Repair, Not Improvement: Decomposing Constrained Decoding in Tool-Call Abstention
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Computation and Language
Title:Repair, Not Improvement: Decomposing Constrained Decoding in Tool-Call Abstention
Abstract:Function calling is what the recent accounting of constrained generation explicitly sets aside: it finds the decoder's contribution small for format constraints, then warns in its Section 7 against extrapolating where a constraint encodes a correctness requirement, and names function calling as one. Tool abstention is that case at its sharpest: an enum leaves the wording of an answer alone and narrows the set of answers there are, and declining to call anything is the first it drops. We measure the excluded case. Three conditions over one byte-identical prompt separate a grammar's two jobs: it fixes where generation stops as well as which tokens may be emitted. We evaluate open-weight models from 0.6B to 4B on matched English and Korean items, so the language comparison is made within item. Against an unconstrained decoder, prior work's contrast is negative on abstention in four of six cells with intervals excluding zero, worst -29.5 points, and positive with an interval excluding zero in none. The total is a sum with opposite signs: on the smallest model in Korean the stop token costs -20.0, the enum returns +19.5, and the two leave -0.5. What it recovers is form: of 698 abstentions repaired, 545 had no readable answer and 0 were judgements the scorer refused. On tool-needed items it is positive throughout; abstention leads because it is the preregistered measure, and the pooled number being kinder to the intervention makes moving to it worse rather than better. Both preregistered language claims fail.
| Comments: | 24 pages, 4 figures, 17 tables |
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2608.13959 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2608.13959v1 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.13959
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language
-
Recipes for Steering and Scaling LLMs via Sampling
Aug 28
-
Can a Model Catch Its Own Hallucinations for Free?: Label-Free Doubt Signals Hold Their Own Against a Labelled Dataset for Abstention
Aug 28
-
FIRSTPASS: A Multi-Domain, Multi-Round Peer Review Dataset Grounded in Real Editorial Outcomes
Aug 28
-
Interpretable, Fairly Evaluated Automated L2 Speaking Assessment that Beats the Single-Human Ceiling and Why Pause Encoding Does Not Change LLM Fluency Scores
Aug 28
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.