The quadratic growth of attention computation and key-value (KV) cache with respect to sequence length is a central bottleneck for ultra-long-context language models and high-resolution generative models. We propose ProxyFormer, a general dual-stream architecture built upon proxy tokens. In each layer, fine-grained local features are compressed bottom-up into a small set of proxy states; expensive global interactions are performed only in the compressed proxy space; the globally contextualized proxies are then decompressed and injected top-down back into the local stream. Because the local stream persists across layers, fine-grained information that is not captured by one compression step remains accessible for later refinement, alleviating the irreversible information loss of conventional one-shot compression. We further introduce factorized multi-level compression/decompression, layer-wise dynamic compression ratios, asymmetric dual embeddings, and a proxy-only KV-cache inference scheme. On a 16GB GPU with batch size 1, a standard decoder-only model can train sequences of only about 20K tokens, whereas ProxyFormer with a compression ratio of 64 extends the trainable sequence length to about 0.7M. A model trained with a 64K window retains 92%-95% retrieval accuracy on a multi-needle retrieval task with 1,048,576 tokens, and a model trained with an 8K window exceeds 94% accuracy when extrapolated to 256K tokens. Preliminary image-generation experiments demonstrate the feasibility of ProxyFormer for both pixel-space and latent-space flow matching.
When does multi-agent debate help data cleaning, and when does it hurt? Across three benchmarks, four model families, and over 6,000 task-condition pairs, we find debate's effect reverses sign: it degrades generation across all four models (-1.6 to -15.5pp) through critique-induced confusion (CIC), hallucinated Critic feedback that the Generator accepts uncritically, yet improves error detection (+27.4pp F1, d=1.0). We derive a debate benefit condition: debate helps when the probability of rescuing a wrong output (Critic verification odds weighted by fixability) exceeds the probability of destroying a correct one. A factorial experiment proves adversarial separation is essential: self-verification with identical tools fails, while a separate Critic with code-execution grounding and evidence-gated generation produces the first debate configuration to significantly exceed single-agent on a generative task (+5.3pp, p<0.05). The condition correctly predicts all nine task types and generalizes with zero false positives across 19 published comparisons in seven domains.