Model the Edit, Not the Image: Visual Autoregressive Editing from a Source-Centric Perspective

Next-scale visual autoregressive models (VARs) have emerged as a powerful generative paradigm, producing high-quality images through efficient coarse-to-fine prediction. However, their potential for text-guided image editing remains largely underexplored. Existing training-free VAR editing approaches often formulate editing as target-conditioned regeneration guided or constrained by the source image, and may rely on inversion, test-time optimization, attention control, or user-provided masks. This generation-centric formulation does not fully exploit the multiscale source representations provided by VARs and may introduce additional computation or intervention. We instead take a source-centric perspective on VAR editing, in which the encoded source image tokens serve as the primary visual state and the editing process focuses on condition-induced changes. Based on this perspective, we propose \textbf{EditMod}, which compares source- and target-conditioned predictions under a shared autoregressive context, treats their difference as a scale-wise editing direction, and applies it as a residual update to source tokens at selected scales. Experiments show that EditMod achieves leading source-image fidelity while maintaining strong text alignment, and completes end-to-end editing of a 1K image in only 1.57 seconds on a single A100 GPU without per-image preparation.

Not All Flips Are Conformity: Decomposing Stance Convergence in Multi-Agent LLM Debate

Multi-agent debate (MAD) is a promising strategy for improving LLM reasoning, but when agents converge on a shared answer, it is unclear whether that convergence reflects genuine deliberation or social compliance. We show that the conventional answer flip rate conflates three distinct mechanisms: spontaneous instability, stance-induced conformity, and reasoning-induced persuasion. Our three-source decomposition framework isolates each through controlled counterfactual conditions. In the primary MMLU-Pro setting, 37% of agent-question observations change under self-reflection alone, while robustness tests show substantial model-dependent instability across GPQA-Diamond and three model families; strict conformity is 29% in the primary setting and remains predominantly harmful across model replications (57-77% correct-to-wrong). A controlled information-gradient experiment reveals that even vacuous reasoning is associated with 20-39% error adoption among resistant agents, with reasoning-like presentation carrying substantial persuasive weight. Harmful conformity can be predicted from Round 0 features (AUC = 0.79), and risk-targeted intervention reduces it by 13.6 percentage points (p < 0.001). However, without correctness labels or self-reflection controls, reducing peer adoption does not improve accuracy, because harmful and beneficial influence cannot be distinguished.