REVIEW 2 major objections 7 minor 10 cited by
SepLLM: Accelerate Large Language Models by Compressing One Segment into One Separator
T0 review · 2 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read Separator tokens act as compressed segment summaries, so a transformer can drop most of its KV cache and still match full attention.
desk verdict A practical KV-cache compression method with strong matched-KV controls, but the 'separator as segment summary' mechanism is overclaimed and the theory section is sloppy. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The machinery is a binary attention mask $M$ that zeroes out every attention pair except those between a query and (i) the first $a$ initial tokens, (ii) the separator tokens that have already appeared, and (iii) the $n$ nearest preceding tokens; the paper also implements a Sep-Attention kernel for sparse matrix multiplication. Separators are the load-bearing element: the list $\{\texttt{.}, \texttt{,}, \texttt{?}, \texttt{!}, \texttt{;}, \texttt{:}, \texttt{ }, \texttt{\t}, \texttt{\n}\}$ defines the segment boundaries, and during training the mask forces the model to condense each segment's content into the corresponding separator's key and value. For streaming, four cache blocks (initial, separator, local window, past window) keep total usage under capacity $c$; once full, past-window non-separators are dropped and separator KV moves into the separator cache, giving a periodic cache evolution whose average usage tends to $(w+c+a+s)/2$, strictly below $c$. The universal-approximation appendix shows that the class of SepLLM networks with $H=2$, $d_h=1$, $d_f=4$ can approximate any continuous sequence-to-sequence function.
What would settle it
Take a long passage with a fact embedded mid-sentence between commas, then ask a training-free SepLLM to retrieve that fact from a prompt of thousands of tokens; if accuracy drops sharply relative to full attention while a same-budget StreamingLLM also fails, then separator hidden states alone are not carrying segment content in that regime.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The central claim is that information within a segment of text is functionally stored in the hidden state of the token that ends the segment, so a model does not need to attend to the segment's interior once it has seen the separator. SepLLM operationalizes this with a data-dependent sparse mask that keeps three classes of tokens: initial attention sinks, separator tokens from a fixed set of nine punctuation and whitespace types, and the closest neighbors of the current token. The authors support the compression hypothesis with attention visualizations showing separators receiving disproportionately high scores, removal experiments in which deleting separator KV hurts reasoning, and a fixed-interval variant that attends at regular intervals and performs worse. In training-free mode on Llama-3-8B, SepLLM retains 47.36% of the original KV cache and achieves 77.18% on GSM8K-CoT versus 77.79% for full attention; in streaming mode the cache stays bounded and perplexity remains stable out to millions of tokens.
Load-bearing premise
The load-bearing premise is that a fixed set of nine separator tokens is sufficient as long-range anchors for every input—that every fact a token needs to recall sits in the hidden state of a comma, period, or similar separator—so inputs where important information is not adjacent to a separator (code, formulas, punctuation-sparse prose) may not be compressible this way.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- With the Llama-3-8B backbone, the KV cache drops below half (47.36%) on GSM8K-CoT with no meaningful accuracy loss, which directly reduces the memory cost per decoded token.
- SepLLM is trainable from scratch and via post-training, unlike many KV-compression methods, so its sparse mask can be baked into pretraining and fine-tuning rather than applied only at inference.
- In streaming settings the cache stays bounded by capacity $c$ while processing millions of tokens, with average usage tending to $(w+c+a+s)/2$, so long dialogues and document streams no longer require unbounded memory.
- Training with the SepLLM mask cuts FLOPs by roughly 30% and wall-clock time per iteration by about a third while achieving the same training loss as full attention.
- The universal approximation theorem says a small SepLLM network can approximate arbitrary continuous sequence functions, so the sparse pattern is not inherently capacity-limited.
Reading between the lines
- Editorial inference: if separator hidden states really serve as RNN-like memory, tokenizers that insert explicit boundary tokens could make the compression more robust than relying on the nine-natural-punctuation list.
- Editorial inference: the fixed nine-token separator set is an English-centric inductive bias; languages with different punctuation, or code with operators as boundaries, would need a different anchor set, and the method's performance there is a direct testable extension.
- Editorial inference: the compression hypothesis implies a hierarchy of segment granularity—short separators (commas) inside longer ones (periods)—and a natural next step would be checking whether attention to higher-level separators carries more global information than lower-level ones.
- Editorial inference: comparing SepLLM's cache against a learned policy that picks boundary tokens by attention score would separate the value of "separator" as a linguistic category from the value of "high-attention token" generally.
Signed reviews
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. This paper reports that separator tokens (commas, periods, spaces, newlines, and similar) receive disproportionately high attention in pretrained LLMs, and hypothesizes that these tokens compress the information of the text segments they delimit. On this basis it proposes SepLLM, a sparse-attention method that retains only three groups of KV-cache entries: a few initial tokens, all separator tokens, and a local window of neighboring tokens. The method is evaluated in three regimes: training-free inference (Llama-3-8B on GSM8K-CoT and MMLU, achieving a KV-cache reduction of over 50% at near-vanilla accuracy), training from scratch (Pythia-160m on the Pile), and post-training (Pythia-1.4B), plus a streaming variant that keeps a bounded cache and runs on sequences up to 4M tokens (PG19). The controls include a matched-KV StreamingLLM baseline, a fixed-interval anchor baseline (FixLLM), and standard KV-compression baselines (H2O, SnapKV, PyramidKV). An appendix contributes a universal-approximation theorem for an encoder-based variant of SepLLM, adapted from Yun et al. (2020).
Significance. Conditional on the results, this is a practically useful contribution: SepLLM is a simple, plug-and-play KV-retention rule that requires no importance scoring, integrates into both training-from-scratch and fine-tuning, and ships with a hardware-efficient kernel and released code. The experimental program is broad and internally consistent. I credit in particular the matched-KV StreamingLLM control (Table 1), the FixLLM fixed-interval control (Table 17), which rules out the trivial alternative that any uniformly placed sparse anchor would work, the systematic ablations of cache hyperparameters (s, w, c, separator list, initial tokens, positional shifting), and the range of backbones (Pythia-6.9B/12B, Llama-3-8B base/instruct, Falcon-40B). The main caveat is interpretive: the experiments establish that separator positions are effective sparse anchors, but they do not directly establish that separator hidden states contain compressed summaries of the preceding segments. That caveat affects the framing claims in Section 6 ('native sparse attention') and the title more than the validity of the method as an engineering contribution.
major comments (2)
- [§3.1, §4.2, §4.6/FixLLM, Appendix H] The compression mechanism is underdetermined by the reported experiments. The evidence offered for the claim that 'information of the segments... can be effectively condensed into the separator tokens themselves' is (i) attention heatmaps (Figure 2; Appendix A shows layers 0-2, head 0 only), (ii) the removal ablation against StreamingLLM at matched KV (Table 1), and (iii) the fixed-interval control FixLLM (Table 17, Appendix I). All three are also predicted by the rival hypothesis that the paper itself states in Appendix H: separators are extremely high-frequency tokens whose keys act as generic attention sinks and whose positions coincide with syntactic boundaries. Because a fixed-interval anchor at position k is also computed from the full prefix in the training-free setting, FixLLM compares anchor positions but cannot distinguish 'separator hidden states summarize the preceding segment' from 'separator positions are good places for prefix-computed anchors'; the Needle-in-a-Haystack result (Appendix F) is likewise consistent with both readings. Consequently, the sentence in §4.2 ('This indicates that the KV of separators indeed encapsulates information contained within their respective segments') overclaims what Table 1 shows. Since the mechanism is used to justify the training mask (§3.1) and the 'native sparse attention' framing (§6), I ask the authors to either (a) add direct evidence—for example, a frequency-matched non-separator anchor (a common content token at the same positions), a probe of whether separator KVs encode segment content, or an evaluation on tokenizers/languages with different separator frequency—or (b) restate the contribution as the empirical finding that separator positions are effective sparse anchors, and correspondingly soften the abstract, title, and Section 6.
- [§5 and Appendices J-K] Theorem 5.1, as stated in the main text, claims universal approximation for every f in F over arbitrary inputs, but the proof in Appendix J relies on an assumption that appears only in the appendix's class definition: 'for at most s successive tokens, a special token will appear in the sequence.' This bounded-gap assumption is used in the token-transmission step of Lemma K.4 ('the last token can attend to the nearest special tokens with the help of neighboring tokens, requiring at most ceil(s/l) layers'), so the construction does not cover inputs without special tokens or with arbitrarily large separator gaps. The main-text statement omits this restriction, and the class notation T^{2,1,4}_{Sep} does not expose the parameters l and s, so the theorem as stated overclaims what the proof establishes. In addition, the theorem is proven for an encoder-based variant with bidirectional local windows, whereas the evaluated SepLLM is a causal decoder; the paper should state explicitly how the encoder version bears on the decoder architecture used in the experiments. Please restate Theorem 5.1 with the separator-regularity assumption made explicit and the layer-count dependence on n, l, s, and delta given.
minor comments (7)
- [§4.4, Figure 6] The post-training section presents only loss curves in the main text; the downstream evidence for post-training appears in Appendix D (Table 14) but for a different setting (LongAlpaca fine-tuning of Llama-3-8B rather than continued pretraining of Pythia-1.4B). Please add downstream-task results for the post-trained Pythia-1.4B checkpoint (for example, the tasks used in Table 2) or make the relationship between the two experiments explicit.
- [Tables 4, 5, and 11-13] The perplexity protocol is underspecified: please state how the test text is chunked, whether caches are reset at chunk or book boundaries, how positions are assigned after compression, and whether perplexity is computed on ground-truth next tokens or on model-generated continuations. The absolute values reported (Vanilla 302.6/1090.8 on PG19 at 20K/64K; StreamingLLM around 31-38 for Llama-3-8B) are far outside the ranges typically reported for this model, so these details are needed for reproducibility.
- [Introduction and Table 10] The introduction states that SepLLM 'reduces computational costs by 28% and training time by 26% while achieving the same training loss,' but Table 10 reports 2524.45 ms to 1648.11 ms per iteration, which is a ~35% wall-clock reduction; please reconcile the 26% figure or identify the setting it refers to.
- [Appendix A and Figure 2] The attention-visualization evidence shows only head 0 of layers 0-2; because the paper claims a consistent pattern across the model, an aggregate statistic (for example, the fraction of heads and layers with high separator-attention mass) would be more convincing than three individual attention maps.
- [Throughout, Figure 4, Eq. (1)] Please unify naming and notation: 'StrmLLM' in the tables versus 'StreamingLLM' in the text, 'streamingLLM' in §4.5, and the typo 'SegLLM' in the Figure 4 caption; also align the mask notation in Eq. (1) ('Mul(Q, K^T M)') with the elementwise definition in Eq. (2).
- [Table 16, Appendix G] The separator-choice ablation fixes n=256 while the separator list shrinks, so the rows with fewer separators consume less KV budget; a budget-matched comparison (increasing n in the reduced-separator rows) would isolate the effect of separator identity more cleanly, as the StrmLLM (n=380) row does for the no-separator case.
- [Appendix H] The second explanatory paragraph contains a non-sequitur: 'separators need to be generated by the language model very frequently. Therefore, their attention values with respect to any other token cannot be too small.' Output-token frequency does not imply high attention mass on that token as a key; this argument should be removed or reformulated, particularly since it appears in the very appendix that discusses alternative explanations.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: SepLLM's separator-retention claim is evaluated against external benchmarks and controlled alternatives, not derived from its own construction.
full rationale
The paper's chain is observational and empirical rather than definitional. The retained-token set (initial, separator, neighbor) is motivated by attention visualization, but the central claim that separator KV is specially valuable is tested by ablations: StrmLLM removes separator KV at matched budgets, and FixLLM replaces separators with fixed-interval anchors. These controls show the benefit is not merely that any sparse anchor works, and no parameter is fitted to the evaluation targets. The training-from-scratch mask forces long-range information through separators by construction, but the favorable loss/FLOPs and downstream results are contingent outcomes, not identities; the same mask could have failed. The universal approximation theorem in Appendices J-K adapts Yun et al. (2020) with an explicit regular-spacing assumption for special tokens; it is an independent mathematical result and is not used to define the empirical compression claim. Self-citations (SparseBERT, LightGNN, Self-adjust softmax) appear only in a general sparsity parenthetical and are not load-bearing. The skeptic's attention-sink alternative is a mechanistic underdetermination and a correctness risk, not equation-level circularity; the paper itself acknowledges the high-frequency explanation in Appendix H.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (5)
- number of initial tokens a =
4 (default; 0 and 32 ablated)
- separator cache capacity s =
32/64/256 depending on task
- local window size n/w =
64/128/256 etc.
- total KV cache capacity c =
324/800/1024
- separator token list =
9 tokens: . , ? ! ; : space tab newline
assumptions (3)
- domain assumption Special tokens appear frequently in the input (at most s successive tokens without a special token)
- domain assumption Separator embeddings contain sufficient segment information to predict the next token
- standard math Standard universal approximation toolkit: piecewise constant approximation, hardmax/softmax equivalence, ReLU piecewise-linear representation (Yun et al. 2020)
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of SepLLM: Accelerate Large Language Models by Compressing One Segment into One Separator." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XE55HDQM
@misc{pith2026241212094,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: SepLLM: Accelerate Large Language Models by Compressing One Segment into One Separator},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XE55HDQM}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.12094}
}
read the original abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have exhibited exceptional performance across a spectrum of natural language processing tasks. However, their substantial sizes pose considerable challenges, particularly in computational demands and inference speed, due to their quadratic complexity. In this work, we have identified a key pattern: certain seemingly meaningless separator tokens (i.e., punctuations) contribute disproportionately to attention scores compared to semantically meaningful tokens. This observation suggests that information of the segments between these separator tokens can be effectively condensed into the separator tokens themselves without significant information loss. Guided by this insight, we introduce SepLLM, a plug-and-play framework that accelerates inference by compressing these segments and eliminating redundant tokens. Additionally, we implement efficient kernels for training acceleration. Experimental results across training-free, training-from-scratch, and post-training settings demonstrate SepLLM's effectiveness. Notably, using the Llama-3-8B backbone, SepLLM achieves over 50% reduction in KV cache on the GSM8K-CoT benchmark while maintaining comparable performance. Furthermore, in streaming settings, SepLLM effectively processes sequences of up to 4 million tokens or more while maintaining consistent language modeling capabilities.
Figures
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Forward citations
Cited by 10 Pith papers
-
Metaphor Tracer: A Theory-Informed Analysis of Hidden States
Hidden-state aggregator and differentiator scores, frozen on one text, track within-text organization across models and align with engineered registers and psychoanalytic marks while dissociating from information and ...
-
What to Keep, What to Forget: A Rate--Distortion View of Memory Compaction in LLMs and Agents
KV-cache eviction, prompt compression, recurrent state bounding, and agent memory consolidation are unified as one rate-distortion problem with a shared lower bound, shared failure mode, and transferable mechanisms.
-
ChunkLLM: A Lightweight Pluggable Framework for Accelerating LLMs Inference
ChunkLLM adds lightweight chunk-boundary and chunk-attention adapters to frozen LLMs, keeping ~98% of long-context quality with ~49% KV cache and up to 4.48x speedup on 120K-token generation.
-
CaliDrop: KV Cache Compression with Calibration
CaliDrop adds a stale-query calibration term on top of token eviction, improving accuracy at high KV compression ratios with modest throughput overhead.
-
OrthoRank: Token Selection via Sink Token Orthogonality for Efficient LLM inference
OrthoRank selects tokens for computation by their orthogonality to the sink token in normalized hidden states, yielding better perplexity and accuracy than layer pruning at matched sparsity without additional training.
-
EARN: Efficient Inference Acceleration for LLM-based Generative Recommendation by Register Tokens
EARN inserts learnable register tokens at both ends of a user prompt, prunes prompt tokens after early layers, and achieves up to 3.79x faster LLM-based recommendation inference with comparable or better accuracy.
-
GEM: Empowering LLM for both Embedding Generation and Language Understanding
GEM fine-tunes decoder-only LLMs with bottleneck special tokens and a mixed next-token prediction and contrastive objective, giving them text-embedding ability with only a modest MMLU drop.
-
Mixture of Sparse Attention: Content-Based Learnable Sparse Attention via Expert-Choice Routing
MoSA, an expert-choice style sparse attention that selects per-head top-k tokens, outperforms dense transformers on C4 language modeling under matched FLOPs with up to 27% perplexity improvement and reduces wall-clock...
-
SeerAttention-R: Sparse Attention Adaptation for Long Reasoning
A learned gate selects the important KV blocks during long decoding, preserving math reasoning accuracy while skipping up to 90% of attention work.
-
A Survey on Large Language Model Acceleration based on KV Cache Management
A survey that classifies KV cache management techniques for faster LLM inference into token-level, model-level, and system-level categories, with benchmark resources.
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
The Falcon Series of Open Language Models
Almazrouei, E., Alobeidli, H., Alshamsi, A., Cappelli, A., Cojocaru, R., Debbah, M., Goffinet, ´E., Hesslow, D., Lau- nay, J., Malartic, Q., Mazzotta, D., Noune, B., Pannier, B., and Penedo, G. The Falcon Series of Open Language Models. Preprint arXiv:2311.16867,
-
[2]
This approximation is justified by the fact that the softmax function can approximate the hardmax op- erator arbitrarily closely when the temperature parameter is sufficiently large. Additionally, feed-forward networks with ReLU activation can effectively represent any piecewise linear function. K. Proof for Theorem J.1 Lemma K.1(Lemma 5 in Yun et al. (20...
work page 2020
-
[7]
The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modeling
Gao, L., Biderman, S., Black, S., Golding, L., Hoppe, T., Foster, C., Phang, J., He, H., Thite, A., Nabeshima, N., et al. The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modeling. Preprint arXiv:2101.00027,
-
[9]
X., Wang, L., Xiao, Z., Wang, Y ., Ruan, C., Zhang, M., Liang, W., and Zeng, W
Yuan, J., Gao, H., Dai, D., Luo, J., Zhao, L., Zhang, Z., Xie, Z., Wei, Y . X., Wang, L., Xiao, Z., Wang, Y ., Ruan, C., Zhang, M., Liang, W., and Zeng, W. Native Sparse Atten- tion: Hardware-Aligned and Natively Trainable Sparse Attention. Preprint arXiv:2502.11089,
-
[10]
Chen, G., Xia, L., and Huang, C
1145/3701551.3703536. Chen, G., Xia, L., and Huang, C. Pre-training for rec- ommendation unlearning. InProceedings of the 48th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR ’25, 2025b. doi: 10.1145/3726302.3730060. Chen, Y ., Qian, S., Tang, H., Lai, X., Liu, Z., Han, S., and Jia, J. LongLoRA: Efficient Fin...
-
[11]
PyramidKV: Dynamic KV Cache Compression based on Pyramidal Information Funneling
Zhang, Y ., Gao, B., Liu, T., Lu, K., Xiong, W., Dong, Y ., Chang, B., Hu, J., Xiao, W., et al. PyramidKV: Dynamic KV Cache Compression based on Pyramidal Information Funneling. Preprint arXiv:2406.02069,
-
[13]
The comparison of SepLLM adapted to Falcon-40B (Al- mazrouei et al., 2023). Base or Instruct.In general, whether it is the base model or the instruction-tuned model, we can condense the seg- ment information into the corresponding Key-Value pairs of the separator tokens. To illustrate, we fine-tune Llama-3-8B- instruct and Llama-3-8B-base models (Dubey et al.,
work page 2023
-
[14]
of base or instruct versions. E. Extended Comparisons We use GSM8K-CoT (Cobbe et al., 2021), the most com- monly used metric for testing mathematical reasoning and logical analysis, to compare SepLLM (a=3,n=256) with other state-of-the-art training-free methods, including H2O (Zhang et al., 2023), SnapKV (Li et al., 2024), and flexible-extract strict-matc...
work page 2021
Show all 20 references
-
[15]
PyramidKV (Zhang et al., 2024)
Evaluation results and averageruntimeKV cache usage for experiments on GSM8K-CoT with 8-shots, compared to multi- ple baseline methods. PyramidKV (Zhang et al., 2024). All methods are config- ured to retain nearly identical runtime KV cache usage. The results are shown in Table
2024
-
[16]
” and “?
It can be observed that Se- pLLM, without requiring complex importance evaluation mechanisms, is able to maintain strong reasoning capabili- ties simply by compressing segment information. F. Needle in a Haystack To evaluate the long-context information retrieval ability of ou...
2024
-
[18]
(n−1) d−1X i=0 δ−i :δ: (n−1) d−1X i=0 δ−i +δ −d+1 −δ # , u⊤Zk ∈
To identify the position of tokens in SepLLM, we include the position encoding E∈R d×n into the token X, i.e., the input token is X+E . Here, for theoretical convenience, the positional encoding matrix is defined as E= [(n−1)1,0,1, . . . ,(n−2)1]. With this encoding, the input...
2020
-
[19]
4 initial tokens are kept
Needle-in-a-Haystacktest results for our SepLLM(n=2048; first/last 2 layers (4 layers in total): full attention) based on Llama-3-8B-instruct. 4 initial tokens are kept. Figure
-
[20]
32 initial tokens are kept
Needle-in-a-Haystacktest results for our SepLLM(n=2048; first/last 2 layers (4 layers in total): full attention) based on Llama-3-8B-instruct. 32 initial tokens are kept. 18 Accelerate LLMs by Compressing One Segment into One Separator Figure 12.An example of attention map in ...
-
[2017]
InfLLM: Training-Free Long- Context Extrapolation for LLMs with an Efficient Context Memory
Xiao, C., Zhang, P., Han, X., Xiao, G., Lin, Y ., Zhang, Z., Liu, Z., and Sun, M. InfLLM: Training-Free Long- Context Extrapolation for LLMs with an Efficient Context Memory. InNeural Information Processing Systems, 2024a. Xiao, G., Tian, Y ., Chen, B., Han, S., and Lewis, M. ...
-
[2018]
Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems
Cobbe, K., Kosaraju, V ., Bavarian, M., Chen, M., Jun, H., Kaiser, L., Plappert, M., Tworek, J., Hilton, J., Nakano, R., et al. Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems. Preprint arXiv:2110.14168,
-
[2020]
The Llama 3 Herd of Models
Dubey, A., Jauhri, A., Pandey, A., Kadian, A., Al-Dahle, A., Letman, A., Mathur, A., Schelten, A., Yang, A., Fan, A., et al. The Llama 3 Herd of Models. Preprint arXiv:2407.21783,
-
[2021]
The results in Table 17 show that FixLLM has a significant gap compared to SepLLM in both mathematical logical reasoning and knowledge-based reasoning capabili- ties
and MMLU (Hendrycks et al., 2021)) benchmarks under a training-free setting, based on the Llama3-8B-Instruct backbone. The results in Table 17 show that FixLLM has a significant gap compared to SepLLM in both mathematical logical reasoning and knowledge-based reasoning capabil...
2020
-
[2023]
Long- former: The Long-Document Transformer
Beltagy, I., Peters, M., and Cohan, A. Long- former: The Long-Document Transformer. Preprint arXiv:2004.05150,
2004 arXiv
-
[2024]
Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Chal- lenge
Clark, P., Cowhey, I., Etzioni, O., Khot, T., Sabharwal, A., Schoenick, C., and Tafjord, O. Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Chal- lenge. Preprint arXiv:1803.05457,
-
[2025]
SampleAttention: Near-Lossless Acceleration of Long Context LLM Infer- ence with Adaptive Structured Sparse Attention
Zhu, Q., Duan, J., Chen, C., Liu, S., Li, X., Feng, G., Lv, X., Cao, H., Xiao, C., Zhang, X., et al. SampleAttention: Near-Lossless Acceleration of Long Context LLM Infer- ence with Adaptive Structured Sparse Attention. Preprint arXiv:2406.15486,
Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.