Skip to content

OraclePhys: A Systematic Framework for LLM Fine-Tuning on Structural Mechanics

Aug 2026 · 0 citations · 34 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

The study yields two findings: first, the label's answer form -- not its bit count -- causally determines what fine-tuning teaches: a ranking objective installs an out-of-distribution forward model where the untrained base sits at the guessing prior.

Abstract

What a language model internalizes from fine-tuning is usually diagnosed after the fact. We make it an experimental variable. OraclePhys is a systematic fine-tuning framework with three components: OraclePhys-Bench, an exactly-graded structural-mechanics benchmark whose finite-element oracle scores every answer and counterfactual edit -- no human labels, no LLM judging; OraclePhys-30K, a supervision dataset of seven answer forms over byte-identical structure descriptions; and a controlled training study across the seven forms and three verifier roles. The study yields two findings. First, the label's answer form -- not its bit count -- causally determines what fine-tuning teaches: a ranking objective installs an out-of-distribution forward model where the untrained base sits at the guessing prior, a scalar objective at best a partial one, a boolean nothing detectable; the vector-scalar gulf survives a second physics domain, a second model family, and a paraphrased evaluation surface. Second, written or score-filtered answers install this capability, while advantage-weighted scores (GRPO) raise reward yet leave the model statistically equivalent to its start on held-out physics -- within the recipes and budgets tested -- sufficing only for routing. The trained 8B -- the first LLM on spatial structural response -- reaches the task's data-precision frontier: above a frontier LLM at zero- and 32-shot, at a specialist's level. What the label spells out about the target computation is what fine-tuning teaches; what you train on is what you route.

View source

Similar papers

Preprint Aug 2026

Why Large Language Models Fail at Tabular Prediction

The results show that the LLM's capability dissolves with dimension in a way no noise-corrupted classical learner mimics - which explains why LLMs, so capable elsewhere, keep losing to fifty-year-old baselines on tables, while leaving the mechanism of the prediction as an open question.

M. Garnelo, Wojciech M. Czarnecki · 1 citation
Jul 2026

The Model Knows Your Project, Not You: Measuring Recognition in LLMs with NameRank

NameRank, a [0,1] recognition score, is built: recognition is paid to named, indexable artifacts, not to credentials or titles, because recognition attaches to the artifact's own distinctive name, not to the roster behind it.

Bojie Li, Noah Shi · 0 citations
Conference Open access May 2026

FormulaSPIN: Self-Play Fine-Tuning for Natural Language to Spreadsheet Formula Generation

This paper introduces FORMULASPIN, a self-play framework that breaks the ceiling of supervised fine-tuning by enabling iterative self-improvement without any additional data, and underscores self-play's potential to tackle scarce data tasks and open the door to extending it beyond executable domains.

Cy Xie · 0 citations
Review Jul 2026

Instruction-Tuned Language Models Cannot Sample from Distributions They Can Describe

For applications that require per-persona outputs, the same model that cannot sample from a distribution can describe it accurately in a single call, and is proposed Prompt-Perturbed Argyle (PPA), which reduces the same error by 21% at no added cost.

Chaemi Jang, Dong-Man Lee, Ji Hee Kim · 0 citations
Jul 2026

Structured Output Collapses Answer Diversity Across 44 Language Models

When a language model must choose one answer from a large space of equally valid options, a format clause --"Reply with JSON only"-- changes which answer it chooses, and structured output is how software consumes language models.

Tapan Parikh · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

How Much Does a Reasoning Summary Reveal? An Observability Ladder for Large Language Models

An observability ladder is introduced that holds each completed run fixed and varies only what a reader inspects to judge whether the answer is correct: the response, a self-summary the model writes from the trace, the trace itself, and internal signals, each with and without the prompt.

A. Algaba, Francesca Carlon, Lynn Delcon et al. · 0 citations

Related blog posts

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 12, 2026

Simulating student learning for better AI tutoring

StudentSim is a research system for evaluating and improving AI tutoring tools before they are tested with learners. It models how individuals may engage with tutors, giving feedback to improve tutor performance across subjects like chess, writing, and mathematics. The post Simulating student learning for better AI tutoring appeared first on Microsoft Research.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.