paper-with-me

Papers

Scaffold, Not Vocabulary? A Controlled, Two-Tier, Pre-Registered Study of a Popperian Code-Generation Skill

2026-06-04 · Mehmet Iscan arxiv

Large language models increasingly write, review, and judge code, and a fast-growing practice equips them with prompt 'skills' that ask the model to reason like a scientist. A prominent example tells the model to act as a Popperian falsificationist, and such skills are reported to improve generated code. But these gains are almost always read off an LLM-as-a-judge, an instrument with documented positional, self-preference, and stylistic biases. We ask: if it appears to help, is the gain from the skill's Popperian content, or from the structure any scaffold imposes? We pre-register a two-tier ablation with three controls: a length-matched placebo, a labels-only scaffold that keeps the Popperian headers but strips the procedure, and an execution oracle (HumanEval+ unit tests), plus a vocabulary-halo sentinel and a same-model self-judge audit. On a frontier model (Claude Sonnet 4.6, N=163) all conditions sit near the benchmark ceiling and do not separate, so the pre-registered +5-point improvement is not supported (a ceiling-limited non-detection). On a small model (Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B, N=164) structured arms lift best-of-eight correctness by 20-22 points, but the full skill shows no separable benefit over a labels-only scaffold (aggregate F@8=L@8 vs V@8=34.8%), and the placebo trails by only 2.4 points. A 0.5B self-judge applying the Popperian rubric does not beat random selection and concentrates 60% of its picks on one index. In the two settings tested, the skill's Popperian procedural content adds no separable execution-correctness benefit beyond a labels-only scaffold, so the gains track scaffold structure. We contribute a calibrated negative result and a reusable disambiguation protocol; the finding bounds an engineering claim about one prompt-skill family and is not an evaluation of Popperian methodology in general.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:2606.06454

Code (0)

등록된 구현이 없습니다.

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

Scaffold Effects on GAIA: A Controlled Comparison

2026-06-07 · Jason Starace arxiv

Published agent capability scores conflate what a model can do with what its scaffold lets it do, and the magnitude of this elicitation gap is not well characterized under controlled conditions. This study executes a pre…

Safety Under Scaffolding: How Evaluation Conditions Shape Measured Safety

2026-03-08 · David Gringras arxiv

A safety score earned on a benchmark need not predict how the same model behaves once it is wrapped in an agentic scaffold the benchmark never tested. We ran six frontier models through four deployment configurations (di…

Falsification, Not Exposure: An Internally Preregistered Placebo-Controlled Decomposition of Self-Repair Feedback in Frozen Small Code Models

2026-06-30 · Mehmet Iscan arxiv

In deployment settings where retraining is infeasible, small frozen code models are routinely asked to repair a failed program after seeing their own failing output, usually treated as a retry mechanism. From a Popperian…

From Idea to Prototype in an Afternoon: Scaffolded, AI-Assisted Rapid VA Prototyping

2026-06-30 · Gennady Andrienko, Natalia Andrienko arxiv

Testing a new visual-analytics idea usually takes months: one needs to find a realistic data set, clean it, and implement an interactive prototype. We describe a case where a workflow language and an AI assistant reduced…

Don't Blame the Large Language Model: How Scaffolding Evolution Shapes Coding Agent Quality

2026-07-04 · Oussama Ben Sghaier, Hao Li, Bram Adams, Ahmed E. Hassan arxiv

Coding agents, autonomous systems that use large language models (LLMs) to resolve software engineering tasks, rely on agentic scaffolding: a middleware layer in between a developer and a large language model that orches…