Temperature Fragility and the Conditional Benefits of Truncation Sampling

Sampling plays an important role in long-form language-model reasoning. Over thousands of decoding steps, small changes in the candidate token set can compound into different reasoning trajectories, stability profiles, and final answers. Existing truncation methods such as top-$p$, min-$p$, and fixed top-$nσ$ sampling improve over unrestricted sampling, but they rely on fixed thresholds that cannot adapt to changes in entropy, task difficulty, training stage, or generation budget. We introduce Adaptive Nucleus Truncation Sampling (ANTS), which extends top-$nσ$ sampling from a fixed decoding rule into an adaptive rollout-control mechanism for long-form generation. ANTS selects standardized neighborhoods around the maximum logit before temperature scaling, adapts the truncation width using an entropy-conditioned controller, and retains a no-truncation fallback arm to stabilize training when truncation becomes unsafe. On a 33B-total / 4B-active sparse Mixture-of-Experts reasoning model, ANTS improves average performance over percentage-based benchmarks by +1.9, +3.8, and +5.2 points at 8K, 16K, and 32K generation budgets, respectively. The strongest gains appear on instruction following and mathematical reasoning, with IFBench improving by more than 10 points at 32K and AIME 2025 improving by 7 points. Code generation reveals an important budget interaction. On Codeforces, ANTS trails the baseline at 8K, but reverses this gap and substantially improves ELO at 16K and 32K. These results suggest that sampler design should be treated not just as a decoding hyperparameter, but as part of how we stabilize and scale long-budget reasoning.

High-temperature sampling is one of the primary mechanisms for increasing diversity in LLMs. Recent advances in truncation-based sampling techniques have helped mitigate drawbacks of high-temperature sampling such as neural text degeneration, thereby enabling greater diversity in LLM outputs without sacrificing coherence. However, increasing the entropy of the token probability distribution via high temperatures has also been shown to weaken model guardrails by reducing the model's refusal response in the presence of harmful prompts. Despite the potential benefits of high-temperature sampling and the importance of maintaining model safety, there is a lack of existing solutions for maintaining the refusal behavior of LLMs under a higher entropy regime. To address this gap, we systematically study how temperature influences refusal behavior in LLMs and propose an efficient sequential decoding approach which preserves a model's greedy decoding refusal response at high temperatures while incurring minimal additional latency. Through extensive experiments, we show that our approach preserves 91-99% of the greedy decoding refusal behavior across three benchmark datasets without compromising the model's high-temperature response for safe prompts. Our work demonstrates how refusal behavior can be maintained in an efficient manner for applications which require high-temperature sampling.

Modern LLM deployments often combine quantization with higher sampling temperatures to reduce cost, latency, or repetition, yet safety evaluations usually treat these as fixed implementation details. We test whether models that are safe at FP16 with greedy decoding remain safe after quantization and stochastic sampling, or whether the two factors amplify each other. We evaluate 8 instruction-tuned models from five families across 3 precisions and 6 temperatures, covering 144 configurations on 7 harmfulness benchmarks and generating about 2.0 million responses, which are scored by a six-judge safety ensemble. Contrary to concerns that low-bit deployment erodes alignment, we find that standard quantization is approximately safety-neutral: for 7 of 8 models, AWQ INT4 keeps attack success within about 1.6 percentage points of FP16 or lowers it, with clear degradation only for SmolLM3-3B (34.5% to 44.1%). However, the larger risk comes from sampling: higher temperatures sharply increase decision instability, with DFR reaching 41.9% at T = 1.0, even when average ASR changes only modestly. The two factors do not compound: our Compound Degradation Index remains sub-additive (-0.071 to +0.018), indicating that quantization partially offsets rather than amplifies temperature-induced degradation. Finally, a per-benchmark breakdown shows that single-benchmark evaluation badly understates risk: several models scoring 0% on AdvBench exceed 80% on ManyHarm. Standard INT4/INT8 quantization can therefore be reasonable for well-aligned models, but safety claims should report multi-sample stability across multiple benchmarks rather than rely on a single benchmark at greedy decoding.