normalization, grapheme-break, and emoji test suites. Across intrinsic evaluations, UBE lowers dispersion in English-normalized token-count ratios, reducing cross-lingual token-budget disparity. In multilingual language model (LM) experiments, UBE matches BBPE's LM quality. In the main multilingual settings, UBE reduces token counts most for high-premium scripts and slightly lowers English token counts, yielding more usable context under fixed token budgets and faster prompt processing in content-matched benchmarks.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.01984
Hallucination detection is particularly important for medical language models, but repeated-sampling approaches are expensive and existing uncertainty-head resources do not directly transfer to a new backbone and language. We adapt the LLM Uncertainty Head (LUH) framework to Aya-Expanse-8B-based Persian medical models, using Gaokerena-V and Gaokerena-R as two previously developed backbones. We first examine response variability on a 168-question Iranian medical entrance examination and observe substantially lower five-run consistency for Gaokerena-V than for Aya-Expanse-8B, whereas Gaokerena-R is comparable to Aya-Expanse-8B. We then construct two paired claim-level hallucination datasets directly in Persian, containing 1,600 responses for each backbone, and train lightweight claim-level heads on frozen backbone attention maps and token probabilities. On held-out test splits, the heads obtain PR-AUCs of 0.4820 and 0.4652, corresponding to 2.30 and 2.66 times their respective random baselines, and ROC-AUCs of 0.7852 and 0.7810. The heads require neither retrieval nor repeated sampling at inference time. These results provide an initial study of single-pass claim-level uncertainty estimation for Persian medical language models; the test splits are small and the labels are automatically generated.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03482
LLM agents increasingly screen tool outputs with small prompt-injection detectors, and teams choose among detectors by their scores on public benchmarks. We ask whether those scores predict how a detector behaves inside an agent. We replay the ground-truth tool calls of two agent benchmarks, AgentDojo and tau-bench, without an LLM to obtain tool outputs that are benign by construction, label injected outputs by differential replay, and evaluate fifteen detectors, including Meta's Prompt Guard 2, and two task-aware LLM judges on these outputs and on the BIPIA benchmark. Detection rankings transfer poorly between benchmarks: the best detector on BIPIA catches 2% of AgentDojo injections at a 1% false-positive rate, and a detector that catches 72% of AgentDojo injections catches 15% on tau-bench. False-positive rates on tool outputs, which range from none to over 90%, do transfer between the two agent benchmarks. Where training data is public, the form of the training inputs explains the results. The BIPIA leader was trained on full BIPIA inputs, but having seen InjecAgent's attack strings as short prompts does not help it find them inside tool outputs; the best detector on both agent benchmarks shares no data with any benchmark and was trained on agent-style inputs. Evaluations meant to inform deployment should use the agent's own tool outputs, report detection at a low false-positive rate, and audit what the detector was trained on.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03448
A targeted adversarial perturbation can drive a vision-language model's (VLM's) teacher-forced training loss for a fixed target caption to near zero, yet the same model, allowed to generate freely, produces the original, correct description with no trace of the target. We call this dissociation the train/inference gap, and give it a precise mechanistic account on Qwen2.5-VL-7B-Instruct using a controlled two-stage PGD attack on 200 held-out COCO images. First, we show that image-level pixel statistics, including a correctly re-implemented, texture-based attackability measure from the CNN robustness literature, have essentially no predictive power over which images are corrupted (best predictor r=-0.050, p=0.484; ridge regression R^2=0.069). Second, using the logit lens, we localise the gap to a single autoregressive step: the rank of the target token, conditioned on the correct first token already being generated, is fixed at exactly 3,488 out of 152,064 vocabulary entries for every image and every condition, with zero variance. Third, tracking target-token rank across all 28 LLM decoder layers reveals that the visual encoder corrupts every image's representation by a comparable margin regardless of eventual outcome, but the language model decoder then differentially arbitrates: amplifying the corrupted signal for susceptible images and actively suppressing it, past its clean-image baseline, for resistant ones (p<0.001, rank-biserial r=0.579). A linear probe on the merger hidden state separates these two outcomes with AUC=0.858, though we flag a circularity concern in this estimate. Together these results argue that adversarial robustness in autoregressive VLMs is substantially a property of the language decoder's prior, not the visual encoder, with direct implications for where faithfulness evaluations and defenses for deployed VLM systems should be targeted.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03445
Online data selection has demonstrated substantial efficiency gains for LLM pretraining by training on the most valuable candidates within each batch. Since a candidate's value is realized through its effective model update, principled selection should account for the optimizer step, which reshapes the raw gradient before it updates model parameters. We formalize this optimizer-aware selection paradigm as OptiSelect and present the first systematic study of how the optimizer shapes data selection. Our theory establishes a selection gain principle in which the advantage of online selection is governed by the discriminability of the optimizer-induced utility scores. We prove that sign-based and polar-tangential preconditioners of Lion and Muon would suffer from a discriminability collapse which caps attainable gains from OptiSelect, whereas diagonal-adaptive optimizers such as AdamW and Sophia admit strictly better upper bounds. The proposed principle also yields a quantitative derivation of the optimal candidate oversampling ratio. Pretraining experiments on 124M and 720M models are consistent with our theoretical analysis and show that AdamW's diagonal-adaptive scoring geometry remains the strongest scoring geometry even with Muon as optimizer. We further demonstrate that OptiSelect retains its benefits under data rephrasing, a technique used in modern data processing pipelines. Our findings provide theoretical foundations and practical guidance for co-designing optimizers and data selection in LLM pretraining.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03432
Efficient request scheduling is increasingly important for reducing completion time in large language model (LLM) serving. Size-based policies such as Shortest Job First prioritize shorter requests, but output lengths are unknown before generation, so practical schedulers rely on predicted lengths. We introduce JIL, an attack on prediction-based LLM schedulers that manipulates the scheduling signal to obtain higher priority and reduce completion time. Using TRAIL as a case study, JIL optimizes an adversarial suffix that causes a lightweight output-length probe to underestimate a request's length. We evaluate JIL on two datasets and four LLMs across varied request profiles and deployment configurations. JIL reduces predicted output lengths by up to 83.4 percent, and adversarial requests complete up to 1.53 times faster on average in end-to-end serving experiments. The reduction in predicted length is substantially larger than the change in actual output length, revealing a mismatch between the scheduler's estimate and the request's realized size. Response utility varies across models and tasks, exposing a trade-off between scheduling advantage and response quality. We also evaluate scheduler-side defenses and find that grouping length predictions into coarse intervals reduces JIL's scheduling advantage and mitigates delays to benign requests.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03430
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have shown strong visual reasoning abilities, but knowledge-intensive visual question answering often requires external textual evidence beyond the image and the model's parametric knowledge. Existing multimodal RAG systems commonly rely on Top-$K$ retrieval or reranking, which may return redundant passages and provide limited control over whether an answer update is sufficiently supported by the retrieved evidence. We propose \textit{CLIMB}, a training-free inference-time framework for multimodal RAG. CLIMB first constructs a compact complementary evidence pool using an MMR-style objective that balances query relevance and passage-level redundancy. It then performs confidence-controlled refinement within this fixed pool: an R/E/C critic scores passages by relevance, evidence specificity, and cross-modal alignment, while an evidence-grounded confidence estimator accepts an updated answer only when the estimated confidence increases. This design provides a simple stopping criterion and reduces unnecessary refinement without modifying the underlying retriever or MLLM. Experiments on Encyclopedic-VQA and InfoSeek show that CLIMB consistently improves over retrieval-augmented multimodal baselines. Ablations further indicate that complementary pooling, critic-based scoring, and iterative confidence-controlled refinement each contribute to the final performance.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03421
Attack Path (AP) modeling is fundamental to cybersecurity analysis, where the Planning Domain Definition Language (PDDL) has been widely adopted to encode APs into formal and machine-verifiable representations for automated reasoning about vulnerability exploitation, attack progression, and their potential impacts. However, existing AP modeling approaches largely rely on expert-driven manual construction, limiting their scalability and ability to keep pace with rapidly evolving cyber threats. Large language models (LLMs) are promising candidates, as their extensive pre-trained knowledge and reasoning capabilities enable them to interpret and transform threat intelligence into formal representations. In this paper, we propose \textbf{CVE2AP}, an LLM-based approach for automatically generating PDDL-encoded attack paths from natural language CVE (Common Vulnerability Exposure) descriptions. CVE2AP leverages structured prompting and incorporates an error-feedback mechanism that iteratively refines the generated paths using planner-reported syntactic and solvability errors. We conduct a systematic empirical evaluation across multiple LLMs and generation configurations, assessing generation quality across syntactic, solvability and semantic dimensions, together with token consumption and generation time. The results demonstrate that CVE2AP effectively generates high-quality PDDL-encoded attack paths, achieving up to 86.9\% syntax correctness, 78.6\% solvability, and 93.1\% semantic correctness under LLM-as-expert evaluation, while \texttt{GPT-5.5} offers the best quality-cost trade-off and error feedback yields the most consistent quality improvement.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03383