Skills, as a useful abstraction for the procedural capabilities of large language models (LLMs), capture how models perform structured, multi-step reasoning and program execution. Existing approaches typically treat skills as explicit, surface-level constructs specified through prompts or programs, leaving open the question of how such procedural capabilities are represented inside the model and whether they can be manipulated as structured objects in latent space. In this empirical study, we investigate whether procedural LLM skills can be represented as directions in activation space and whether vector-space operations over these directions can express skill-level behaviors. We find that procedural skills admit a vector-space representation: individual skill directions can be activated to shift model behavior; independently extracted directions can compose to form higher-level skills. Contrastive directions yield context-conditioned algorithmic personalization and optimization trajectories over skill directions evolve non-monotonically, with intermediate states often surpassing fully optimized solutions. These results support a representation-level view of procedural LLM skills: they admit a latent vector-space organization that allows direct manipulation through internal interventions.
Xun-Yi Jiang, Junda Wu, Yuxin Xiong et al.· 0 citations
Large language models can generate interactive web interfaces, but reliable generative UI requires maintaining an executable artifact as user requests evolve. We introduce EvoGenUI-Bench, a benchmark for multi-turn interface maintenance comprising 150 five-turn tasks and 750 turns across three scenarios: information presentation, executable interaction, and tool-grounded external state. We execute generated artifacts in a browser and evaluate them using screenshots, source and DOM evidence, actor traces, and runtime logs. Beyond turn-level and episode-level success, we measure cross-turn retention with Adjacent Pass Retention. Across eight models, even the strongest achieves 74.9% Turn Pass while completing only 37.3% of five-turn episodes; APR further falls to 52.4% on tool-grounded tasks. Diagnostic analysis shows that presentation failures center on information architecture, interaction failures on derived-state propagation and affordance binding, and tool-grounded failures additionally involve external-state grounding and requirement decomposition. These results reframe generative UI evaluation from judging isolated outputs to testing whether interface behavior, derived state, external state, and assistant claims remain synchronized as the artifact evolves.
Yue Peng, Lan-Ke Xia, Zi-Han Wang et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
