<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>SpiralThinker: Latent Reasoning through an Iterative Process with Text-Latent Interleaving · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2511.08983/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2511.08983/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>SpiralThinker: Latent Reasoning through an Iterative Process with Text-Latent Interleaving — mentioned by ianjbutler</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49474824</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2511.08983:49474824</guid><pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2026 05:52:02 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; These researchers wanted methods based on human input to win and were disappointed when they did not.[1] This was/is basically a strawman though. Like maybe &amp;quot;human input winning&amp;quot; was desirable for chess masters but for computer science wonks? Not the point or the disappoint. It&amp;#x27;s always neats and scruffies fighting about using some kind of recognizable method (logic) instead of magic (ML). &amp;gt; breakthrough progress eventually arrives by an opposing approach based on scaling computation by search and learning. More to OP&amp;#x27;s point I think: nowadays when someone wants to beat you over the head…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2511.08983/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CL</category></item></channel></rss>
