<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Debugging on Stack Research</title><link>https://stackresearch.org/tags/debugging/</link><description>Recent content in Debugging on Stack Research</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://stackresearch.org/tags/debugging/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Structural Debugging for Chain-of-Thought Graphs</title><link>https://stackresearch.org/research/trace-topology/</link><pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://stackresearch.org/research/trace-topology/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;When a program crashes, the stack trace does not explain the whole bug. It does something narrower and more useful: it shows where execution was, what called what, and which line broke.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When a language model&amp;rsquo;s reasoning goes wrong, the failure is usually harder to locate. The final answer may be fluent and wrong. The intermediate trace may drift quietly for a thousand tokens. There is often no structural map of what depended on what, and no obvious place to point and say: this is where the reasoning stopped holding together.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>