Gowda, Tejaswi · Oct 28, 2026
arXiv: Decompose, Don't Expand: Capability-Independent AI Systems by Construction
Markdown · JSON · Original source
Tejaswi Gowda argues that when a task is too hard for a model, developers should often separate the parts that can be solved deterministically, leaving the model only the part that genuinely requires generation. Gowda calls the resulting property “parity by construction”: on tasks handled by the host rather than the model, performance does not depend on which model is used. In the paper’s measured domain, operation selection scored identically across nine models after the host resolved the context; selector resolution did so for eight of nine. Labelling did not decompose and remained sensitive to model size. Gowda argues that this design can make a stock checkpoint sufficient, without task-specific training or . The paper also presents examples from physics setup, motion retargeting, object-model editing, and a Web-CLI tool family. These examples illustrate the proposed design discipline, but are not independent replications. How well does the approach generalize beyond the one domain measured in the paper?
Headline and summary by Escape Meridian, prepared by Luna from the attributed source. A source check is not independent confirmation of the source’s claims.
Original source
cs.AI · Article
Source details
Original source date: Oct 28, 2026 (2026-10-28).
Date basis: Date basis not provided.
Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-13T03:36:31.941Z. First observed: 2026-10-30T06:45:39.497Z. Retrieved: 2026-10-31T04:46:30.092Z.
Referenced by
Recorded citations and public file attachments. A reference alone does not establish agreement or influence.
No public references recorded here yet.
Limits
The measured results cover one domain; the other examples are illustrative, not measured results. The Web-CLI examples come from the same author and are not an independent replication. The supplied evidence is the paper’s abstract, so it does not provide detailed methods or results for assessing the evaluations.
Open question
How well does the approach generalize beyond the one domain measured in the paper?
Source-stated
Gowda argues that many tasks delegated whole to a model contain deterministic parts that can be handled separately, leaving a smaller generative core for the model.
many tasks commonly delegated whole to a model are in fact deterministic tasks with a small generative core
Source-stated
Gowda calls it parity by construction when performance on extracted sub-tasks no longer varies with model size because the model does not perform those tasks.
on the extracted sub-tasks the model-size performance curve becomes flat, because no model performs them at all
Source-stated
In the measured domain, operation selection scored identically across nine models after the host resolved the context, and selector resolution did so for eight of nine.
once the host resolves the context, operation selection scores identically for all nine models and selector resolution for eight of nine
Source-stated
Labelling did not decompose and remained sensitive to model size across the same range.
the one task that does not decompose, labelling, remains sloped across the same range
Source-stated
Gowda presents examples across several domains, while noting the Web-CLI tool family is not an independent replication.
we show the same move recurring across physics setup, motion retargeting, and object-model editing, and in a Web-CLI tool family (same author, so not an independent replication).
Source and contributor context
Gowda, Tejaswi · Article author
These are credits stated by the source; they do not establish a profile match or authorship of every passage.
Source media
No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction.
Terms and references
Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement.
Fine-tuning
Further training of an existing model to adapt it to a particular task or use.
arXiv
arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Editorial provenance
Version 1. Publication ID: 12106d6f-eb76-4803-8d33-fc4463f474d5.
Prepared by gpt-6-luna; grounding review by gpt-6-luna.
Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-13T03:36:31.941Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true.
Editorial selection: accept; reasons: material_development.
Observation: b2e86e173217baead46ebadf96d054e7279ff2cabf4441d57e1269a15b17e837. Source text hash: 2adcec146097d80fcd6af1674a42582fcf97d042af901d890f4b4de9bff18e91.
Revision and source-check history
Version 1 · 2026-11-13T03:36:31.941Z
arXiv: Decompose, Don't Expand: Capability-Independent AI Systems by Construction
Tejaswi Gowda argues that when a task is too hard for a model, developers should often separate the parts that can be solved deterministically, leaving the model only the part that genuinely requires generation. Gowda calls the resulting property “parity by construction”: on tasks handled by the host rather than the model, performance does not depend on which model is used. In the paper’s measured domain, operation selection scored identically across nine models after the host resolved the context; selector resolution did so for eight of nine. Labelling did not decompose and remained sensitive to model size. Gowda argues that this design can make a stock checkpoint sufficient, without task-specific training or . The paper also presents examples from physics setup, motion retargeting, object-model editing, and a Web-CLI tool family. These examples illustrate the proposed design discipline, but are not independent replications. How well does the approach generalize beyond the one domain measured in the paper?
Original source
cs.AI · Article
Source details
Original source date: Oct 28, 2026 (2026-10-28).
Date basis: Date basis not provided.
Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-13T03:36:31.941Z. First observed: 2026-10-30T06:45:39.497Z. Retrieved: 2026-10-31T04:46:30.092Z.
Limits
The measured results cover one domain; the other examples are illustrative, not measured results. The Web-CLI examples come from the same author and are not an independent replication. The supplied evidence is the paper’s abstract, so it does not provide detailed methods or results for assessing the evaluations.
Open question
How well does the approach generalize beyond the one domain measured in the paper?
Source-stated
Gowda argues that many tasks delegated whole to a model contain deterministic parts that can be handled separately, leaving a smaller generative core for the model.
many tasks commonly delegated whole to a model are in fact deterministic tasks with a small generative core
Source-stated
Gowda calls it parity by construction when performance on extracted sub-tasks no longer varies with model size because the model does not perform those tasks.
on the extracted sub-tasks the model-size performance curve becomes flat, because no model performs them at all
Source-stated
In the measured domain, operation selection scored identically across nine models after the host resolved the context, and selector resolution did so for eight of nine.
once the host resolves the context, operation selection scores identically for all nine models and selector resolution for eight of nine
Source-stated
Labelling did not decompose and remained sensitive to model size across the same range.
the one task that does not decompose, labelling, remains sloped across the same range
Source-stated
Gowda presents examples across several domains, while noting the Web-CLI tool family is not an independent replication.
we show the same move recurring across physics setup, motion retargeting, and object-model editing, and in a Web-CLI tool family (same author, so not an independent replication).
Source and contributor context
Gowda, Tejaswi · Article author
These are credits stated by the source; they do not establish a profile match or authorship of every passage.
Source media
No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction.
Terms and references
Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement.
Fine-tuning
Further training of an existing model to adapt it to a particular task or use.
arXiv
arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Editorial provenance
Version 1. Publication ID: 12106d6f-eb76-4803-8d33-fc4463f474d5.
Prepared by gpt-6-luna; grounding review by gpt-6-luna.
Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-13T03:36:31.941Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true.
Editorial selection: accept; reasons: material_development.
Observation: b2e86e173217baead46ebadf96d054e7279ff2cabf4441d57e1269a15b17e837. Source text hash: 2adcec146097d80fcd6af1674a42582fcf97d042af901d890f4b4de9bff18e91.
uncertain · 2026-11-13T03:36:31.941Z · anthropic/claude-opus-5.5
Publication: 12106d6f-eb76-4803-8d33-fc4463f474d5
attribution — pass: The paper is correctly attributed to Tejaswi Gowda, and the reading frames its claims as the author's arguments and results rather than as established facts.
Authors:Tejaswi Gowda
summary — uncertain: The reading tracks the abstract's three claims, but central terms go unexplained for a non-specialist. 'The host' (the non-model software that takes over extracted sub-tasks) is never introduced. 'Deterministic', 'stock checkpoint', 'fine-tuning', 'operation selection' and 'selector resolution' are also undefined. The measured domain is unnamed, though the abstract does not name it either. Smallest repair: briefly define host, deterministic and stock checkpoint, or add tooltips for them.
extract the parts that admit a deterministic solution to a host, leaving the model only the irreducibly fuzzy residue
date — pass: originalPublished 2026-10-28 matches the v1 submission date. The later feed date was correctly not used.
[Submitted on 28 Oct 2026]
support — pass: The claims match the abstract: the flat curves for operation selection (nine of nine) and selector resolution (eight of nine), the sloped curve for labelling, the stock-checkpoint argument, and the one-domain-measured limitation. Calling the other examples illustrative rather than independent replications is consistent with the abstract's measured-versus-illustrative distinction. The question follows from that stated scope.
are explicit about what is measured (one domain) versus illustrative (the rest)
media — pass: The selected media is the verified arXiv abstract page for this paper, which is the direct original source.
Challenge or correct this reading
Send a correction or an opposing source with this reading’s URL. Disagreement and uncertainty can remain unresolved.
Further training of an existing model to adapt it to a particular task or use.
Definition referencearXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXivFurther training of an existing model to adapt it to a particular task or use.
Definition referencearXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXiv