Researcher profile

Shubhashis Roy Dipta

Shubhashis Roy Dipta contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Artificial Intelligence Computation and Language Machine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author

4works

0followers

3topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

preprint2026arXiv

AgentCollabBench: Diagnosing When Good Agents Make Bad Collaborators

Multi-agent systems achieve state-of-the-art outcomes through peer collaboration. However, when an agent in the pipeline silently drops a constraint, the system's final output may look correct even though the reasoning chain was quietly corrupted, and existing outcome-based evaluations are blind to such multi-hop process failures. To make these vulnerabilities measurable before deployment, we introduce AgentCollabBench, a diagnostic benchmark of 900 human-validated tasks spanning software engineering, DevOps, and data engineering. Each task isolates one of four behavioral risks: instruction decay (does a constraint survive peer pressure?), false-belief contagion (does a falsehood spread through consensus?), context leakage (does information bleed between tasks?), and tracer durability (does marked data reach the final agent?). Evaluating four modern LLMs (GPT 4.1 mini, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, Qwen-3.5-35B-A3B, and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct), we expose model-specific vulnerability profiles invisible to outcome-only evaluation; Qwen-3.5-35B-A3B, for example, leads on tracer durability and instruction stability, while GPT 4.1 mini leads on leakage containment and false-belief resistance. Beyond per-model differences, communication topology emerges as a primary risk factor that explains 7-40% of the variance in multi-hop information survival. The effect traces to a synthesis bottleneck specific to converging-DAG nodes: an agent weighing competing parent inputs discards constraints carried by a minority branch, a bottleneck structurally absent from linear chains. AgentCollabBench demonstrates that suboptimal topology can silently erase the safeguards of highly capable models, arguing that multi-agent reliability is fundamentally a structural problem and that scaling model intelligence alone is no substitute for architecture.

preprint2026arXiv

Cornerstones or Stumbling Blocks? Deciphering the Rock Tokens in On-Policy Distillation

While recent work in Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has shown that a small subset of critical tokens disproportionately drives reasoning gains, an analogous token-level understanding of On-Policy Distillation (OPD) remains largely unexplored. In this work, we investigate high-loss tokens, a token type that--as the most direct signal of student-teacher mismatch under OPD's per-token KL objective--should progressively diminish as training converges according to existing studies; however, our empirical analysis shows otherwise. Even after OPD training reaches apparent saturation, a substantial subset of tokens continues to exhibit persistently high loss; these tokens, which we term Rock Tokens, can account for up to 18\% of the tokens in generated outputs. Our investigation reveals two startling paradoxes. First, despite their high occurrence frequency providing a disproportionately large share of total gradient norms, Rock Tokens themselves remain stagnant throughout training, resisting teacher-driven corrections. Second, through causal intervention, we find that these tokens provide negligible functional contribution to the model's actual reasoning performance. These findings suggest that a vast amount of optimization bandwidth is spent on structural and discourse residuals that the student model cannot or need not internalize. By deconstructing these dynamics, we demonstrate that strategically bypassing these ``stumbling blocks'' can significantly streamline the alignment process, challenging the necessity of uniform token weighting and offering a more efficient paradigm for large-scale model distillation.

preprint2026arXiv

Learning How to Use Tools, Not Just When: Pattern-Aware Tool-Integrated Reasoning

Tool-integrated reasoning (TIR) has become a key approach for improving large reasoning models (LRMs) on complex problems. Prior work has mainly studied when to invoke tools, while overlooking how tools are applied. We identify two common patterns: a calculator pattern that uses code for direct computation, and an algorithmic pattern that encodes problems as programs. Misaligned choices often cause failures even when reasoning is sound. We propose a two-stage framework that first builds code competence from both patterns and then aligns pattern selection with teacher preferences. Across challenging math datasets, our pattern-aware method substantially improves both code usage and accuracy, for instance raising Code@1 on MATH500 from 64.0% to 70.5% and on AIME24 from 26.7% to 50.0%. These gains highlight the effectiveness of a pattern-aware approach for tool-integrated reasoning.

preprint2026arXiv

TRIAGE: Evaluating Prospective Metacognitive Control in LLMs under Resource Constraints

Deploying language models as autonomous agents requires more than per-task accuracy: when an agent faces a queue of problems under a finite token budget, it must decide which to attempt, in what order, and how much compute to commit to each, all before any execution feedback is available. This is the prospective form of metacognitive control studied for decades in human cognition, yet whether language models possess it remains untested. We introduce TRIAGE, an evaluation framework in which a model receives a task pool and a token budget calibrated to its own baseline cost, and commits to a single ordered plan that jointly encodes selection, sequencing, and per-problem allocation. Plans are scored against an oracle with full knowledge of the model's solvability and cost on each problem, yielding a triage efficiency ratio on a common scale. We evaluate frontier and open-source models, with and without reasoning enabled, across competition mathematics, graduate-level science, code generation, and expert multidisciplinary knowledge, and find that current language models exhibit substantial gaps in prospective metacognitive control, revealing a previously unmeasured capability dimension with direct implications for resource-efficient agent deployment.

Institution

Affiliation not imported yet

This author record came from a source that does not expose affiliation metadata. Once the author claims the profile or we enrich the record from another provider, this section will link to the concrete institution.

Topic footprint