📊 ArXiv 研究报告 (2026-04-23)
生成时间: 2026-04-23 08:52:04 数据源: ArXiv
📌 配置信息
关键词列表(共 27 个,总权重 27.0)
| 关键词 | 权重 | 类型 |
|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 主要 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 主要 |
评分设置
- 每个关键词最大分: 15
- 及格分公式: 5.0 + 0.8 × 总权重
- 当前及格分: 26.6
📈 论文统计
- 总抓取: 334 篇
- 及格论文: 0 篇 (0.0%)
📋 所有论文列表
1. ❌ UniT: Toward a Unified Physical Language for Human-to-Humanoid Policy Learning and World Modeling
作者: Boyu Chen, Yi Chen, Lu Qiu, Jerry Bai, Yuying Ge, Yixiao Ge 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19734v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Scaling humanoid foundation models is bottlenecked by the scarcity of robotic data. While massive egocentric human data offers a scalable alternative, bridging the cross-embodiment chasm remains a fundamental challenge due to kinematic mismatches. We introduce UniT (Unified Latent Action Tokenizer via Visual Anchoring), a framework that establishes a unified physical language for human-to-humanoid transfer. Grounded in the philosophy that heterogeneous kinematics share universal visual consequences, UniT employs a tri-branch cross-reconstruction mechanism: actions predict vision to anchor kinematics to physical outcomes, while vision reconstructs actions to filter out irrelevant visual confounders. Concurrently, a fusion branch synergies these purified modalities into a shared discrete latent space of embodiment-agnostic physical intents. We validate UniT across two paradigms: 1) Policy Learning (VLA-UniT): By predicting these unified tokens, it effectively leverages diverse human data to achieve state-of-the-art data efficiency and robust out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization on both humanoid simulation benchmark and real-world deployments, notably demonstrating zero-shot task transfer. 2) World Modeling (WM-UniT): By aligning cross-embodiment dynamics via unified tokens as conditions, it realizes direct human-to-humanoid action transfer. This alignment ensures that human data seamlessly translates into enhanced action controllability for humanoid video generation. Ultimately, by inducing a highly aligned cross-embodiment representation (empirically verified by t-SNE visualizations revealing the convergence of human and humanoid features into a shared manifold), UniT offers a scalable path to distill vast human knowledge into general-purpose humanoid capabilities.
2. ❌ FASTER: Value-Guided Sampling for Fast RL
作者: Perry Dong, Alexander Swerdlow, Dorsa Sadigh, Chelsea Finn 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19730v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Some of the most performant reinforcement learning algorithms today can be prohibitively expensive as they use test-time scaling methods such as sampling multiple action candidates and selecting the best one. In this work, we propose FASTER, a method for getting the benefits of sampling-based test-time scaling of diffusion-based policies without the computational cost by tracing the performance gain of action samples back to earlier in the denoising process. Our key insight is that we can model the denoising of multiple action candidates and selecting the best one as a Markov Decision Process (MDP) where the goal is to progressively filter action candidates before denoising is complete. With this MDP, we can learn a policy and value function in the denoising space that predicts the downstream value of action candidates in the denoising process and filters them while maximizing returns. The result is a method that is lightweight and can be plugged into existing generative RL algorithms. Across challenging long-horizon manipulation tasks in online and batch-online RL, FASTER consistently improves the underlying policies and achieves the best overall performance among the compared methods. Applied to a pretrained VLA, FASTER achieves the same performance while substantially reducing training and inference compute requirements. Code is available at https://github.com/alexanderswerdlow/faster .
3. ❌ Generalization at the Edge of Stability
作者: Mario Tuci, Caner Korkmaz, Umut Şimşekli, Tolga Birdal 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19740v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Training modern neural networks often relies on large learning rates, operating at the edge of stability, where the optimization dynamics exhibit oscillatory and chaotic behavior. Empirically, this regime often yields improved generalization performance, yet the underlying mechanism remains poorly understood. In this work, we represent stochastic optimizers as random dynamical systems, which often converge to a fractal attractor set (rather than a point) with a smaller intrinsic dimension. Building on this connection and inspired by Lyapunov dimension theory, we introduce a novel notion of dimension, coined the `sharpness dimension’, and prove a generalization bound based on this dimension. Our results show that generalization in the chaotic regime depends on the complete Hessian spectrum and the structure of its partial determinants, highlighting a complexity that cannot be captured by the trace or spectral norm considered in prior work. Experiments across various MLPs and transformers validate our theory while also providing new insights into the recently observed phenomenon of grokking.
4. ❌ Benign Overfitting in Adversarial Training for Vision Transformers
作者: Jiaming Zhang, Meng Ding, Shaopeng Fu, Jingfeng Zhang, Di Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19724v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Despite the remarkable success of Vision Transformers (ViTs) across a wide range of vision tasks, recent studies have revealed that they remain vulnerable to adversarial examples, much like Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs). A common empirical defense strategy is adversarial training, yet the theoretical underpinnings of its robustness in ViTs remain largely unexplored. In this work, we present the first theoretical analysis of adversarial training under simplified ViT architectures. We show that, when trained under a signal-to-noise ratio that satisfies a certain condition and within a moderate perturbation budget, adversarial training enables ViTs to achieve nearly zero robust training loss and robust generalization error under certain regimes. Remarkably, this leads to strong generalization even in the presence of overfitting, a phenomenon known as \emph{benign overfitting}, previously only observed in CNNs (with adversarial training). Experiments on both synthetic and real-world datasets further validate our theoretical findings.
5. ❌ VLA Foundry: A Unified Framework for Training Vision-Language-Action Models
作者: Jean Mercat, Sedrick Keh, Kushal Arora, Isabella Huang, Paarth Shah, Haruki Nishimura, Shun Iwase, Katherine Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19728v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We present VLA Foundry, an open-source framework that unifies LLM, VLM, and VLA training in a single codebase. Most open-source VLA efforts specialize on the action training stage, often stitching together incompatible pretraining pipelines. VLA Foundry instead provides a shared training stack with end-to-end control, from language pretraining to action-expert fine-tuning. VLA Foundry supports both from-scratch training and pretrained backbones from Hugging Face. To demonstrate the utility of our framework, we train and release two types of models: the first trained fully from scratch through our LLM–>VLM–>VLA pipeline and the second built on the pretrained Qwen3-VL backbone. We evaluate closed-loop policy performance of both models on LBM Eval, an open-data, open-source simulator. We also contribute usability improvements to the simulator and the STEP analysis tools for easier public use. In the nominal evaluation setting, our fully-open from-scratch model is on par with our prior closed-source work and substituting in the Qwen3-VL backbone leads to a strong multi-task table top manipulation policy outperforming our baseline by a wide margin. The VLA Foundry codebase is available at https://github.com/TRI-ML/vla_foundry and all multi-task model weights are released on https://huggingface.co/collections/TRI-ML/vla-foundry. Additional qualitative videos are available on the project website https://tri-ml.github.io/vla_foundry.
6. ❌ Adaptive MSD-Splitting: Enhancing C4.5 and Random Forests for Skewed Continuous Attributes
作者: Jake Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19722v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The discretization of continuous numerical attributes remains a persistent computational bottleneck in the induction of decision trees, particularly as dataset dimensions scale. Building upon the recently proposed MSD-Splitting technique – which bins continuous data using the empirical mean and standard deviation to dramatically improve the efficiency and accuracy of the C4.5 algorithm – we introduce Adaptive MSD-Splitting (AMSD). While standard MSD-Splitting is highly effective for approximately symmetric distributions, its rigid adherence to fixed one-standard-deviation cutoffs can lead to catastrophic information loss in highly skewed data, a common artifact in real-world biomedical and financial datasets. AMSD addresses this by dynamically adjusting the standard deviation multiplier based on feature skewness, narrowing intervals in dense regions to preserve discriminative resolution. Furthermore, we integrate AMSD into ensemble methods, specifically presenting the Random Forest-AMSD (RF-AMSD) framework. Empirical evaluations on the Census Income, Heart Disease, Breast Cancer, and Forest Covertype datasets demonstrate that AMSD yields a 2-4% accuracy improvement over standard MSD-Splitting, while maintaining near-identical O(N) time complexity reductions compared to the O(N log N) exhaustive search. Our Random Forest extension achieves state-of-the-art accuracy at a fraction of standard computational costs, confirming the viability of adaptive statistical binning in large-scale ensemble learning architectures.
7. ❌ A-MAR: Agent-based Multimodal Art Retrieval for Fine-Grained Artwork Understanding
作者: Shuai Wang, Hongyi Zhu, Jia-Hong Huang, Yixian Shen, Chengxi Zeng, Stevan Rudinac, Monika Kackovic, Nachoem Wijnberg, Marcel Worring 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19689v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Understanding artworks requires multi-step reasoning over visual content and cultural, historical, and stylistic context. While recent multimodal large language models show promise in artwork explanation, they rely on implicit reasoning and internalized knowl- edge, limiting interpretability and explicit evidence grounding. We propose A-MAR, an Agent-based Multimodal Art Retrieval framework that explicitly conditions retrieval on structured reasoning plans. Given an artwork and a user query, A-MAR first decomposes the task into a structured reasoning plan that specifies the goals and evidence requirements for each step. Retrieval is then conditionedon this plan, enabling targeted evidence selection and supporting step-wise, grounded explanations. To evaluate agent-based multi- modal reasoning within the art domain, we introduce ArtCoT-QA. This diagnostic benchmark features multi-step reasoning chains for diverse art-related queries, enabling a granular analysis that extends beyond simple final answer accuracy. Experiments on SemArt and Artpedia show that A-MAR consistently outperforms static, non planned retrieval and strong MLLM baselines in final explanation quality, while evaluations on ArtCoT-QA further demonstrate its advantages in evidence grounding and multi-step reasoning ability. These results highlight the importance of reasoning-conditioned retrieval for knowledge-intensive multimodal understanding and position A-MAR as a step toward interpretable, goal-driven AI systems, with particular relevance to cultural industries. The code and data are available at: https://github.com/ShuaiWang97/A-MAR.
8. ❌ Multi-Cycle Spatio-Temporal Adaptation in Human-Robot Teaming
作者: Alex Cuellar, Michael Hagenow, Julie Shah 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19670v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Effective human-robot teaming is crucial for the practical deployment of robots in human workspaces. However, optimizing joint human-robot plans remains a challenge due to the difficulty of modeling individualized human capabilities and preferences. While prior research has leveraged the multi-cycle structure of domains like manufacturing to learn an individual’s tendencies and adapt plans over repeated interactions, these techniques typically consider task-level and motion-level adaptation in isolation. Task-level methods optimize allocation and scheduling but often ignore spatial interference in close-proximity scenarios; conversely, motion-level methods focus on collision avoidance while ignoring the broader task context. This paper introduces RAPIDDS, a framework that unifies these approaches by modeling an individual’s spatial behavior (motion paths) and temporal behavior (time required to complete tasks) over multiple cycles. RAPIDDS then jointly adapts task schedules and steers diffusion models of robot motions to maximize efficiency and minimize proximity accounting for these individualized models. We demonstrate the importance of this dual adaptation through an ablation study in simulation and a physical robot scenario using a 7-DOF robot arm. Finally, we present a user study (n=32) showing significant plan improvement compared to non-adaptive systems across both objective metrics, such as efficiency and proximity, and subjective measures, including fluency and user preference. See this paper’s companion video at: https://youtu.be/55Q3lq1fINs.
9. ❌ Learning Hybrid-Control Policies for High-Precision In-Contact Manipulation Under Uncertainty
作者: Hunter L. Brown, Geoffrey Hollinger, Stefan Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19677v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Reinforcement learning-based control policies have been frequently demonstrated to be more effective than analytical techniques for many manipulation tasks. Commonly, these methods learn neural control policies that predict end-effector pose changes directly from observed state information. For tasks like inserting delicate connectors which induce force constraints, pose-based policies have limited explicit control over force and rely on carefully tuned low-level controllers to avoid executing damaging actions. In this work, we present hybrid position-force control policies that learn to dynamically select when to use force or position control in each control dimension. To improve learning efficiency of these policies, we introduce Mode-Aware Training for Contact Handling (MATCH) which adjusts policy action probabilities to explicitly mirror the mode selection behavior in hybrid control. We validate MATCH’s learned policy effectiveness using fragile peg-in-hole tasks under extreme localization uncertainty. We find MATCH substantially outperforms pose-control policies – solving these tasks with up to 10% higher success rates and 5x fewer peg breaks than pose-only policies under common types of state estimation error. MATCH also demonstrates data efficiency equal to pose-control policies, despite learning in a larger and more complex action space. In over 1600 sim-to-real experiments, we find MATCH succeeds twice as often as pose policies in high noise settings (33% vs.~68%) and applies ~30% less force on average compared to variable impedance policies on a Franka FR3 in laboratory conditions.
10. ❌ An AI Agent Execution Environment to Safeguard User Data
作者: Robert Stanley, Avi Verma, Lillian Tsai, Konstantinos Kallas, Sam Kumar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19657v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
AI agents promise to serve as general-purpose personal assistants for their users, which requires them to have access to private user data (e.g., personal and financial information). This poses a serious risk to security and privacy. Adversaries may attack the AI model (e.g., via prompt injection) to exfiltrate user data. Furthermore, sharing private data with an AI agent requires users to trust a potentially unscrupulous or compromised AI model provider with their private data. This paper presents GAAP (Guaranteed Accounting for Agent Privacy), an execution environment for AI agents that guarantees confidentiality for private user data. Through dynamic and directed user prompts, GAAP collects permission specifications from users describing how their private data may be shared, and GAAP enforces that the agent’s disclosures of private user data, including disclosures to the AI model and its provider, comply with these specifications. Crucially, GAAP provides this guarantee deterministically, without trusting the agent with private user data, and without requiring any AI model or the user prompt to be free of attacks. GAAP enforces the user’s permission specification by tracking how the AI agent accesses and uses private user data. It augments Information Flow Control with novel persistent data stores and annotations that enable it to track the flow of private information both across execution steps within a single task, and also over multiple tasks separated in time. Our evaluation confirms that GAAP blocks all data disclosure attacks, including those that make other state-of-the-art systems disclose private user data to untrusted parties, without a significant impact on agent utility.
11. ❌ Chat2Workflow: A Benchmark for Generating Executable Visual Workflows with Natural Language
作者: Yi Zhong, Buqiang Xu, Yijun Wang, Zifei Shan, Shuofei Qiao, Guozhou Zheng, Ningyu Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19667v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
At present, executable visual workflows have emerged as a mainstream paradigm in real-world industrial deployments, offering strong reliability and controllability. However, in current practice, such workflows are almost entirely constructed through manual engineering: developers must carefully design workflows, write prompts for each step, and repeatedly revise the logic as requirements evolve-making development costly, time-consuming, and error-prone. To study whether large language models can automate this multi-round interaction process, we introduce Chat2Workflow, a benchmark for generating executable visual workflows directly from natural language, and propose a robust agentic framework to mitigate recurrent execution errors. Chat2Workflow is built from a large collection of real-world business workflows, with each instance designed so that the generated workflow can be transformed and directly deployed to practical workflow platforms such as Dify and Coze. Experimental results show that while state-of-the-art language models can often capture high-level intent, they struggle to generate correct, stable, and executable workflows, especially under complex or changing requirements. Although our agentic framework yields up to 5.34% resolve rate gains, the remaining real-world gap positions Chat2Workflow as a foundation for advancing industrial-grade automation. Code is available at https://github.com/zjunlp/Chat2Workflow.
12. ❌ A Dual Perspective on Synthetic Trajectory Generators: Utility Framework and Privacy Vulnerabilities
作者: Aya Cherigui, Florent Guépin, Arnaud Legendre, Jean-François Couchot 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19653v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Human mobility data are used in numerous applications, ranging from public health to urban planning. Human mobility is inherently sensitive, as it can contain information such as religious beliefs and political affiliations. Historically, it has been proposed to modify the information using techniques such as aggregation, obfuscation, or noise addition, to adequately protect privacy and eliminate concerns. As these methods come at a great cost in utility, new methods leveraging development in generative models, were introduced. The extent to which such methods answer the privacy-utility trade-off remains an open problem. In this paper, we introduced a first step towards solving it, by the introduction and application of a new framework for utility evaluation. Furthermore, we provide evidence that privacy evaluation remains a great challenge to consider and that it should be tackled through adversarial evaluation in accordance with the current EU regulation. We propose a new membership inference attack against a subcategory of generative models, even though this subcategory was deemed private due to its resistance over the trajectory user-linking problem.
13. ❌ Environmental Sound Deepfake Detection Using Deep-Learning Framework
作者: Lam Pham, Khoi Vu, Dat Tran, Phat Lam, Vu Nguyen, David Fischinger, Alexander Schindler, Martin Boyer, Son Le 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19652v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
In this paper, we propose a deep-learning framework for environmental sound deepfake detection (ESDD) – the task of identifying whether the sound scene and sound event in an input audio recording is fake or not. To this end, we conducted extensive experiments to explore how individual spectrograms, a wide range of network architectures and pre-trained models, ensemble of spectrograms or network architectures affect the ESDD task performance. The experimental results on the benchmark datasets of EnvSDD and ESDD-Challenge-TestSet indicate that detecting deepfake audio of sound scene and detecting deepfake audio of sound event should be considered as individual tasks. We also indicate that the approach of finetuning a pre-trained model is more effective compared with training a model from scratch for the ESDD task. Eventually, our best model, which was finetuned from the pre-trained WavLM model with the proposed three-stage training strategy, achieve the Accuracy of 0.98, F1 Score of 0.95, AuC of 0.99 on EnvSDD Test subset and the Accuracy of 0.88, F1 Score of 0.77, and AuC of 0.92 on ESDD-Challenge-TestSet dataset.
14. ❌ Safety-Critical Contextual Control via Online Riemannian Optimization with World Models
作者: Tongxin Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19639v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Modern world models are becoming too complex to admit explicit dynamical descriptions. We study safety-critical contextual control, where a Planner must optimize a task objective using only feasibility samples from a black-box Simulator, conditioned on a context signal $ξ_t$. We develop a sample-based Penalized Predictive Control (PPC) framework grounded in online Riemannian optimization, in which the Simulator compresses the feasibility manifold into a score-based density $\hat{p}(u \mid ξ_t)$ that endows the action space with a Riemannian geometry guiding the Planner’s gradient descent. The barrier curvature $κ(ξ_t)$, the minimum curvature of the conditional log-density $-\ln\hat{p}(\cdot\midξ_t)$, governs both convergence rate and safety margin, replacing the Lipschitz constant of the unknown dynamics. Our main result is a contextual safety bound showing that the distance from the true feasibility manifold is controlled by the score estimation error and a ratio that depends on $κ(ξ_t)$, both of which improve with richer context. Simulations on a dynamic navigation task confirm that contextual PPC substantially outperforms marginal and frozen density models, with the advantage growing after environment shifts.
15. ❌ CoCo-SAM3: Harnessing Concept Conflict in Open-Vocabulary Semantic Segmentation
作者: Yanhui Chen, Baoyao Yang, Siqi Liu, Jingchao Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19648v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
SAM3 advances open-vocabulary semantic segmentation by introducing a prompt-driven mask generation paradigm. However, in multi-class open-vocabulary scenarios, masks generated independently from different category prompts lack a unified and inter-class comparable evidence scale, often resulting in overlapping coverage and unstable competition. Moreover, synonymous expressions of the same concept tend to activate inconsistent semantic and spatial evidence, leading to intra-class drift that exacerbates inter-class conflicts and compromises overall inference stability. To address these issues, we propose CoCo-SAM3 (Concept-Conflict SAM3), which explicitly decouples inference into intra-class enhancement and inter-class competition. Our method first aligns and aggregates evidence from synonymous prompts to strengthen concept consistency. It then performs inter-class competition on a unified comparable scale, enabling direct pixel-wise comparisons among all candidate classes. This mechanism stabilizes multi-class inference and effectively mitigates inter-class conflicts. Without requiring any additional training, CoCo-SAM3 achieves consistent improvements across eight open-vocabulary semantic segmentation benchmarks.
16. ❌ Towards Streaming Target Speaker Extraction via Chunk-wise Interleaved Splicing of Autoregressive Language Model
作者: Shuhai Peng, Hui Lu, Jinjiang Liu, Liyang Chen, Guiping Zhong, Jiakui Li, Huimeng Wang, Haiyun Li, Liang Cao, Shiyin Kang, Zhiyong Wu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19635v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
While generative models have set new benchmarks for Target Speaker Extraction (TSE), their inherent reliance on global context precludes deployment in real-time applications. Direct adaptation to streaming scenarios often leads to catastrophic inference performance degradation due to the severe mismatch between training and streaming inference. To bridge this gap, we present the first autoregressive (AR) models tailored for streaming TSE. Our approach introduces a Chunk-wise Interleaved Splicing Paradigm that ensures highly efficient and stable streaming inference. To ensure the coherence between the extracted speech segments, we design a historical context refinement mechanism that mitigates boundary discontinuities by leveraging historical information. Experiments on Libri2Mix show that while AR generative baseline exhibits performance degradation at low latencies, our approach maintains 100% stability and superior intelligibility. Furthermore, our streaming results are comparable to or even surpass offline baselines. Additionally, our model achieves a Real-Time-Factor (RTF) of 0.248 on consumer-level GPUs. This work provides empirical evidence that AR generative backbones are viable for latency-sensitive applications through the Chunk-wise Interleaved Splicing Paradigm.
17. ❌ SafetyALFRED: Evaluating Safety-Conscious Planning of Multimodal Large Language Models
作者: Josue Torres-Fonseca, Naihao Deng, Yinpei Dai, Shane Storks, Yichi Zhang, Rada Mihalcea, Casey Kennington, Joyce Chai 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19638v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Multimodal Large Language Models are increasingly adopted as autonomous agents in interactive environments, yet their ability to proactively address safety hazards remains insufficient. We introduce SafetyALFRED, built upon the embodied agent benchmark ALFRED, augmented with six categories of real-world kitchen hazards. While existing safety evaluations focus on hazard recognition through disembodied question answering (QA) settings, we evaluate eleven state-of-the-art models from the Qwen, Gemma, and Gemini families on not only hazard recognition, but also active risk mitigation through embodied planning. Our experimental results reveal a significant alignment gap: while models can accurately recognize hazards in QA settings, average mitigation success rates for these hazards are low in comparison. Our findings demonstrate that static evaluations through QA are insufficient for physical safety, thus we advocate for a paradigm shift toward benchmarks that prioritize corrective actions in embodied contexts. We open-source our code and dataset under https://github.com/sled-group/SafetyALFRED.git
18. ❌ Time Series Augmented Generation for Financial Applications
作者: Anton Kolonin, Alexey Glushchenko, Evgeny Bochkov, Abhishek Saxena 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19633v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Evaluating the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) for complex, quantitative financial tasks is a critical and unsolved challenge. Standard benchmarks often fail to isolate an agent’s core ability to parse queries and orchestrate computations. To address this, we introduce a novel evaluation methodology and benchmark designed to rigorously measure an LLM agent’s reasoning for financial time-series analysis. We apply this methodology in a large-scale empirical study using our framework, Time Series Augmented Generation (TSAG), where an LLM agent delegates quantitative tasks to verifiable, external tools. Our benchmark, consisting of 100 financial questions, is used to compare multiple SOTA agents (e.g., GPT-4o, Llama 3, Qwen2) on metrics assessing tool selection accuracy, faithfulness, and hallucination. The results demonstrate that capable agents can achieve near-perfect tool-use accuracy with minimal hallucination, validating the tool-augmented paradigm. Our primary contribution is this evaluation framework and the corresponding empirical insights into agent performance, which we release publicly to foster standardized research on reliable financial AI.
19. ❌ AblateCell: A Reproduce-then-Ablate Agent for Virtual Cell Repositories
作者: Xue Xia, Chengkai Yao, Mingyu Tsoi, Xinjie Mao, Wenxuan Huang, Jiaqi Wei, Hao Wu, Cheng Tan, Lang Yu, Yuejin Yang, Siqi Sun, Zhangyang Gao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19606v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Systematic ablations are essential to attribute performance gains in AI Virtual Cells, yet they are rarely performed because biological repositories are under-standardized and tightly coupled to domain-specific data and formats. While recent coding agents can translate ideas into implementations, they typically stop at producing code and lack a verifier that can reproduce strong baselines and rigorously test which components truly matter. We introduce AblateCell, a reproduce-then-ablate agent for virtual cell repositories that closes this verification gap. AblateCell first reproduces reported baselines end-to-end by auto-configuring environments, resolving dependency and data issues, and rerunning official evaluations while emitting verifiable artifacts. It then conducts closed-loop ablation by generating a graph of isolated repository mutations and adaptively selecting experiments under a reward that trades off performance impact and execution cost. Evaluated on three single-cell perturbation prediction repositories (CPA, GEARS, BioLORD), AblateCell achieves 88.9% (+29.9% to human expert) end-to-end workflow success and 93.3% (+53.3% to heuristic) accuracy in recovering ground-truth critical components. These results enable scalable, repository-grounded verification and attribution directly on biological codebases.
20. ❌ Cross-Model Consistency of AI-Generated Exercise Prescriptions: A Repeated Generation Study Across Three Large Language Models
作者: Kihyuk Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19598v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This study compared repeated generation consistency of exercise prescription outputs across three large language models (LLMs), specifically GPT-4.1, Claude Sonnet 4.6, and Gemini 2.5 Flash, under temperature=0 conditions. Each model generated prescriptions for six clinical scenarios 20 times, yielding 360 total outputs analyzed across four dimensions: semantic similarity, output reproducibility, FITT classification, and safety expression. Mean semantic similarity was highest for GPT-4.1 (0.955), followed by Gemini 2.5 Flash (0.950) and Claude Sonnet 4.6 (0.903), with significant inter-model differences confirmed (H = 458.41, p < .001). Critically, these scores reflected fundamentally different generative behaviors: GPT-4.1 produced entirely unique outputs (100%) with stable semantic content, while Gemini 2.5 Flash showed pronounced output repetition (27.5% unique outputs), indicating that its high similarity score derived from text duplication rather than consistent reasoning. Identical decoding settings thus yielded fundamentally different consistency profiles, a distinction that single-output evaluations cannot capture. Safety expression reached ceiling levels across all models, confirming its limited utility as a differentiating metric. These results indicate that model selection constitutes a clinical rather than merely technical decision, and that output behavior under repeated generation conditions should be treated as a core criterion for reliable deployment of LLM-based exercise prescription systems.
21. ❌ RoLegalGEC: Legal Domain Grammatical Error Detection and Correction Dataset for Romanian
作者: Mircea Timpuriu, Dumitru-Clementin Cercel 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19593v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The importance of clear and correct text in legal documents cannot be understated, and, consequently, a grammatical error correction tool meant to assist a professional in the law must have the ability to understand the possible errors in the context of a legal environment, correcting them accordingly, and implicitly needs to be trained in the same environment, using realistic legal data. However, the manually annotated data required by such a process is in short supply for languages such as Romanian, much less for a niche domain. The most common approach is the synthetic generation of parallel data; however, it requires a structured understanding of the Romanian grammar. In this paper, we introduce, to our knowledge, the first Romanian-language parallel dataset for the detection and correction of grammatical errors in the legal domain, RoLegalGEC, which aggregates 350,000 examples of errors in legal passages, along with error annotations. Moreover, we evaluate several neural network models that transform the dataset into a valuable tool for both detecting and correcting grammatical errors, including knowledge-distillation Transformers, sequence tagging architectures for detection, and a variety of pre-trained text-to-text Transformer models for correction. We consider that the set of models, together with the novel RoLegalGEC dataset, will enrich the resource base for further research on Romanian.
22. ❌ Lyapunov-Certified Direct Switching Theory for Q-Learning
作者: Donghwan Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19569v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Q-learning is one of the most fundamental algorithms in reinforcement learning. We analyze constant-stepsize Q-learning through a direct stochastic switching system representation. The key observation is that the Bellman maximization error can be represented exactly by a stochastic policy. Therefore, the Q-learning error admits a switched linear conditional-mean recursion with martingale-difference noise. The intrinsic drift rate is the joint spectral radius (JSR) of the direct switching family, which can be strictly smaller than the standard row-sum rate. Using this representation, we derive a finite-time final-iterate bound via a JSR-induced Lyapunov function and then give a computable quadratic-certificate version.
23. ❌ Impact of large language models on peer review opinions from a fine-grained perspective: Evidence from top conference proceedings in AI
作者: Wenqing Wu, Chengzhi Zhang, Yi Zhao, Tong Bao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19578v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
With the rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs), the academic community has faced unprecedented disruptions, particularly in the realm of academic communication. The primary function of peer review is improving the quality of academic manuscripts, such as clarity, originality and other evaluation aspects. Although prior studies suggest that LLMs are beginning to influence peer review, it remains unclear whether they are altering its core evaluative functions. Moreover, the extent to which LLMs affect the linguistic form, evaluative focus, and recommendation-related signals of peer-review reports has yet to be systematically examined. In this study, we examine the changes in peer review reports for academic articles following the emergence of LLMs, emphasizing variations at fine-grained level. Specifically, we investigate linguistic features such as the length and complexity of words and sentences in review comments, while also automatically annotating the evaluation aspects of individual review sentences. We also use a maximum likelihood estimation method, previously established, to identify review reports that potentially have modified or generated by LLMs. Finally, we assess the impact of evaluation aspects mentioned in LLM-assisted review reports on the informativeness of recommendation for paper decision-making. The results indicate that following the emergence of LLMs, peer review texts have become longer and more fluent, with increased emphasis on summaries and surface-level clarity, as well as more standardized linguistic patterns, particularly reviewers with lower confidence score. At the same time, attention to deeper evaluative dimensions, such as originality, replicability, and nuanced critical reasoning, has declined.
24. ❌ Multi-modal Reasoning with LLMs for Visual Semantic Arithmetic
作者: Chuou Xu, Liya Ji, Qifeng Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19567v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Reinforcement learning (RL) as post-training is crucial for enhancing the reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs) in coding and math. However, their capacity for visual semantic arithmetic, inferring relationships from images, remains underexplored. The classic text analogy “king”-“man”+“woman” = “queen” illustrates relational reasoning, yet replacing text with images of “king” and “man” significantly reduces performance because it requires commonsense knowledge and the extraction of concise concepts from irrelevant visual details. This capability is important for service and domestic robotics in unstructured environments, where robots must infer semantic relationships among objects, agents, and actions. In a kitchen, recognizing from images that “powder” and “cake” are related by “is made of” grounds symbolic relations in perception, enabling tool substitution, task generalization, and improved semantic reasoning. Prior work approaches semantic arithmetic by decoding image features after vector arithmetic, but suffers from modality gaps and lacks systematic evaluation. In this paper, we formulate two novel tasks, two-term subtraction and three-term operations, and construct the Image-Relation-Pair Dataset (IRPD) for benchmarking. We further propose Semantic Arithmetic Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (SAri-RFT), which post-trains large vision-language models (LVLMs) using a verifiable function and Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). Our method achieves state-of-the-art results on IRPD and the real-world Visual7W-Telling dataset. By equipping LVLMs with robust cross-modal relational reasoning, this work advances domestic robots’ ability to ground symbolic reasoning in perception, enhancing decision-making, tool adaptability, and human-robot interaction in complex environments. Datasets and source code are provided in the supplementary material.
25. ❌ Detecting Hallucinations in SpeechLLMs at Inference Time Using Attention Maps
作者: Jonas Waldendorf, Bashar Awwad Shiekh Hasan, Evgenii Tsymbalov 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19565v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Hallucinations in Speech Large Language Models (SpeechLLMs) pose significant risks, yet existing detection methods typically rely on gold-standard outputs that are costly or impractical to obtain. Moreover, hallucination detection methods developed for text-based LLMs do not directly capture audio-specific signals. We investigate four attention-derived metrics: AUDIORATIO, AUDIOCONSISTENCY, AUDIOENTROPY, and TEXTENTROPY, designed to capture pathological attention patterns associated with hallucination, and train lightweight logistic regression classifiers on these features for efficient inference-time detection. Across automatic speech recognition and speech-to-text translation tasks, evaluations on Qwen-2-Audio and Voxtral-3B show that our approach outperforms uncertainty-based and prior attention-based baselines on in-domain data, achieving improvements of up to +0.23 PR-AUC, and generalises to out-of-domain ASR settings. We further find that strong performance can be achieved with approximately 100 attention heads, improving out-of-domain generalisation compared to using all heads. While effectiveness is model-dependent and task-specific training is required, our results demonstrate that attention patterns provide a valuable tool for hallucination detection in SpeechLLMs.
26. ❌ EgoSelf: From Memory to Personalized Egocentric Assistant
作者: Yanshuo Wang, Yuan Xu, Xuesong Li, Jie Hong, Yizhou Wang, Chang Wen Chen, Wentao Zhu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19564v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Egocentric assistants often rely on first-person view data to capture user behavior and context for personalized services. Since different users exhibit distinct habits, preferences, and routines, such personalization is essential for truly effective assistance. However, effectively integrating long-term user data for personalization remains a key challenge. To address this, we introduce EgoSelf, a system that includes a graph-based interaction memory constructed from past observations and a dedicated learning task for personalization. The memory captures temporal and semantic relationships among interaction events and entities, from which user-specific profiles are derived. The personalized learning task is formulated as a prediction problem where the model predicts possible future interactions from individual user’s historical behavior recorded in the graph. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of EgoSelf as a personalized egocentric assistant. Code is available at \href{https://abie-e.github.io/egoself_project/}{https://abie-e.github.io/egoself_project/}.
27. ❌ Detecting Data Contamination in Large Language Models
作者: Juliusz Janicki, Savvas Chamezopoulos, Evangelos Kanoulas, Georgios Tsatsaronis 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19561v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large Language Models (LLMs) utilize large amounts of data for their training, some of which may come from copyrighted sources. Membership Inference Attacks (MIA) aim to detect those documents and whether they have been included in the training corpora of the LLMs. The black-box MIAs require a significant amount of data manipulation; therefore, their comparison is often challenging. We study state-of-the-art (SOTA) MIAs under the black-box assumptions and compare them to each other using a unified set of datasets to determine if any of them can reliably detect membership under SOTA LLMs. In addition, a new method, called the Familiarity Ranking, was developed to showcase a possible approach to black-box MIAs, thereby giving LLMs more freedom in their expression to understand their reasoning better. The results indicate that none of the methods are capable of reliably detecting membership in LLMs, as shown by an AUC-ROC of approximately 0.5 for all methods across several LLMs. The higher TPR and FPR for more advanced LLMs indicate higher reasoning and generalizing capabilities, showcasing the difficulty of detecting membership in LLMs using black-box MIAs.
28. ❌ Enhancing Construction Worker Safety in Extreme Heat: A Machine Learning Approach Utilizing Wearable Technology for Predictive Health Analytics
作者: Syed Sajid Ullah, Amir Khan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19559v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Construction workers are highly vulnerable to heat stress, yet tools that translate real-time physiological data into actionable safety intelligence remain scarce. This study addresses this gap by developing and evaluating deep learning models, specifically a baseline Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) network and an attention-based LSTM, to predict heat stress among 19 workers in Saudi Arabia. Using Garmin Vivosmart 5 smartwatches to monitor metrics such as heart rate, HRV, and oxygen saturation, the attention-based model outperformed the baseline, achieving 95.40% testing accuracy and significantly reducing false positives and negatives. With precision, recall, and F1 scores of 0.982, this approach not only improves predictive performance but also offers interpretable results suitable for integration into IoT-enabled safety systems and BIM dashboards, advancing proactive, informatics-driven safety management in the construction industry.
29. ❌ Taming Actor-Observer Asymmetry in Agents via Dialectical Alignment
作者: Bobo Li, Rui Wu, Zibo Ji, Meishan Zhang, Hao Fei, Min Zhang, Mong-Li Lee, Wynne Hsu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19548v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large Language Model agents have rapidly evolved from static text generators into dynamic systems capable of executing complex autonomous workflows. To enhance reliability, multi-agent frameworks assigning specialized roles are increasingly adopted to enable self-reflection and mutual auditing. While such role-playing effectively leverages domain expert knowledge, we find it simultaneously induces a human-like cognitive bias known as Actor-Observer Asymmetry (AOA). Specifically, an agent acting as an actor (during self-reflection) tends to attribute failures to external factors, whereas an observer (during mutual auditing) attributes the same errors to internal faults. We quantify this using our new Ambiguous Failure Benchmark, which reveals that simply swapping perspectives triggers the AOA effect in over 20% of cases for most models. To tame this bias, we introduce ReTAS (Reasoning via Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis), a model trained through dialectical alignment to enforce perspective-invariant reasoning. By integrating dialectical chain-of-thought with Group Relative Policy Optimization, ReTAS guides agents to synthesize conflicting viewpoints into an objective consensus. Experiments demonstrate that ReTAS effectively mitigates attribution inconsistency and significantly improves fault resolution rates in ambiguous scenarios.
30. ❌ DT2IT-MRM: Debiased Preference Construction and Iterative Training for Multimodal Reward Modeling
作者: Zhihong Zhang, Jie Zhao, Xiaojian Huang, Jin Xu, Zhuodong Luo, Xin Liu, Jiansheng Wei, Xuejin Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19544v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Multimodal reward models (MRMs) play a crucial role in aligning Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) with human preferences. Training a good MRM requires high-quality multimodal preference data. However, existing preference datasets face three key challenges: lack of granularity in preference strength, textual style bias, and unreliable preference signals. Besides, existing open-source multimodal preference datasets suffer from substantial noise, yet there is a lack of effective and scalable curation methods to enhance their quality. To address these limitations, we propose \textbf{DT2IT-MRM}, which integrates a \textbf{D}ebiased preference construction pipeline, a novel reformulation of text-to-image (\textbf{T2I}) preference data, and an \textbf{I}terative \textbf{T}raining framework that curates existing multimodal preference datasets for \textbf{M}ultimodal \textbf{R}eward \textbf{M}odeling. Our experimental results show that DT2IT-MRM achieves new \textbf{state-of-the-art} overall performance on three major benchmarks: VL-RewardBench, Multimodal RewardBench, and MM-RLHF-RewardBench.
31. ❌ Integrating Anomaly Detection into Agentic AI for Proactive Risk Management in Human Activity
作者: Farbod Zorriassatine, Ahmad Lotfi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19538v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Agentic AI, with goal-directed, proactive, and autonomous decision-making capabilities, offers a compelling opportunity to address movement-related risks in human activity, including the persistent hazard of falls among elderly populations. Despite numerous approaches to fall mitigation through fall prediction and detection, existing systems have not yet functioned as universal solutions across care pathways and safety-critical environments. This is largely due to limitations in consistently handling real-world complexity, particularly poor context awareness, high false alarm rates, environmental noise, and data scarcity. We argue that fall detection and fall prediction can usefully be formulated as anomaly detection problems and more effectively addressed through an agentic AI system. More broadly, this perspective enables the early identification of subtle deviations in movement patterns associated with increased risk, whether arising from age-related decline, fatigue, or environmental factors. While technical requirements for immediate deployment are beyond the scope of this paper, we propose a conceptual framework that highlights potential value. This framework promotes a well-orchestrated approach to risk management by dynamically selecting relevant tools and integrating them into adaptive decision-making workflows, rather than relying on static configurations tailored to narrowly defined scenarios.
32. ❌ Mesh Memory Protocol: Semantic Infrastructure for Multi-Agent LLM Systems
作者: Hongwei Xu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19540v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Teams of LLM agents increasingly collaborate on tasks spanning days or weeks: multi-day data-generation sprints where generator, reviewer, and auditor agents coordinate in real time on overlapping batches; specialists carrying findings forward across session restarts; product decisions compounding over many review rounds. This requires agents to share, evaluate, and combine each other’s cognitive state in real time across sessions. We call this cross-session agent-to-agent cognitive collaboration, distinct from parallel agent execution. To enable it, three problems must be solved together. (P1) Each agent decides field by field what to accept from peers, not accept or reject whole messages. (P2) Every claim is traceable to source, so returning claims are recognised as echoes of the receiver’s own prior thinking. (P3) Memory that survives session restarts is relevant because of how it was stored, not how it is retrieved. These are protocol-level properties at the semantic layer of agent communication, distinct from tool-access and task-delegation protocols at lower layers. We call this missing protocol layer “semantic infrastructure,” and the Mesh Memory Protocol (MMP) specifies it. Four composable primitives work together: CAT7, a fixed seven-field schema for every Cognitive Memory Block (CMB); SVAF, which evaluates each field against the receiver’s role-indexed anchors and realises P1; inter-agent lineage, carried as parents and ancestors of content-hash keys and realising P2; and remix, which stores only the receiver’s own role-evaluated understanding of each accepted CMB, never the raw peer signal, realising P3. MMP is specified, shipped, and running in production across three reference deployments, where each session runs an autonomous agent as a mesh peer with its own identity and memory, collaborating with other agents across the network for collective intelligence.
33. ❌ Cyber Defense Benchmark: Agentic Threat Hunting Evaluation for LLMs in SecOps
作者: Alankrit Chona, Igor Kozlov, Ambuj Kumar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19533v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We introduce the Cyber Defense Benchmark, a benchmark for measuring how well large language model (LLM) agents perform the core SOC analyst task of threat hunting: given a database of raw Windows event logs with no guided questions or hints, identify the exact timestamps of malicious events. The benchmark wraps 106 real attack procedures from the OTRF Security-Datasets corpus - spanning 86 MITRE ATT&CK sub-techniques across 12 tactics - into a Gymnasium reinforcement-learning environment. Each episode presents the agent with an in-memory SQLite database of 75,000-135,000 log records produced by a deterministic campaign simulator that time-shifts and entity-obfuscates the raw recordings. The agent must iteratively submit SQL queries to discover malicious event timestamps and explicitly flag them, scored CTF-style against Sigma-rule-derived ground truth. Evaluating five frontier models - Claude Opus 4.6, GPT-5, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Kimi K2.5, and Gemini 3 Flash - on 26 campaigns covering 105 of 106 procedures, we find that all models fail dramatically: the best model (Claude Opus 4.6) submits correct flags for only 3.8% of malicious events on average, and no run across any model ever finds all flags. We define a passing score as >= 50% recall on every ATT&CK tactic - the minimum bar for unsupervised SOC deployment. No model passes: the leader clears this bar on 5 of 13 tactics and the remaining four on zero. These results suggest that current LLMs are poorly suited for open-ended, evidence-driven threat hunting despite strong performance on curated Q&A security benchmarks.
34. ❌ BEAT: Tokenizing and Generating Symbolic Music by Uniform Temporal Steps
作者: Lekai Qian, Haoyu Gu, Jingwei Zhao, Ziyu Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19532v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Tokenizing music to fit the general framework of language models is a compelling challenge, especially considering the diverse symbolic structures in which music can be represented (e.g., sequences, grids, and graphs). To date, most approaches tokenize symbolic music as sequences of musical events, such as onsets, pitches, time shifts, or compound note events. This strategy is intuitive and has proven effective in Transformer-based models, but it treats the regularity of musical time implicitly: individual tokens may span different durations, resulting in non-uniform time progression. In this paper, we instead consider whether an alternative tokenization is possible, where a uniform-length musical step (e.g., a beat) serves as the basic unit. Specifically, we encode all events within a single time step at the same pitch as one token, and group tokens explicitly by time step, which resembles a sparse encoding of a piano-roll representation. We evaluate the proposed tokenization on music continuation and accompaniment generation tasks, comparing it with mainstream event-based methods. Results show improved musical quality and structural coherence, while additional analyses confirm higher efficiency and more effective capture of long-range patterns with the proposed tokenization.
35. ❌ Revisiting RaBitQ and TurboQuant: A Symmetric Comparison of Methods, Theory, and Experiments
作者: Jianyang Gao, Yutong Gou, Yuexuan Xu, Jifan Shi, Yongyi Yang, Shuolin Li, Raymond Chi-Wing Wong, Cheng Long 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19528v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This technical note revisits the relationship between RaBitQ and TurboQuant under a unified comparison framework. We compare the two methods in terms of methodology, theoretical guarantees, and empirical performance, using a reproducible, transparent, and symmetric setup. Our results show that, despite the claimed advantage of TurboQuant, TurboQuant does not provide a consistent improvement over RaBitQ in directly comparable settings; in many tested configurations, it performs worse than RaBitQ. We further find that several reported runtime and recall results in the TurboQuant paper could not be reproduced from the released implementation under the stated configuration. Overall, this note clarifies the shared structure and genuine differences between the two lines of work, while documenting reproducibility issues in the experimental results reported by the TurboQuant paper.
36. ❌ Revac: A Social Deduction Reasoning Agent
作者: Mihir Shriniwas Arya, Avinash Anish, Aditya Ranjan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19523v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Social deduction games such as Mafia present a unique AI challenge: players must reason under uncertainty, interpret incomplete and intentionally misleading information, evaluate human-like communication, and make strategic elimination decisions. Unlike deterministic board games, success in Mafia depends not on perfect information or brute-force search, but on inference, memory, and adaptability in the presence of deception. This work presents the design and evaluation of Revac-8, an AI agent developed for the Social Deduction track of the MindGames Arena competition, where it achieved first place. The final agent evolved from a simple two-stage reasoning system into a multi-module architecture that integrates memory-based player profiling, social-graph analysis of accusations and defenses, and dynamic tone selection for communication. These results highlight the importance of structured memory and adaptive communication for achieving strong performance in high-stakes social environments.
37. ❌ SimDiff: Depth Pruning via Similarity and Difference
作者: Yuli Chen, Shuhao Zhang, Fanshen Meng, Bo Cheng, Jiale Han, Qiang Tong, Xiulei Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19520v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Depth pruning improves the deployment efficiency of large language models (LLMs) by identifying and removing redundant layers. A widely accepted standard for this identification process is to measure the similarity between layers using cosine distance. However, we find that methods relying solely on this one-dimensional heuristic can exhibit unpredictable performance and even catastrophic collapse across different architectures. To address this issue, we propose SimDiff, a novel layer importance criterion that jointly evaluates layers from two orthogonal perspectives: representational similarity and transformation difference. The difference is quantified using two distinct metrics: MSSD, which is sensitive to outliers and identifies layers that make decisive corrections, and MASD, which robustly measures a layer’s average contribution. Extensive experiments on multiple models ranging from 0.5B to 13B parameters demonstrate that SimDiff significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines across various pruning ratios. Notably, our method retains over 91% of LLaMA2-7B’s performance at a 25% pruning ratio and achieves up to a 1.49x inference speedup when pruning 12 layers on LLaMA3.1-8B. We also show that pruned models can be effectively recovered with minimal fine-tuning.
38. ❌ From Experience to Skill: Multi-Agent Generative Engine Optimization via Reusable Strategy Learning
作者: Beining Wu, Fuyou Mao, Jiong Lin, Cheng Yang, Jiaxuan Lu, Yifu Guo, Siyu Zhang, Yifan Wu, Ying Huang, Fu Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19516v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Generative engines (GEs) are reshaping information access by replacing ranked links with citation-grounded answers, yet current Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) methods optimize each instance in isolation, unable to accumulate or transfer effective strategies across tasks and engines. We reframe GEO as a strategy learning problem and propose MAGEO, a multi-agent framework in which coordinated planning, editing, and fidelity-aware evaluation serve as the execution layer, while validated editing patterns are progressively distilled into reusable, engine-specific optimization skills. To enable controlled assessment, we introduce a Twin Branch Evaluation Protocol for causal attribution of content edits and DSV-CF, a dual-axis metric that unifies semantic visibility with attribution accuracy. We further release MSME-GEO-Bench, a multi-scenario, multi-engine benchmark grounded in real-world queries. Experiments on three mainstream engines show that MAGEO substantially outperforms heuristic baselines in both visibility and citation fidelity, with ablations confirming that engine-specific preference modeling and strategy reuse are central to these gains, suggesting a scalable learning-driven paradigm for trustworthy GEO. Code is available at https://github.com/Wu-beining/MAGEO
39. ❌ When Graph Structure Becomes a Liability: A Critical Re-Evaluation of Graph Neural Networks for Bitcoin Fraud Detection under Temporal Distribution Shift
作者: Saket Maganti 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19514v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The consensus that GCN, GraphSAGE, GAT, and EvolveGCN outperform feature-only baselines on the Elliptic Bitcoin Dataset is widely cited but has not been rigorously stress-tested under a leakage-free evaluation protocol. We perform a seed-matched inductive-versus-transductive comparison and find that this consensus does not hold. Under a strictly inductive protocol, Random Forest on raw features achieves F1 = 0.821 and outperforms all evaluated GNNs, while GraphSAGE reaches F1 = 0.689 +/- 0.017. A paired controlled experiment reveals a 39.5-point F1 gap attributable to training-time exposure to test-period adjacency. Additionally, edge-shuffle ablations show that randomly wired graphs outperform the real transaction graph, indicating that the dataset’s topology can be misleading under temporal distribution shift. Hybrid models combining GNN embeddings with raw features provide only marginal gains and remain substantially below feature-only baselines. We release code, checkpoints, and a strict-inductive protocol to enable reproducible, leakage-free evaluation.
40. ❌ CoDA: Towards Effective Cross-domain Knowledge Transfer via CoT-guided Domain Adaptation
作者: Jianzhi Yan, Le Liu, Buzhou Tang, Yang Xiang, Dongning Sun, Zhiming Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19488v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved substantial advances in logical reasoning, yet they continue to lag behind human-level performance. In-context learning provides a viable solution that boosts the model’s performance via prompting its input with expert-curated, in-domain exemplars. However, in many real-world, expertise-scarce domains, such as low-resource scientific disciplines, emerging biomedical subfields, or niche legal jurisdictions, such high-quality in-domain demonstrations are inherently limited or entirely unavailable, thereby constraining the general applicability of these approaches. To mitigate this limitation, recent efforts have explored the retrieval of cross-domain samples as surrogate in-context demonstrations. Nevertheless, the resulting gains remain modest. This is largely attributable to the pronounced domain shift between source and target distributions, which impedes the model’s ability to effectively identify and exploit underlying shared structures or latent reasoning patterns. Consequently, when relying solely on raw textual prompting, LLMs struggle to abstract and transfer such cross-domain knowledge in a robust and systematic manner. To address these issues, we propose CoDA, which employs a lightweight adapter to directly intervene in the intermediate hidden states. By combining feature-based distillation of CoT-enriched reference representations with Maximum Mean Discrepancy (MMD) for kernelized distribution matching, our method aligns the latent reasoning representation of the source and target domains. Extensive experimental results on multiple logical reasoning tasks across various model families validate the efficacy of CoDA by significantly outperforming the previous state-of-the-art baselines by a large margin.
41. ❌ EVPO: Explained Variance Policy Optimization for Adaptive Critic Utilization in LLM Post-Training
作者: Chengjun Pan, Shichun Liu, Jiahang Lin, Dingwei Zhu, Jiazheng Zhang, Shihan Dou, Songyang Gao, Zhenhua Han, Binghai Wang, Rui Zheng, Xuanjing Huang, Tao Gui, Yansong Feng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19485v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Reinforcement learning (RL) for LLM post-training faces a fundamental design choice: whether to use a learned critic as a baseline for policy optimization. Classical theory favors critic-based methods such as PPO for variance reduction, yet critic-free alternatives like GRPO have gained widespread adoption due to their simplicity and competitive performance. We show that in sparse-reward settings, a learned critic can inject estimation noise that exceeds the state signal it captures, increasing rather than reducing advantage variance. By casting baseline selection as a Kalman filtering problem, we unify PPO and GRPO as two extremes of the Kalman gain and prove that explained variance (EV), computable from a single training batch, identifies the exact boundary: positive EV indicates the critic reduces variance, while zero or negative EV signals that it inflates variance. Building on this insight, we propose Explained Variance Policy Optimization (EVPO), which monitors batch-level EV at each training step and adaptively switches between critic-based and batch-mean advantage estimation, provably achieving no greater variance than the better of the two at every step. Across four tasks spanning classical control, agentic interaction, and mathematical reasoning, EVPO consistently outperforms both PPO and GRPO regardless of which fixed baseline is stronger on a given task. Further analysis confirms that the adaptive gating tracks critic maturation over training and that the theoretically derived zero threshold is empirically optimal.
42. ❌ Fairness Audits of Institutional Risk Models in Deployed ML Pipelines
作者: Kelly McConvey, Dipto Das, Maya Ghai, Angelina Zhai, Rosa Lee, Shion Guha 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19468v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Fairness audits of institutional risk models are critical for understanding how deployed machine learning pipelines allocate resources. Drawing on multi-year collaboration with Centennial College, where our prior ethnographic work introduced the ASP-HEI Cycle, we present a replica-based audit of a deployed Early Warning System (EWS), replicating its model using institutional training data and design specifications. We evaluate disparities by gender, age, and residency status across the full pipeline (training data, model predictions, and post-processing) using standard fairness metrics. Our audit reveals systematic misallocation: younger, male, and international students are disproportionately flagged for support, even when many ultimately succeed, while older and female students with comparable dropout risk are under-identified. Post-processing amplifies these disparities by collapsing heterogeneous probabilities into percentile-based risk tiers. This work provides a replicable methodology for auditing institutional ML systems and shows how disparities emerge and compound across stages, highlighting the importance of evaluating construct validity alongside statistical fairness. It contributes one empirical thread to a broader program investigating algorithms, student data, and power in higher education.
43. ❌ LePREC: Reasoning as Classification over Structured Factors for Assessing Relevance of Legal Issues
作者: Fanyu Wang, Xiaoxi Kang, Paul Burgess, Aashish Srivastava, Chetan Arora, Adnan Trakic, Lay-Ki Soon, Md Khalid Hossain, Lizhen Qu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19464v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
More than half of the global population struggles to meet their civil justice needs due to limited legal resources. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive reasoning capabilities, significant challenges remain even at the foundational step of legal issue identification. To investigate LLMs’ capabilities in this task, we constructed a dataset from 769 real-world Malaysian Contract Act court cases, using GPT-4o to extract facts and generate candidate legal issues, annotated by senior legal experts, which reveals a critical limitation: while LLMs generate diverse issue candidates, their precision remains inadequate (GPT-4o achieves only 62%). To address this gap, we propose LePREC (Legal Professional-inspired Reasoning Elicitation and Classification), a neuro-symbolic framework combining neural generation with structured statistical reasoning. LePREC consists of: (1) a neuro component leverages LLMs to transform legal descriptions into question-answer pairs representing diverse analytical factors, and (2) a symbolic component applies sparse linear models over these discrete features, learning explicit algebraic weights that identify the most informative reasoning factors. Unlike end-to-end neural approaches, LePREC achieves interpretability through transparent feature weighting while maintaining data efficiency through correlation-based statistical classification. Experiments show a 30-40% improvement over advanced LLM baselines, including GPT-4o and Claude, confirming that correlation-based factor-issue analysis offers a more data-efficient solution for relevance decisions.
44. ❌ A neural operator framework for data-driven discovery of stability and receptivity in physical systems
作者: Chengyun Wang, Liwei Chen, Nils Thuerey 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19465v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Understanding how complex systems respond to perturbations, such as whether they will remain stable or what their most sensitive patterns are, is a fundamental challenge across science and engineering. Traditional stability and receptivity (resolvent) analyses are powerful but rely on known equations and linearization, limiting their use in nonlinear or poorly modeled systems. Here, we introduce a data-driven framework that automatically identifies stability properties and optimal forcing responses from observation data alone, without requiring governing equations. By training a neural network as a dynamics emulator and using automatic differentiation to extract its Jacobian, we can compute eigenmodes and resolvent modes directly from data. We demonstrate the method on both canonical chaotic models and high-dimensional fluid flows, successfully identifying dominant instability modes and input-output structures even in strongly nonlinear regimes. By leveraging a neural network-based emulator, we readily obtain a nonlinear representation of system dynamics while additionally retrieving intricate dynamical patterns that were previously difficult to resolve. This equation-free methodology establishes a broadly applicable tool for analyzing complex, high-dimensional datasets, with immediate relevance to grand challenges in fields such as climate science, neuroscience, and fluid engineering.
45. ❌ Do LLMs Game Formalization? Evaluating Faithfulness in Logical Reasoning
作者: Kyuhee Kim, Auguste Poiroux, Antoine Bosselut 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19459v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Formal verification guarantees proof validity but not formalization faithfulness. For natural-language logical reasoning, where models construct axiom systems from scratch without library constraints, this gap between valid proofs and faithful translations is especially acute. We investigate whether frontier models exploit this gap when generating Lean 4 proofs, a behavior we term formalization gaming. We evaluate GPT-5 and DeepSeek-R1 on 303 first-order logic problems (203 from FOLIO, 100 from Multi-LogiEval), comparing unified generation against a two-stage pipeline that separates formalization from proving. Despite compilation rates of 87-99%, we find no evidence of systematic gaming in unified generation: models prefer reporting failure over forcing proofs, even under prompting designed to encourage it. However, unfaithfulness that evades our detection signals may still occur. The two-stage pipeline reveals two distinct modes of unfaithfulness: GPT-5 fabricates axioms during proof generation, a reactive fallback detectable via cross-stage comparison, while DeepSeek-R1 mistranslates premises during formalization, producing internally consistent outputs that evade detection entirely. These findings show that high compilation rates or accuracies should not be equated with faithful reasoning. Code and data are available at https://github.com/koreankiwi99/formalization-gaming.
46. ❌ Counting Worlds Branching Time Semantics for post-hoc Bias Mitigation in generative AI
作者: Alessandro G. Buda, Giuseppe Primiero, Leonardo Ceragioli, Melissa Antonelli 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19431v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Generative AI systems are known to amplify biases present in their training data. While several inference-time mitigation strategies have been proposed, they remain largely empirical and lack formal guarantees. In this paper we introduce CTLF, a branching-time logic designed to reason about bias in series of generative AI outputs. CTLF adopts a counting worlds semantics where each world represents a possible output at a given step in the generation process and introduces modal operators that allow us to verify whether the current output series respects an intended probability distribution over a protected attribute, to predict the likelihood of remaining within acceptable bounds as new outputs are generated, and to determine how many outputs are needed to remove in order to restore fairness. We illustrate the framework on a toy example of biased image generation, showing how CTLF formulas can express concrete fairness properties at different points in the output series.
47. ❌ Four-Axis Decision Alignment for Long-Horizon Enterprise AI Agents
作者: Vasundra Srininvasan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19457v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Long-horizon enterprise agents make high-stakes decisions (loan underwriting, claims adjudication, clinical review, prior authorization) under lossy memory, multi-step reasoning, and binding regulatory constraints. Current evaluation reports a single task-success scalar that conflates distinct failure modes and hides whether an agent is aligned with the standards its deployment environment requires. We propose that long-horizon decision behavior decomposes into four orthogonal alignment axes, each independently measurable and failable: factual precision (FRP), reasoning coherence (RCS), compliance reconstruction (CRR), and calibrated abstention (CAR). CRR is a novel regulatory-grounded axis; CAR is a measurement axis separating coverage from accuracy. We exercise the decomposition on a controlled benchmark (LongHorizon-Bench) covering loan qualification and insurance claims adjudication with deterministic ground-truth construction. Running six memory architectures, we find structure aggregate accuracy cannot see: retrieval collapses on factual precision; schema-anchored architectures pay a scaffolding tax; plain summarization under a fact-preservation prompt is a strong baseline on FRP, RCS, EDA, and CRR; and all six architectures commit on every case, exposing a decisional-alignment axis the field has not targeted. The decomposition also surfaced a pre-registered prediction of our own, that summarization would fail factual recall, which the data reversed at large magnitude, an axis-level reversal aggregate accuracy would have hidden. Institutional alignment (regulatory reconstruction) and decisional alignment (calibrated abstention) are under-represented in the alignment literature and become load-bearing once decisions leave the laboratory. The framework transfers to any regulated decisioning domain via two steps: build a fact schema, and calibrate the CRR auditor prompt.
48. ❌ GOLD-BEV: GrOund and aeriaL Data for Dense Semantic BEV Mapping of Dynamic Scenes
作者: Joshua Niemeijer, Alaa Eddine Ben Zekri, Reza Bahmanyar, Philipp M. Schmälzle, Houda Chaabouni-Chouayakh, Franz Kurz 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19411v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Understanding road scenes in a geometrically consistent, scene-centric representation is crucial for planning and mapping. We present GOLD-BEV, a framework that learns dense bird’s-eye-view (BEV) semantic environment maps-including dynamic agents-from ego-centric sensors, using time-synchronized aerial imagery as supervision only during training. BEV-aligned aerial crops provide an intuitive target space, enabling dense semantic annotation with minimal manual effort and avoiding the ambiguity of ego-only BEV labeling. Crucially, strict aerial-ground synchronization allows overhead observations to supervise moving traffic participants and mitigates the temporal inconsistencies inherent to non-synchronized overhead sources. To obtain scalable dense targets, we generate BEV pseudo-labels using domain-adapted aerial teachers, and jointly train BEV segmentation with optional pseudo-aerial BEV reconstruction for interpretability. Finally, we extend beyond aerial coverage by learning to synthesize pseudo-aerial BEV images from ego sensors, which support lightweight human annotation and uncertainty-aware pseudo-labeling on unlabeled drives.
49. ❌ HP-Edit: A Human-Preference Post-Training Framework for Image Editing
作者: Fan Li, Chonghuinan Wang, Lina Lei, Yuping Qiu, Jiaqi Xu, Jiaxiu Jiang, Xinran Qin, Zhikai Chen, Fenglong Song, Zhixin Wang, Renjing Pei, Wangmeng Zuo 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19406v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Common image editing tasks typically adopt powerful generative diffusion models as the leading paradigm for real-world content editing. Meanwhile, although reinforcement learning (RL) methods such as Diffusion-DPO and Flow-GRPO have further improved generation quality, efficiently applying Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) to diffusion-based editing remains largely unexplored, due to a lack of scalable human-preference datasets and frameworks tailored to diverse editing needs. To fill this gap, we propose HP-Edit, a post-training framework for Human Preference-aligned Editing, and introduce RealPref-50K, a real-world dataset across eight common tasks and balancing common object editing. Specifically, HP-Edit leverages a small amount of human-preference scoring data and a pretrained visual large language model (VLM) to develop HP-Scorer–an automatic, human preference-aligned evaluator. We then use HP-Scorer both to efficiently build a scalable preference dataset and to serve as the reward function for post-training the editing model. We also introduce RealPref-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating real-world editing performance. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our approach significantly enhances models such as Qwen-Image-Edit-2509, aligning their outputs more closely with human preference.
50. ❌ M$^{2}$GRPO: Mamba-based Multi-Agent Group Relative Policy Optimization for Biomimetic Underwater Robots Pursuit
作者: Yukai Feng, Zhiheng Wu, Zhengxing Wu, Junwen Gu, Junzhi Yu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19404v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Traditional policy learning methods in cooperative pursuit face fundamental challenges in biomimetic underwater robots, where long-horizon decision making, partial observability, and inter-robot coordination require both expressiveness and stability. To address these issues, a novel framework called Mamba-based multi-agent group relative policy optimization (M$^{2}$GRPO) is proposed, which integrates a selective state-space Mamba policy with group-relative policy optimization under the centralized-training and decentralized-execution (CTDE) paradigm. Specifically, the Mamba-based policy leverages observation history to capture long-horizon temporal dependencies and exploits attention-based relational features to encode inter-agent interactions, producing bounded continuous actions through normalized Gaussian sampling. To further improve credit assignment without sacrificing stability, the group-relative advantages are obtained by normalizing rewards across agents within each episode and optimized through a multi-agent extension of GRPO, significantly reducing the demand for training resources while enabling stable and scalable policy updates. Extensive simulations and real-world pool experiments across team scales and evader strategies demonstrate that M$^{2}$GRPO consistently outperforms MAPPO and recurrent baselines in both pursuit success rate and capture efficiency. Overall, the proposed framework provides a practical and scalable solution for cooperative underwater pursuit with biomimetic robot systems.
51. ❌ Revisiting Catastrophic Forgetting in Continual Knowledge Graph Embedding
作者: Gerard Pons, Carlos Escolano, Besim Bilalli, Anna Queralt 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19401v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Knowledge Graph Embeddings (KGEs) support a wide range of downstream tasks over Knowledge Graphs (KGs). In practice, KGs evolve as new entities and facts are added, motivating Continual Knowledge Graph Embedding (CKGE) methods that update embeddings over time. Current CKGE approaches address catastrophic forgetting (i.e., the performance degradation on previously learned tasks) primarily by limiting changes to existing embeddings. However, we show that this view is incomplete. When new entities are introduced, their embeddings can interfere with previously learned ones, causing the model to predict them in place of previously correct answers. This phenomenon, which we call entity interference, has been largely overlooked and is not accounted for in current CKGE evaluation protocols. As a result, the assessment of catastrophic forgetting becomes misleading, and CKGE methods performance is systematically overestimated. To address this issue, we introduce a corrected CKGE evaluation protocol that accounts for entity interference. Through experiments on multiple benchmarks, we show that ignoring this effect can lead to performance overestimation of up to 25%, particularly in scenarios with significant entity growth. We further analyze how different CKGE methods and KGE models are affected by the different sources of forgetting, and introduce a catastrophic forgetting metric tailored to CKGE.
52. ❌ GRASPrune: Global Gating for Budgeted Structured Pruning of Large Language Models
作者: Ziyang Wang, Jiangfeng Xiao, Chuan Xiao, Ruoxiang Li, Rui Mao, Jianbin Qin 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19398v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large language models (LLMs) are expensive to serve because model parameters, attention computation, and KV caches impose substantial memory and latency costs. We present GRASPrune, a structured pruning framework applied after pretraining that jointly prunes FFN channels and KV head groups under a single global budget. Instead of learning importance scores without constraints and applying the budget only after training, GRASPrune learns lightweight gate scores with a projected straight-through estimator that enforces a hard mask satisfying the budget at every step while keeping the backbone weights frozen. After the mask is fixed, we calibrate scaling factors on the retained units to mitigate scale mismatch caused by pruning, and fold these factors into the pruned weights to obtain a smaller dense checkpoint with no extra parameters at inference. On LLaMA-2-7B, GRASPrune removes 50% of parameters and achieves 12.18 perplexity on WikiText-2 while maintaining competitive average zero-shot accuracy on five benchmarks, using four epochs on 512 unlabeled calibration sequences on a single NVIDIA A100 80GB GPU without any full model fine-tuning.
53. ❌ Multimodal Transformer for Sample-Aware Prediction of Metal-Organic Framework Properties
作者: Seunghee Han, Jaewoong Lee, Jihan Kim 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19383v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) are a major target of machine-learning-based property prediction, yet most models assume that a single framework representation maps to a single property value. This assumption becomes problematic for experimental MOFs, where samples reported as the same framework can exhibit different properties because of differences in crystallinity, phase purity, defects, and other sample-dependent factors. Here we introduce Experimental X-ray Diffraction Integrated Transformer (EXIT), a multimodal transformer for sample-aware prediction of MOF properties that combines MOFid with X-ray diffraction (XRD). In EXIT, MOFid encodes MOF identity, whereas XRD provides complementary information about the experimentally realized sample state. EXIT is pre-trained on one million hypothetical MOFs with simulated XRD to learn transferable representations, leading to improved downstream performance relative to existing approaches. EXIT is fine-tuned on literature-derived experimental datasets for surface area and pore volume prediction. Incorporating experimental XRD improves predictive performance relative to models without experimental XRD, and attention analysis and sample-level case studies further show that EXIT assigns different predictions to samples sharing the same MOF identity when their XRD patterns differ. These results establish a practical step from framework-aware to sample-aware MOF property prediction and highlight the value of incorporating experimental characterization into porous materials informatics.
54. ❌ Towards Energy Impact on AI-Powered 6G IoT Networks: Centralized vs. Decentralized
作者: Anjie Qiu, Donglin Wang, Sanket Partani, Andreas Weinand, Hans D. Schotten 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19377v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The emergence of sixth-generation (6G) technologies has introduced new challenges and opportunities for machine learning (ML) applications in Internet of Things (IoT) networks, particularly concerning energy efficiency. As model training and data transmission contribute significantly to energy consumption, optimizing these processes has become critical for sustainable system design. This study first conduct analysis on the energy consumption model for both centralized and decentralized architecture and then presents a testbed deployed within the German railway infrastructure, leveraging sensor data for ML-based predictive maintenance. A comparative analysis of distributed versus Centralized Learning (CL) architectures reveals that distributed models maintain competitive predictive accuracy (~90%) while reducing overall electricity consumption by up to 70%. These findings underscore the potential of distributed ML to improve energy efficiency in real-world IoT deployments, particularly by mitigating transmission-related energy costs.
55. ❌ TACENR: Task-Agnostic Contrastive Explanations for Node Representations
作者: Vasiliki Papanikou, Evaggelia Pitoura 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19372v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Graph representation learning has achieved notable success in encoding graph-structured data into latent vector spaces, enabling a wide range of downstream tasks. However, these node representations remain opaque and difficult to interpret. Existing explainability methods primarily focus on supervised settings or on explaining individual representation dimensions, leaving a critical gap in explaining the overall structure of node representations. In this paper, we propose TACENR (Task-Agnostic Contrastive Explanations for Node Representations), a local explanation method that identifies not only attribute features but also proximity and structural ones that contribute the most in the representation space. TACENR builds on contrastive learning, through which we learn a similarity function in the representation space, revealing which are the features that play an important role in the representation of a node. While our focus is on task-agnostic explanations, TACENR can be applied to supervised scenarios as well. Experimental results demonstrate that proximity and structural features play a significant role in shaping node representations and that our supervised variant performs comparably to existing task-specific approaches in identifying the most impactful features.
56. ❌ Do Agents Dream of Root Shells? Partial-Credit Evaluation of LLM Agents in Capture The Flag Challenges
作者: Ali Al-Kaswan, Maksim Plotnikov, Maxim Hájek, Roland Vízner, Arie van Deursen, Maliheh Izadi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19354v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large Language Model (LLM) agents are increasingly proposed for autonomous cybersecurity tasks, but their capabilities in realistic offensive settings remain poorly understood. We present DeepRed, an open-source benchmark for evaluating LLM-based agents on realistic Capture The Flag (CTF) challenges in isolated virtualized environments. DeepRed places an agent in a Kali attacker environment with terminal tools and optional web search, connected over a private network to a target challenge, and records full execution traces for analysis. To move beyond binary solved/unsolved outcomes, we introduce a partial-credit scoring method based on challenge-specific checkpoints derived from public writeups, together with an automated summarise-then-judge labelling pipeline for assigning checkpoint completion from logs. Using DeepRed, we benchmark ten commercially accessible LLMs on ten VM-based CTF challenges spanning different challenge categories. The results indicate that current agents remain limited: the best model achieves only 35% average checkpoint completion, performing strongest on common challenge types and weakest on tasks requiring non-standard discovery and longer-horizon adaptation.
57. ❌ LASER: Learning Active Sensing for Continuum Field Reconstruction
作者: Huayu Deng, Jinghui Zhong, Xiangming Zhu, Yunbo Wang, Xiaokang Yang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19355v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
High-fidelity measurements of continuum physical fields are essential for scientific discovery and engineering design but remain challenging under sparse and constrained sensing. Conventional reconstruction methods typically rely on fixed sensor layouts, which cannot adapt to evolving physical states. We propose LASER, a unified, closed-loop framework that formulates active sensing as a Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP). At its core, LASER employs a continuum field latent world model that captures the underlying physical dynamics and provides intrinsic reward feedback. This enables a reinforcement learning policy to simulate ‘‘what-if’’ sensing scenarios within a latent imagination space. By conditioning sensor movements on predicted latent states, LASER navigates toward potentially high-information regions beyond current observations. Our experiments demonstrate that LASER consistently outperforms static and offline-optimized strategies, achieving high-fidelity reconstruction under sparsity across diverse continuum fields.
58. ❌ Evaluation-driven Scaling for Scientific Discovery
作者: Haotian Ye, Haowei Lin, Jingyi Tang, Yizhen Luo, Caiyin Yang, Chang Su, Rahul Thapa, Rui Yang, Ruihua Liu, Zeyu Li, Chong Gao, Dachao Ding, Guangrong He, Miaolei Zhang, Lina Sun, Wenyang Wang, Yuchen Zhong, Zhuohao Shen, Di He, Jianzhu Ma, Stefano Ermon, Tongyang Li, Xiaowen Chu, James Zou, Yuzhi Xu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19341v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Language models are increasingly used in scientific discovery to generate hypotheses, propose candidate solutions, implement systems, and iteratively refine them. At the core of these trial-and-error loops lies evaluation: the process of obtaining feedback on candidate solutions via verifiers, simulators, or task-specific scoring functions. While prior work has highlighted the importance of evaluation, it has not explicitly formulated the problem of how evaluation-driven discovery loops can be scaled up in a principled and effective manner to push the boundaries of scientific discovery, a problem this paper seeks to address. We introduce Simple Test-time Evaluation-driven Scaling (SimpleTES), a general framework that strategically combines parallel exploration, feedback-driven refinement, and local selection, revealing substantial gains unlocked by scaling evaluation-driven discovery loops along the right dimensions. Across 21 scientific problems spanning six domains, SimpleTES discovers state-of-the-art solutions using gpt-oss models, consistently outperforming both frontier-model baselines and sophisticated optimization pipelines. Particularly, we sped up the widely used LASSO algorithm by over 2x, designed quantum circuit routing policies that reduce gate overhead by 24.5%, and discovered new Erdos minimum overlap constructions that surpass the best-known results. Beyond novel discoveries, SimpleTES produces trajectory-level histories that naturally supervise feedback-driven learning. When post-trained on successful trajectories, models not only improve efficiency on seen problems but also generalize to unseen problems, discovering solutions that base models fail to uncover. Together, our results establish effective evaluation-driven loop scaling as a central axis for advancing LLM-driven scientific discovery, and provide a simple yet practical framework for realizing these gains.
59. ❌ RDP LoRA: Geometry-Driven Identification for Parameter-Efficient Adaptation in Large Language Models
作者: Yusuf Çelebi, Yağız Asker, Özay Ezerceli, Mahmoud ElHussieni, Selva Taş, Reyhan Bayraktar, Fatma Betül Terzioğlu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19321v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs) remains structurally uncertain despite parameter-efficient methods such as Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA), as the layer-specific roles of internal representations are poorly understood, leading to heuristic decisions about where adaptation should be applied. We model the evolution of hidden states as a high-dimensional geometric trajectory and propose using the Ramer-Douglas-Peucker (RDP) algorithm, a parameter-free and training-free polygon simplification method that preserves global structural transitions while eliminating locally redundant changes, to identify critical breakpoints along the representation path. Crucially, we use these geometric pivots not merely for analysis, but as a direct decision signal for determining which layers should be adapted during parameter-efficient fine-tuning. By integrating this geometry-aware layer selection strategy into LoRA fine-tuning of Qwen3-8B-Base, we achieve superior performance on MMLU-Math using only 13 RDP-selected layers (81.67%), significantly outperforming both full 36-layer adaptation (79.32%) and random 13-layer selection (75.56%), as well as the baseline Qwen3-8B-Base model (74.25%). These results demonstrate that leveraging the intrinsic geometry of representation trajectories provides a robust, interpretable, and training-free signal for optimizing layer selection during model adaptation.
60. ❌ PLaMo 2.1-VL Technical Report
作者: Tommi Kerola, Yuya Masuda, Takashi Masuko, Toshiki Nakanishi, Daisuke Nishino, Kuniyuki Takahashi, Hanqin Wang, Yoshihiro Yamada 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19324v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We introduce PLaMo 2.1-VL, a lightweight Vision Language Model (VLM) for autonomous devices, available in 8B and 2B variants and designed for local and edge deployment with Japanese-language operation. Focusing on Visual Question Answering (VQA) and Visual Grounding as its core capabilities, we develop and evaluate the models for two real-world application scenarios: factory task analysis via tool recognition, and infrastructure anomaly detection. We also develop a large-scale synthetic data generation pipeline and comprehensive Japanese training and evaluation resources. PLaMo 2.1-VL outperforms comparable open models on Japanese and English benchmarks, achieving 61.5 ROUGE-L on JA-VG-VQA-500 and 85.2% accuracy on Japanese Ref-L4. For the two application scenarios, it achieves 53.9% zero-shot accuracy on factory task analysis, and fine-tuning on power plant data improves anomaly detection bbox + label F1-score from 39.7 to 64.9.
61. ❌ Large Language Models Exhibit Normative Conformity
作者: Mikako Bito, Keita Nishimoto, Kimitaka Asatani, Ichiro Sakata 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19301v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The conformity bias exhibited by large language models (LLMs) can pose a significant challenge to decision-making in LLM-based multi-agent systems (LLM-MAS). While many prior studies have treated “conformity” simply as a matter of opinion change, this study introduces the social psychological distinction between informational conformity and normative conformity in order to understand LLM conformity at the mechanism level. Specifically, we design new tasks to distinguish between informational conformity, in which participants in a discussion are motivated to make accurate judgments, and normative conformity, in which participants are motivated to avoid conflict or gain acceptance within a group. We then conduct experiments based on these task settings. The experimental results show that, among the six LLMs evaluated, up to five exhibited tendencies toward not only informational conformity but also normative conformity. Furthermore, intriguingly, we demonstrate that by manipulating subtle aspects of the social context, it may be possible to control the target toward which a particular LLM directs its normative conformity. These findings suggest that decision-making in LLM-MAS may be vulnerable to manipulation by a small number of malicious users. In addition, through analysis of internal vectors associated with informational and normative conformity, we suggest that although both behaviors appear externally as the same form of “conformity,” they may in fact be driven by distinct internal mechanisms. Taken together, these results may serve as an initial milestone toward understanding how “norms” are implemented in LLMs and how they influence group dynamics.
62. ❌ Co-Refine: AI-Powered Tool Supporting Qualitative Analysis
作者: Athikash Jeyaganthan, Kai Xu, Franziska Becker, Steffen Koch 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19309v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Qualitative coding relies on a researcher’s application of codes to textual data. As coding proceeds across large datasets, interpretations of codes often shift (temporal drift), reducing the credibility of the analysis. Existing Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis (CAQDAS) tools provide support for data management but offer no workflow for real-time detection of these drifts. We present Co-Refine, an AI-augmented qualitative coding platform that delivers continuous, grounded feedback on coding consistency without disrupting the researcher’s workflow. The system employs a three-stage audit pipeline: Stage 1 computes deterministic embedding-based metrics for mathematical consistency; Stage 2 grounds LLM verdicts within $\pm0.15$ of the deterministic scores; and Stage 3 produces code definitions from previous patterns to create a deepening feedback loop. Co-Refine demonstrates that deterministic scoring can effectively constrain LLM outputs to produce reliable, real-time audit signals for qualitative analysis.
63. ❌ HalluAudio: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Hallucination Detection in Large Audio-Language Models
作者: Feiyu Zhao, Yiming Chen, Wenhuan Lu, Daipeng Zhang, Xianghu Yue, Jianguo Wei 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19300v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large Audio-Language Models (LALMs) have recently achieved strong performance across various audio-centric tasks. However, hallucination, where models generate responses that are semantically incorrect or acoustically unsupported, remains largely underexplored in the audio domain. Existing hallucination benchmarks mainly focus on text or vision, while the few audio-oriented studies are limited in scale, modality coverage, and diagnostic depth. We therefore introduce HalluAudio, the first large-scale benchmark for evaluating hallucinations across speech, environmental sound, and music. HalluAudio comprises over 5K human-verified QA pairs and spans diverse task types, including binary judgments, multi-choice reasoning, attribute verification, and open-ended QA. To systematically induce hallucinations, we design adversarial prompts and mixed-audio conditions. Beyond accuracy, our evaluation protocol measures hallucination rate, yes/no bias, error-type analysis, and refusal rate, enabling a fine-grained analysis of LALM failure modes. We benchmark a broad range of open-source and proprietary models, providing the first large-scale comparison across speech, sound, and music. Our results reveal significant deficiencies in acoustic grounding, temporal reasoning, and music attribute understanding, underscoring the need for reliable and robust LALMs.
64. ❌ Rethinking Scale: Deployment Trade-offs of Small Language Models under Agent Paradigms
作者: Xinlin Wang, Mats Brorsson 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19299v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Despite the impressive capabilities of large language models, their substantial computational costs, latency, and privacy risks hinder their widespread deployment in real-world applications. Small Language Models (SLMs) with fewer than 10 billion parameters present a promising alternative; however, their inherent limitations in knowledge and reasoning curtail their effectiveness. Existing research primarily focuses on enhancing SLMs through scaling laws or fine-tuning strategies while overlooking the potential of using agent paradigms, such as tool use and multi-agent collaboration, to systematically compensate for the inherent weaknesses of small models. To address this gap, this paper presents the first large-scale, comprehensive study of <10B open-source models under three paradigms: (1) the base model, (2) a single agent equipped with tools, and (3) a multi-agent system with collaborative capabilities. Our results show that single-agent systems achieve the best balance between performance and cost, while multi-agent setups add overhead with limited gains. Our findings highlight the importance of agent-centric design for efficient and trustworthy deployment in resource-constrained settings.
65. ❌ IndiaFinBench: An Evaluation Benchmark for Large Language Model Performance on Indian Financial Regulatory Text
作者: Rajveer Singh Pall 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19298v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We introduce IndiaFinBench, to our knowledge the first publicly available evaluation benchmark for assessing large language model (LLM) performance on Indian financial regulatory text. Existing financial NLP benchmarks draw exclusively from Western financial corpora (SEC filings, US earnings reports, and English-language financial news), leaving a significant gap in coverage of non-Western regulatory frameworks. IndiaFinBench addresses this gap with 406 expert-annotated question-answer pairs drawn from 192 documents sourced from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), spanning four task types: regulatory interpretation (174 items), numerical reasoning (92 items), contradiction detection (62 items), and temporal reasoning (78 items). Annotation quality is validated through a model-based secondary pass (kappa=0.918 on contradiction detection) and a 60-item human inter-annotator agreement evaluation (kappa=0.611; 76.7% overall agreement). We evaluate twelve models under zero-shot conditions, with accuracy ranging from 70.4% (Gemma 4 E4B) to 89.7% (Gemini 2.5 Flash). All models substantially outperform a non-specialist human baseline of 60.0%. Numerical reasoning is the most discriminative task, with a 35.9 percentage-point spread across models. Bootstrap significance testing (10,000 resamples) reveals three statistically distinct performance tiers. The dataset, evaluation code, and all model outputs are available at https://github.com/rajveerpall/IndiaFinBench
66. ❌ Location Not Found: Exposing Implicit Local and Global Biases in Multilingual LLMs
作者: Guy Mor-Lan, Omer Goldman, Matan Eyal, Adi Mayrav Gilady, Sivan Eiger, Idan Szpektor, Avinatan Hassidim, Yossi Matias, Reut Tsarfaty 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19292v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Multilingual large language models (LLMs) have minimized the fluency gap between languages. This advancement, however, exposes models to the risk of biased behavior, as knowledge and norms may propagate across languages. In this work, we aim to quantify models’ inter- and intra-lingual biases, via their ability to answer locale-ambiguous questions. To this end, we present LocQA, a test set containing 2,156 questions in 12 languages, referring to various locale-dependent facts such as laws, dates, and measurements. The questions do not contain indications of the locales they relate to, other than the querying language itself. LLMs’ responses to LocQA locale-ambiguous questions thus reveal models’ implicit priors. We used LocQA to evaluate 32 models, and detected two types of structural biases. Inter-lingually, we show a global bias towards answers relevant to the US-locale, even when models are asked in languages other than English. Moreover, we discovered that this global bias is exacerbated in models that underwent instruction tuning, compared to their base counterparts. Intra-lingually, we show that when multiple locales are relevant for the same language, models act as demographic probability engines, prioritizing locales with larger populations. Taken together, insights from LocQA may help in shaping LLMs’ desired local behavior, and in quantifying the impact of various training phases on different kinds of biases.
67. ❌ Explicit Trait Inference for Multi-Agent Coordination
作者: Suhaib Abdurahman, Etsuko Ishii, Katerina Margatina, Divya Bhargavi, Monica Sunkara, Yi Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19278v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
LLM-based multi-agent systems (MAS) show promise on complex tasks but remain prone to coordination failures such as goal drift, error cascades, and misaligned behaviors. We propose Explicit Trait Inference (ETI), a psychologically grounded method for improving coordination. ETI enables agents to infer and track partner characteristics along two established psychological dimensions–warmth (e.g., trust) and competence (e.g., skill)–from interaction histories to guide decisions. We evaluate ETI in controlled settings (economic games), where it reduces payoff loss by 45-77%, and in more realistic, complex multi-agent settings (MultiAgentBench), where it improves performance by 3-29% depending on the scenario and model, relative to a CoT baseline. Additional analysis shows that gains are closely linked to trait inference: ETI profiles predict agents’ actions, and informative profiles drive improvements. These results highlight ETI as a lightweight and robust mechanism for improving coordination in diverse multi-agent settings, and provide the first systematic evidence that LLM agents can (i) reliably infer others’ traits from interaction histories and (ii) leverage structured awareness of others’ traits for coordination.
68. ❌ CulturALL: Benchmarking Multilingual and Multicultural Competence of LLMs on Grounded Tasks
作者: Peiqin Lin, Chenyang Lyu, Wenjiang Luo, Haotian Ye, Md Mehrab Hossain, Chunlan Ma, Shaoxiong Ji, Younes Samih, Bo Zeng, Fan Jiang, Yuanbin Cao, Dilda Duisenbek, Adrian Neo Sau Xun, Daria Pozdniakova, Liubou Misevich, Nevena Marinković, Ngoc Gia Linh Nguyen, Thi Khanh Linh Do, Sarakmatak Sophy, Baotian Hu, Guanhua Chen, Gongbo Tang, Alham Fikri Aji, Longyue Wang, Weihua Luo 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19262v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large language models (LLMs) are now deployed worldwide, inspiring a surge of benchmarks that measure their multilingual and multicultural abilities. However, these benchmarks prioritize generic language understanding or superficial cultural trivia, leaving the evaluation of grounded tasks – where models must reason within real-world, context-rich scenarios – largely unaddressed. To fill this gap, we present CulturALL, a comprehensive and challenging benchmark to assess LLMs’ multilingual and multicultural competence on grounded tasks. CulturALL is built via a human–AI collaborative framework: expert annotators ensure appropriate difficulty and factual accuracy, while LLMs lighten the manual workload. By incorporating diverse sources, CulturALL ensures comprehensive scenario coverage. Each item is carefully designed to present a high level of difficulty, making CulturALL challenging. CulturALL contains 2,610 samples in 14 languages from 51 regions, distributed across 16 topics to capture the full breadth of grounded tasks. Experiments show that the best LLM achieves 44.48% accuracy on CulturALL, underscoring substantial room for improvement.
69. ❌ Beyond Semantic Similarity: A Component-Wise Evaluation Framework for Medical Question Answering Systems with Health Equity Implications
作者: Abu Noman Md Sakib, Md. Main Oddin Chisty, Zijie Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19281v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) to support patients in addressing medical questions is becoming increasingly prevalent. However, most of the measures currently used to evaluate the performance of these models in this context only measure how closely a model’s answers match semantically, and therefore do not provide a true indication of the model’s medical accuracy or of the health equity risks associated with it. To address these shortcomings, we present a new evaluation framework for medical question answering called VB-Score (Verification-Based Score) that provides a separate evaluation of the four components of entity recognition, semantic similarity, factual consistency, and structured information completeness for medical question-answering models. We perform rigorous reviews of the performance of three well-known and widely used LLMs on 48 public health-related topics taken from high-quality, authoritative information sources. Based on our analyses, we discover a major discrepancy between the models’ semantic and entity accuracy. Our assessments of the performance of all three models show that each of them has almost uniformly severe performance failures when evaluated against our criteria. Our findings indicate alarming performance disparities across various public health topics, with most of the models exhibiting 13.8% lower performance (compared to an overall average) for all the public health topics that relate to chronic conditions that occur in older and minority populations, which indicates the existence of what’s known as condition-based algorithmic discrimination. Our findings also demonstrate that prompt engineering alone does not compensate for basic architectural limitations on how these models perform in extracting medical entities and raise the question of whether semantic evaluation alone is a sufficient measure of medical AI safety.
70. ❌ ShadowPEFT: Shadow Network for Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning
作者: Xianming Li, Zongxi Li, Tsz-fung Andrew Lee, Jing Li, Haoran Xie, Qing Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19254v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) reduces the training cost of full-parameter fine-tuning for large language models (LLMs) by training only a small set of task-specific parameters while freezing the pretrained backbone. However, existing approaches, such as Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA), achieve adaptation by inserting independent low-rank perturbations directly to individual weights, resulting in a local parameterization of adaptation. We propose ShadowPEFT, a centralized PEFT framework that instead performs layer-level refinement through a depth-shared shadow module. At each transformer layer, ShadowPEFT maintains a parallel shadow state and evolves it repeatedly for progressively richer hidden states. This design shifts adaptation from distributed weight-space perturbations to a shared layer-space refinement process. Since the shadow module is decoupled from the backbone, it can be reused across depth, independently pretrained, and optionally deployed in a detached mode, benefiting edge computing scenarios. Experiments on generation and understanding benchmarks show that ShadowPEFT matches or outperforms LoRA and DoRA under comparable trainable-parameter budgets. Additional analyses on shadow pretraining, cross-dataset transfer, parameter scaling, inference latency, and system-level evaluation suggest that centralized layer-space adaptation is a competitive and flexible alternative to conventional low-rank PEFT.
71. ❌ Streamliners for Answer Set Programming
作者: Florentina Voboril, Martin Gebser, Stefan Szeider, Alice Tarzariol 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19251v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Streamliner constraints reduce the search space of combinatorial problems by ruling out portions of the solution space. We adapt the StreamLLM approach, which uses Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate streamliners for Constraint Programming, to Answer Set Programming (ASP). Given an ASP encoding and a few small training instances, we prompt multiple LLMs to propose candidate constraints. Candidates that cause syntax errors, render satisfiable instances unsatisfiable, or degrade performance on all training instances are discarded. The surviving streamliners are evaluated together with the original encoding, and we report results for a virtual best encoding (VBE) that, for each instance, selects the fastest among the original encoding and its streamlined variants. On three ASP Competition benchmarks (Partner Units Problem, Sokoban, Towers of Hanoi), the VBE achieves speedups of up to 4–5x over the original encoding. Different LLMs produce semantically diverse constraints, not mere syntactic variations, indicating that the approach captures genuine problem structure.
72. ❌ Talking to a Know-It-All GPT or a Second-Guesser Claude? How Repair reveals unreliable Multi-Turn Behavior in LLMs
作者: Clara Lachenmaier, Hannah Bultmann, Sina Zarrieß 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19245v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Repair, an important resource for resolving trouble in human-human conversation, remains underexplored in human-LLM interaction. In this study, we investigate how LLMs engage in the interactive process of repair in multi-turn dialogues around solvable and unsolvable math questions. We examine whether models initiate repair themselves and how they respond to user-initiated repair. Our results show strong differences across models: reactions range from being almost completely resistant to (appropriate) repair attempts to being highly susceptible and easily manipulated. We further demonstrate that once conversations extend beyond a single turn, model behavior becomes more distinctive and less predictable across systems. Overall, our findings indicate that each tested LLM exhibits its own characteristic form of unreliability in the context of repair.
73. ❌ Sherpa.ai Privacy-Preserving Multi-Party Entity Alignment without Intersection Disclosure for Noisy Identifiers
作者: Daniel M. Jimenez-Gutierrez, Enrique Zuazua, Georgios Kellaris, Joaquin Del Rio, Oleksii Sliusarenko, Xabi Uribe-Etxebarria 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19219v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Federated Learning (FL) enables collaborative model training among multiple parties without centralizing raw data. There are two main paradigms in FL: Horizontal FL (HFL), where all participants share the same feature space but hold different samples, and Vertical FL (VFL), where parties possess complementary features for the same set of samples. A prerequisite for VFL training is privacy-preserving entity alignment (PPEA), which establishes a common index of samples across parties (alignment) without revealing which samples are shared between them. Conventional private set intersection (PSI) achieves alignment but leaks intersection membership, exposing sensitive relationships between datasets. The standard private set union (PSU) mitigates this risk by aligning on the union of identifiers rather than the intersection. However, existing approaches are often limited to two parties or lack support for typo-tolerant matching. In this paper, we introduce the Sherpa.ai multi-party PSU protocol for VFL, a PPEA method that hides intersection membership and enables both exact and noisy matching. The protocol generalizes two-party approaches to multiple parties with low communication overhead and offers two variants: an order-preserving version for exact alignment and an unordered version tolerant to typographical and formatting discrepancies. We prove correctness and privacy, analyze communication and computational (exponentiation) complexity, and formalize a universal index mapping from local records to a shared index space. This multi-party PSU offers a scalable, mathematically grounded protocol for PPEA in real-world VFL deployments, such as multi-institutional healthcare disease detection, collaborative risk modeling between banks and insurers, and cross-domain fraud detection between telecommunications and financial institutions, while preserving intersection privacy.
74. ❌ UAF: A Unified Audio Front-end LLM for Full-Duplex Speech Interaction
作者: Yadong Li, Guoxin Wu, Haiping Hou, Biye Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19221v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Full-duplex speech interaction, as the most natural and intuitive mode of human communication, is driving artificial intelligence toward more human-like conversational systems. Traditional cascaded speech processing pipelines suffer from critical limitations, including accumulated latency, information loss, and error propagation across modules. To address these issues, recent efforts focus on the end-to-end audio large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4o, which primarily unify speech understanding and generation task. However, most of these models are inherently half-duplex, and rely on a suite of separate, task-specific front-end components, such as voice activity detection (VAD) and turn-taking detection (TD). In our development of speech assistant, we observed that optimizing the speech front-end is equally crucial as advancing the back-end unified model for achieving seamless, responsive interactions. To bridge this gap, we propose the first unified audio front-end LLM (UAF) tailored for full-duplex speech systems. Our model reformulates diverse audio front-end tasks into a single auto-regressive sequence prediction problem, including VAD, TD, speaker recognition (SR), automatic speech recognition (ASR) and question answer (QA). It takes streaming fixed-duration audio chunk (e.g., 600 ms) as input, leverages a reference audio prompt to anchor the target speaker at the beginning, and regressively generates discrete tokens encoding both semantic content and system-level state controls (e.g., interruption signals). Experiments demonstrate that our model achieves leading performance across multiple audio front-end tasks and significantly enhances response latency and interruption accuracy in real-world interaction scenarios.
75. ❌ Industrial Surface Defect Detection via Diffusion Generation and Asymmetric Student-Teacher Network
作者: Shuo Feng, Runlin Zhou, Yuyang Li, Guangcan Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19240v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Industrial surface defect detection often suffers from limited defect samples, severe long-tailed distributions, and difficulties in accurately localizing subtle defects under complex backgrounds. To address these challenges, this paper proposes an unsupervised defect detection method that integrates a Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Model (DDPM) with an asymmetric teacher-student architecture. First, at the data level, the DDPM is trained solely on normal samples. By introducing constant-variance Gaussian perturbations and Perlin noise-based masks, high-fidelity and physically consistent defect samples along with pixel-level annotations are generated, effectively alleviating the data scarcity problem. Second, at the model level, an asymmetric dual-stream network is constructed. The teacher network provides stable representations of normal features, while the student network reconstructs normal patterns and amplifies discrepancies between normal and anomalous regions. Finally, a joint optimization strategy combining cosine similarity loss and pixel-wise segmentation supervision is adopted to achieve precise localization of subtle defects. Experimental results on the MVTecAD dataset show that the proposed method achieves 98.4% image-level AUROC and 98.3% pixel-level AUROC, significantly outperforming existing unsupervised and mainstream deep learning methods. The proposed approach does not require large amounts of real defect samples and enables accurate and robust industrial defect detection and localization. \keywords{Industrial defect detection \and diffusion models \and data generation \and teacher-student architecture \and pixel-level localization}
76. ❌ Improved Anomaly Detection in Medical Images via Mean Shift Density Enhancement
作者: Pritam Kar, Gouri Lakshmi S, Saptarshi Bej 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19191v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Anomaly detection in medical imaging is essential for identifying rare pathological conditions, particularly when annotated abnormal samples are limited. We propose a hybrid anomaly detection framework that integrates self-supervised representation learning with manifold-based density estimation, a combination that remains largely unexplored in this domain. Medical images are first embedded into a latent feature space using pretrained, potentially domain-specific, backbones. These representations are then refined via Mean Shift Density Enhancement (MSDE), an iterative manifold-shifting procedure that moves samples toward regions of higher likelihood. Anomaly scores are subsequently computed using Gaussian density estimation in a PCA-reduced latent space, where Mahalanobis distance measures deviation from the learned normal distribution. The framework follows a one-class learning paradigm and requires only normal samples for training. Extensive experiments on seven medical imaging datasets demonstrate state-of-the-art performance. MSDE achieves the highest AUC on four datasets and the highest Average Precision on five datasets, including near-perfect performance on brain tumor detection (0.981 AUC/AP). These results underscore the potential of the proposed framework as a scalable clinical decision-support tool for early disease detection, screening in low-label settings, and robust deployment across diverse imaging modalities.
77. ❌ Attention-based Multi-modal Deep Learning Model of Spatio-temporal Crop Yield Prediction with Satellite, Soil and Climate Data
作者: Gopal Krishna Shyam, Ila Chandrakar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19217v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Crop yield prediction is one of the most important challenge, which is crucial to world food security and policy-making decisions. The conventional forecasting techniques are limited in their accuracy with reference to the fact that they utilize static data sources that do not reflect the dynamic and intricate relationships that exist between the variables of the environment over time [5,13]. This paper presents Attention-Based Multi-Modal Deep Learning Framework (ABMMDLF), which is suggested to be used in high-accuracy spatio-temporal crop yield prediction. The model we use combines multi-year satellite imagery, high-resolution time-series of meteorological data and initial soil properties as opposed to the traditional models which use only one of the aforementioned factors [12, 21]. The main architecture involves the use of Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) to extract spatial features and a Temporal Attention Mechanism to adaptively weight important phenological periods targeted by the algorithm to change over time and condition on spatial features of images and video sequences. As can be experimentally seen, the proposed research work provides an R^2 score of 0.89, which is far better than the baseline models do.
78. ❌ ClawNet: Human-Symbiotic Agent Network for Cross-User Autonomous Cooperation
作者: Zhiqin Yang, Zhenyuan Zhang, Xianzhang Jia, Jun Song, Wei Xue, Yonggang Zhang, Yike Guo 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19211v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Current AI agent frameworks have made remarkable progress in automating individual tasks, yet all existing systems serve a single user. Human productivity rests on the social and organizational relationships through which people coordinate, negotiate, and delegate. When agents move beyond performing tasks for one person to representing that person in collaboration with others, the infrastructure for cross-user agent collaboration is entirely absent, let alone the governance mechanisms needed to secure it. We argue that the next frontier for AI agents lies not in stronger individual capability, but in the digitization of human collaborative relationships. To this end, we propose a human-symbiotic agent paradigm. Each user owns a permanently bound agent system that collaborates on the owner’s behalf, forming a network whose nodes are humans rather than agents. This paradigm rests on three governance primitives. A layered identity architecture separates a Manager Agent from multiple context-specific Identity Agents; the Manager Agent holds global knowledge but is architecturally isolated from external communication. Scoped authorization enforces per-identity access control and escalates boundary violations to the owner. Action-level accountability logs every operation against its owner’s identity and authorization, ensuring full auditability. We instantiate this paradigm in ClawNet, an identity-governed agent collaboration framework that enforces identity binding and authorization verification through a central orchestrator, enabling multiple users to collaborate securely through their respective agents.
79. ❌ Inductive Subgraphs as Shortcuts: Causal Disentanglement for Heterophilic Graph Learning
作者: Xiangmeng Wang, Qian Li, Haiyang Xia, Hao Miao, Qing Li, Guandong Xu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19186v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Heterophily is a prevalent property of real-world graphs and is well known to impair the performance of homophilic Graph Neural Networks (GNNs). Prior work has attempted to adapt GNNs to heterophilic graphs through non-local neighbor extension or architecture refinement. However, the fundamental reasons behind misclassifications remain poorly understood. In this work, we take a novel perspective by examining recurring inductive subgraphs, empirically and theoretically showing that they act as spurious shortcuts that mislead GNNs and reinforce non-causal correlations in heterophilic graphs. To address this, we adopt a causal inference perspective to analyze and correct the biased learning behavior induced by shortcut inductive subgraphs. We propose a debiased causal graph that explicitly blocks confounding and spillover paths responsible for these shortcuts. Guided by this causal graph, we introduce Causal Disentangled GNN (CD-GNN), a principled framework that disentangles spurious inductive subgraphs from true causal subgraphs by explicitly blocking non-causal paths. By focusing on genuine causal signals, CD-GNN substantially improves the robustness and accuracy of node classification in heterophilic graphs. Extensive experiments on real-world datasets not only validate our theoretical findings but also demonstrate that our proposed CD-GNN outperforms state-of-the-art heterophily-aware baselines.
80. ❌ Reasoning-Aware AIGC Detection via Alignment and Reinforcement
作者: Zhao Wang, Max Xiong, Jianxun Lian, Zhicheng Dou 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19172v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The rapid advancement and widespread adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) have elevated the need for reliable AI-generated content (AIGC) detection, which remains challenging as models evolve. We introduce AIGC-text-bank, a comprehensive multi-domain dataset with diverse LLM sources and authorship scenarios, and propose REVEAL, a detection framework that generates interpretable reasoning chains before classification. Our approach uses a two-stage training strategy: supervised fine-tuning to establish reasoning capabilities, followed by reinforcement learning to improve accuracy, improve logical consistency, and reduce hallucinations. Extensive experiments show that REVEAL achieves state-of-the-art performance across multiple benchmarks, offering a robust and transparent solution for AIGC detection. The project is open-source at https://aka.ms/reveal
81. ❌ SCURank: Ranking Multiple Candidate Summaries with Summary Content Units for Enhanced Summarization
作者: Bo-Jyun Wang, Ying-Jia Lin, Hung-Yu Kao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19185v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Small language models (SLMs), such as BART, can achieve summarization performance comparable to large language models (LLMs) via distillation. However, existing LLM-based ranking strategies for summary candidates suffer from instability, while classical metrics (e.g., ROUGE) are insufficient to rank high-quality summaries. To address these issues, we introduce \textbf{SCURank}, a framework that enhances summarization by leveraging \textbf{Summary Content Units (SCUs)}. Instead of relying on unstable comparisons or surface-level overlap, SCURank evaluates summaries based on the richness and semantic importance of information content. We investigate the effectiveness of SCURank in distilling summaries from multiple diverse LLMs. Experimental results demonstrate that SCURank outperforms traditional metrics and LLM-based ranking methods across evaluation measures and datasets. Furthermore, our findings show that incorporating diverse LLM summaries enhances model abstractiveness and overall distilled model performance, validating the benefits of information-centric ranking in multi-LLM distillation. The code for SCURank is available at https://github.com/IKMLab/SCURank.
82. ❌ LBLLM: Lightweight Binarization of Large Language Models via Three-Stage Distillation
作者: Siqing Song, Chuang Wang, Yong Lang, Yi Yang, Xu-Yao Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19167v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Deploying large language models (LLMs) in resource-constrained environments is hindered by heavy computational and memory requirements. We present LBLLM, a lightweight binarization framework that achieves effective W(1+1)A4 quantization through a novel three-stage quantization strategy. The framework proceeds as follows: (1) initialize a high-quality quantized model via PTQ; (2) quantize binarized weights, group-wise bitmaps, and quantization parameters through layer-wise distillation while keeping activations in full precision; and (3) training learnable activation quantization factors to dynamically quantize activations to 4 bits. This decoupled design mitigates interference between weight and activation quantization, yielding greater training stability and better inference accuracy. LBLLM, trained only using 0.016B tokens with a single GPU, surpasses existing state-of-the-art binarization methods on W2A4 quantization settings across tasks of language modeling, commonsense QA, and language understanding. These results demonstrate that extreme low-bit quantization of LLMs can be both practical and highly effective without introducing any extra high-precision channels or rotational matrices commonly used in recent PTQ-based works, offering a promising path toward efficient LLM deployment in resource-limited situations.
83. ❌ How Do Answer Tokens Read Reasoning Traces? Self-Reading Patterns in Thinking LLMs for Quantitative Reasoning
作者: Haoyang Chen, Yi Liu, Jianzhi Shao, Tao Zhang, Chengfu Huo, Wei Hu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19149v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Thinking LLMs produce reasoning traces before answering. Prior activation steering work mainly targets on shaping these traces. It remains less understood how answer tokens actually read and integrate the reasoning to produce reliable outcomes. Focusing on quantitative reasoning, we analyze the answer-to-reasoning attention and observe a benign self-reading pattern aligned with correctness, characterized by a forward drift of the reading focus along the reasoning trace and a persistent concentration on key semantic anchors, whereas incorrect solutions exhibit diffuse and irregular attention pattern. We interpret this as internal certainty during answer decoding, where the model commits to a viable solution branch and integrates key evidence. Following this, we propose a training-free steering method driven by Self-Reading Quality (SRQ) scores combining geometric metrics for process control with semantic metrics for content monitoring. SRQ selects data to build steering vectors that guide inference toward benign self-reading and away from uncertain and disorganized reading. Experiments show that our method yields consistent accuracy gains.
84. ❌ Nexusformer: Nonlinear Attention Expansion for Stable and Inheritable Transformer Scaling
作者: Weijie Zhao, Mingquan Liu, Bolun Wang, Simo Wu, Nuobei Xie, Rui-Jie Zhu, Peng Zhou 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19147v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Scaling Transformers typically necessitates training larger models from scratch, as standard architectures struggle to expand without discarding learned representations. We identify the primary bottleneck in the attention mechanism’s linear projections, which strictly confine feature extraction to fixed-dimensional subspaces, limiting both expressivity and incremental capacity. To address this, we introduce Nexusformer, which replaces linear $Q/K/V$ projections with a Nexus-Rank layer, a three-stage nonlinear mapping driven by dual activations in progressively higher dimensional spaces. This design overcomes the linearity constraint and enables lossless structured growth: new capacity can be injected along two axes via zero-initialized blocks that preserve pretrained knowledge. Experiments on language modeling and reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that Nexusformer matches Tokenformer’s perplexity using up to 41.5% less training compute during progressive scaling (240M to 440M). Furthermore, our analysis of growth dynamics reveals that zero initialization induces a stable convergence trajectory, allowing us to derive a geometric scaling law that accurately predicts performance across expansion scales.
85. ❌ ST-Prune: Training-Free Spatio-Temporal Token Pruning for Vision-Language Models in Autonomous Driving
作者: Lin Sha, Haiyun Guo, Tao Wang, Cong Zhang, Min Huang, Jinqiao Wang, Qinghai Miao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19145v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have become central to autonomous driving systems, yet their deployment is severely bottlenecked by the massive computational overhead of multi-view camera and multi-frame video input. Existing token pruning methods, primarily designed for single-image inputs, treat each frame or view in isolation and thus fail to exploit the inherent spatio-temporal redundancies in driving scenarios. To bridge this gap, we propose ST-Prune, a training-free, plug-and-play framework comprising two complementary modules: Motion-aware Temporal Pruning (MTP) and Ring-view Spatial Pruning (RSP). MTP addresses temporal redundancy by encoding motion volatility and temporal recency as soft constraints within the diversity selection objective, prioritizing dynamic trajectories and current-frame content over static historical background. RSP further resolves spatial redundancy by exploiting the ring-view camera geometry to penalize bilateral cross-view similarity, eliminating duplicate projections and residual background that temporal pruning alone cannot suppress. These two modules together constitute a complete spatio-temporal pruning process, preserving key scene information under strict compression. Validated across four benchmarks spanning perception, prediction, and planning, ST-Prune establishes new state-of-the-art for training-free token pruning. Notably, even at 90% token reduction, ST-Prune achieves near-lossless performance with certain metrics surpassing the full-model baseline, while maintaining inference speeds comparable to existing pruning approaches.
86. ❌ Has Automated Essay Scoring Reached Sufficient Accuracy? Deriving Achievable QWK Ceilings from Classical Test Theory
作者: Masaki Uto 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19131v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Automated essay scoring (AES) is commonly evaluated on public benchmarks using quadratic weighted kappa (QWK). However, because benchmark labels are assigned by human raters and inevitably contain scoring errors, it remains unclear both what QWK is theoretically attainable and what level is practically sufficient for deployment. We therefore derive two dataset-specific QWK ceilings based on the reliability concept in classical test theory, which can be estimated from standard two-rater benchmarks without additional annotation. The first is the theoretical ceiling: the maximum QWK that an ideal AES model that perfectly predicts latent true scores can achieve under label noise. The second is the human-like ceiling: the QWK attainable by an AES model with human-level scoring error, providing a practical target when AES is intended to replace a single human rater. We further show that human–human QWK, often used as a ceiling reference, can underestimate the true ceiling. Simulation experiments validate the proposed ceilings, and experiments on real benchmarks illustrate how they clarify the current performance and remaining headroom of modern AES models.
87. ❌ The Rise of Verbal Tics in Large Language Models: A Systematic Analysis Across Frontier Models
作者: Shuai Wu, Xue Li, Yanna Feng, Yufang Li, Zhijun Wang, Ran Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19139v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
As Large Language Models (LLMs) continue to evolve through alignment techniques such as Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) and Constitutional AI, a growing and increasingly conspicuous phenomenon has emerged: the proliferation of verbal tics – repetitive, formulaic linguistic patterns that pervade model outputs. These range from sycophantic openers (“That’s a great question!”, “Awesome!”) to pseudo-empathetic affirmations (“I completely understand your concern”, “I’m right here to catch you”) and overused vocabulary (“delve”, “tapestry”, “nuanced”). In this paper, we present a systematic analysis of the verbal tic phenomenon across eight state-of-the-art LLMs: GPT-5.4, Claude Opus 4.7, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Grok 4.2, Doubao-Seed-2.0-pro, Kimi K2.5, DeepSeek V3.2, and MiMo-V2-Pro. Utilizing a custom evaluation framework for standardized API-based evaluation, we assess 10,000 prompts across 10 task categories in both English and Chinese, yielding 160,000 model responses. We introduce the Verbal Tic Index (VTI), a composite metric quantifying tic prevalence, and analyze its correlation with sycophancy, lexical diversity, and human-perceived naturalness. Our findings reveal significant inter-model variation: Gemini 3.1 Pro exhibits the highest VTI (0.590), while DeepSeek V3.2 achieves the lowest (0.295). We further demonstrate that verbal tics accumulate over multi-turn conversations, are amplified in subjective tasks, and show distinct cross-lingual patterns. Human evaluation (N = 120) confirms a strong inverse relationship between sycophancy and perceived naturalness (r = -0.87, p < 0.001). These results underscore the “alignment tax” of current training paradigms and highlight the urgent need for more authentic human-AI interaction frameworks.
88. ❌ DP-FlogTinyLLM: Differentially private federated log anomaly detection using Tiny LLMs
作者: Isaiah Thompson, Tanmay Sen, Ritwik Bhattacharya 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19118v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Modern distributed systems generate massive volumes of log data that are critical for detecting anomalies and cyber threats. However, in real world settings, these logs are often distributed across multiple organizations and cannot be centralized due to privacy and security constraints. Existing log anomaly detection methods, including recent large language model (LLM) based approaches, largely rely on centralized training and are not suitable for such environments. In this paper, we propose DP-FLogTinyLLM, a privacy preserving federated framework for log anomaly detection using parameter efficient LLMs. Our approach enables collaborative learning without sharing raw log data by integrating federated optimization with differential privacy. To ensure scalability in resource constrained environments, we employ low rank adaptation (LoRA) for efficient fine tuning of Tiny LLMs at each client. Empirical results on the Thunderbird and BGL datasets show that the proposed framework matches the performance of centralized LLM based methods, while incurring additional computational overhead due to privacy mechanisms. Compared to existing federated baselines, DP-FLogTinyLLM consistently achieves higher precision and F1-score, with particularly strong gains on the Thunderbird dataset, highlighting its effectiveness in detecting anomalies while minimizing false positives.
89. ❌ Think Before Writing: Feature-Level Multi-Objective Optimization for Generative Citation Visibility
作者: Zikang Liu, Peilan Xu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19113v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Generative answer engines expose content through selective citation rather than ranked retrieval, fundamentally altering how visibility is determined. This shift calls for new optimization methods beyond traditional search engine optimization. Existing generative engine optimization (GEO) approaches primarily rely on token-level text rewriting, offering limited interpretability and weak control over the trade-off between citation visibility and content quality. We propose FeatGEO, a feature-level, multi-objective optimization framework that abstracts webpages into interpretable structural, content, and linguistic properties. Instead of directly editing text, FeatGEO optimizes over this feature space and uses a language model to realize feature configurations into natural language, decoupling high-level optimization from surface-level generation. Experiments on GEO-Bench across three generative engines demonstrate that FeatGEO consistently improves citation visibility while maintaining or improving content quality, substantially outperforming token-level baselines. Further analyses show that citation behavior is more strongly influenced by document-level content properties than by isolated lexical edits, and that the learned feature configurations generalize across language models of different scales.
90. ❌ Design Rules for Extreme-Edge Scientific Computing on AI Engines
作者: Zhenghua Ma, G Abarajithan, Dimitrios Danopoulos, Olivia Weng, Francesco Restuccia, Ryan Kastner 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19106v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Extreme-edge scientific applications use machine learning models to analyze sensor data and make real-time decisions. Their stringent latency and throughput requirements demand small batch sizes and require that model weights remain fully on-chip. Spatial dataflow implementations are common for extreme-edge applications. Spatial dataflow works well for small networks, but it fails to scale to larger models due to inherent resource scaling limitations. AI Engines on modern FPGA SoCs offer a promising alternative with high compute density and additional on-chip memory. However, the architecture, programming model, and performance-scaling behavior of AI Engines differ fundamentally from those of the programmable logic, making direct comparison non-trivial and the benefits of using AI Engines unclear. This work addresses how and when extreme-edge scientific neural networks should be implemented on AI Engines versus programmable logic. We provide systematic architectural characterization and micro-benchmarking and introduce a latency-adjusted resource equivalence (LARE) metric that identifies when AI Engine implementations outperform programmable logic designs. We further propose spatial and API-level dataflow optimizations tailored to low-latency scientific inference. Finally, we demonstrate the successful deployment of end-to-end neural networks on AI Engines that cannot fit on programmable logic when using the hlsml toolchain.
91. ❌ Reinforcement Learning Enabled Adaptive Multi-Task Control for Bipedal Soccer Robots
作者: Yulai Zhang, Yinrong Zhang, Ting Wu, Linqi Ye 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19104v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Developing bipedal football robots in dynamiccombat environments presents challenges related to motionstability and deep coupling of multiple tasks, as well ascontrol switching issues between different states such as up-right walking and fall recovery. To address these problems,this paper proposes a modular reinforcement learning (RL)framework for achieving adaptive multi-task control. Firstly,this framework combines an open-loop feedforward oscilla-tor with a reinforcement learning-based feedback residualstrategy, effectively separating the generation of basic gaitsfrom complex football actions. Secondly, a posture-driven statemachine is introduced, clearly switching between the ballseeking and kicking network (BSKN) and the fall recoverynetwork (FRN), fundamentally preventing state interference.The FRN is efficiently trained through a progressive forceattenuation curriculum learning strategy. The architecture wasverified in Unity simulations of bipedal robots, demonstratingexcellent spatial adaptability-reliably finding and kicking theball even in restricted corner scenarios-and rapid autonomousfall recovery (with an average recovery time of 0.715 seconds).This ensures seamless and stable operation in complex multi-task environments.
92. ❌ Multi-Gait Learning for Humanoid Robots Using Reinforcement Learning with Selective Adversarial Motion Prior
作者: Yuanye Wu, Keyi Wang, Linqi Ye, Boyang Xing 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19102v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Learning diverse locomotion skills for humanoid robots in a unified reinforcement learning framework remains challenging due to the conflicting requirements of stability and dynamic expressiveness across different gaits. We present a multi-gait learning approach that enables a humanoid robot to master five distinct gaits – walking, goose-stepping, running, stair climbing, and jumping – using a consistent policy structure, action space, and reward formulation. The key contribution is a selective Adversarial Motion Prior (AMP) strategy: AMP is applied to periodic, stability-critical gaits (walking, goose-stepping, stair climbing) where it accelerates convergence and suppresses erratic behavior, while being deliberately omitted for highly dynamic gaits (running, jumping) where its regularization would over-constrain the motion. Policies are trained via PPO with domain randomization in simulation and deployed on a physical 12-DOF humanoid robot through zero-shot sim-to-real transfer. Quantitative comparisons demonstrate that selective AMP outperforms a uniform AMP policy across all five gaits, achieving faster convergence, lower tracking error, and higher success rates on stability-focused gaits without sacrificing the agility required for dynamic ones.
93. ❌ Relational AI in Education: Reciprocity, Participatory Design, and Indigenous Worldviews
作者: Roberto Martinez-Maldonado, Vanessa Echeverria, Jenna Hawes, YJ Kim, Zara Maddigan, Mikaela Milesi, Todd Nelson, Yi-Shan Tsai 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19099v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Education is not merely the transmission of information or the optimisation of individual performance; it is a fundamentally social, constructive, and relational practice. However, recent advances in generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) increasingly emphasise efficiency, automation, and individualised assistance, risking the weakening of relational learning processes. Despite growing adoption, AI in education (AIED) research has yet to fully articulate how AI can be designed in ways that sustain the social and ecological relationships through which learning occurs. In this paper, we re-centre education as relational and frame learner-AI interactions as context-specific relationships with clearly defined purposes and boundaries, rather than positioning them as substitutes for, or replacements of, human interaction. Grounded in participatory design practices and inspired by Indigenous worldviews (including Aboriginal Australian, Native American, and Mesoamerican traditions) that foreground reciprocity and relational accountability, we argue that meaningful educational AI should support learning with others rather than replace them. We advance this perspective by: i) conceptualising AIED as a relational design problem grounded in reciprocity; ii) articulating key tensions introduced by GenAI in education; and iii) outlining design directions that expand the AIED design space toward reciprocity, including when not to use AI, how to define pedagogical boundaries, and how to support responsible uses of AIED innovations that sustain communities and natural environments.
94. ❌ SAHM: A Benchmark for Arabic Financial and Shari’ah-Compliant Reasoning
作者: Rania Elbadry, Sarfraz Ahmad, Ahmed Heakl, Dani Bouch, Momina Ahsan, Muhra AlMahri, Marwa Elsaid khalil, Yuxia Wang, Salem Lahlou, Sophia Ananiadou, Veselin Stoyanov, Jimin Huang, Xueqing Peng, Preslav Nakov, Zhuohan Xie 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19098v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
English financial NLP has progressed rapidly through benchmarks for sentiment, document understanding, and financial question answering, while Arabic financial NLP remains comparatively under-explored despite strong practical demand for trustworthy finance and Islamic-finance assistants. We introduce SAHM, a document-grounded benchmark and instruction-tuning dataset for Arabic financial NLP and Shari’ah-compliant reasoning. SAHM contains 14,380 expert-verified instances spanning seven tasks: AAOIFI standards QA, fatwa-based QA/MCQ, accounting and business exams, financial sentiment analysis, extractive summarization, and event-cause reasoning, curated from authentic regulatory, juristic, and corporate sources. We evaluate 19 strong open and proprietary LLMs using task-specific metrics and rubric-based scoring for open-ended outputs, and find that Arabic fluency does not reliably translate to evidence-grounded financial reasoning: models are substantially stronger on recognition-style tasks than on generation and causal reasoning, with the largest gaps on event-cause reasoning. We release the benchmark, evaluation framework, and an instruction-tuned model to support future research on trustworthy Arabic financial NLP.
95. ❌ Multi-modal Test-time Adaptation via Adaptive Probabilistic Gaussian Calibration
作者: Jinglin Xu, Yi Li, Chuxiong Sun, Xiao Xu, Jiangmeng Li, Fanjiang Xu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19093v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Multi-modal test-time adaptation (TTA) enhances the resilience of benchmark multi-modal models against distribution shifts by leveraging the unlabeled target data during inference. Despite the documented success, the advancement of multi-modal TTA methodologies has been impeded by a persistent limitation, i.e., the lack of explicit modeling of category-conditional distributions, which is crucial for yielding accurate predictions and reliable decision boundaries. Canonical Gaussian discriminant analysis (GDA) provides a vanilla modeling of category-conditional distributions and achieves moderate advancement in uni-modal contexts. However, in multi-modal TTA scenario, the inherent modality distribution asymmetry undermines the effectiveness of modeling the category-conditional distribution via the canonical GDA. To this end, we introduce a tailored probabilistic Gaussian model for multi-modal TTA to explicitly model the category-conditional distributions, and further propose an adaptive contrastive asymmetry rectification technique to counteract the adverse effects arising from modality asymmetry, thereby deriving calibrated predictions and reliable decision boundaries. Extensive experiments across diverse benchmarks demonstrate that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance under a wide range of distribution shifts. The code is available at https://github.com/XuJinglinn/AdaPGC.
96. ❌ RoboWM-Bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating World Models in Robotic Manipulation
作者: Feng Jiang, Yang Chen, Kyle Xu, Yuchen Liu, Haifeng Wang, Zhenhao Shen, Jasper Lu, Shengze Huang, Yuanfei Wang, Chen Xie, Ruihai Wu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19092v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Recent advances in large-scale video world models have enabled increasingly realistic future prediction, raising the prospect of leveraging imagined videos for robot learning. However, visual realism does not imply physical plausibility, and behaviors inferred from generated videos may violate dynamics and fail when executed by embodied agents. Existing benchmarks begin to incorporate notions of physical plausibility, but they largely remain perception- or diagnostic-oriented and do not systematically evaluate whether predicted behaviors can be translated into executable actions that complete the intended task. To address this gap, we introduce RoboWM-Bench, a manipulation-centric benchmark for embodiment-grounded evaluation of video world models. RoboWM-Bench converts generated behaviors from both human-hand and robotic manipulation videos into embodied action sequences and validates them through robotic execution. The benchmark spans diverse manipulation scenarios and establishes a unified protocol for consistent and reproducible evaluation. Using RoboWM-Bench, we evaluate state-of-the-art video world models and find that reliably generating physically executable behaviors remains an open challenge. Common failure modes include errors in spatial reasoning, unstable contact prediction, and non-physical deformations. While finetuning on manipulation data yields improvements, physical inconsistencies still persist, suggesting opportunities for more physically grounded video generation for robots.
97. ❌ Towards Scalable Lifelong Knowledge Editing with Selective Knowledge Suppression
作者: Dahyun Jung, Jaewook Lee, Heuiseok Lim 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19089v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large language models (LLMs) require frequent knowledge updates to reflect changing facts and mitigate hallucinations. To meet this demand, lifelong knowledge editing has emerged as a continual approach to modify specific pieces of knowledge without retraining the entire model. Existing parameter editing methods struggle with stability during sequential edits due to catastrophic forgetting. While retrieval-based approaches are proposed to alleviate this issue, their applicability remains limited across various datasets because of high training costs. To address these limitations and enhance scalability in lifelong settings, we propose LightEdit. Our framework first selects relevant knowledge from retrieved information to modify the query effectively. It then incorporates a decoding strategy to suppress the model’s original knowledge probabilities, thereby enabling efficient edits based on the selected information. Extensive experiments on ZSRE, Counterfact, and RIPE benchmarks demonstrate that LightEdit outperforms existing lifelong knowledge editing methods. Furthermore, by minimizing training costs, LightEdit achieves cost-effective scalability, enabling easy adaptation to various datasets.
98. ❌ OLLM: Options-based Large Language Models
作者: Shashank Sharma, Janina Hoffmann, Vinay Namboodiri 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19087v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We introduce Options LLM (OLLM), a simple, general method that replaces the single next-token prediction of standard LLMs with a \textit{set of learned options} for the next token, indexed by a discrete latent variable. Instead of relying on temperature or sampling heuristics to induce diversity, OLLM models variation explicitly: a small latent space parametrizes multiple plausible next-token options which can be selected or searched by a downstream policy. Architecturally, OLLM is a lightweight “plug-in” that inserts two layers: an encoder and a decoder, before the output head, allowing almost any pretrained LLM to be converted with minimal additional parameters. We apply OLLM to a 1.7B-parameter backbone (only $1.56%$ of parameters trainable) trained on OpenMathReasoning and evaluated on OmniMath. The SOTA LoRA-adapted baselines peak at $51%$ final answer correctness, while OLLM’s option set allows up to $\sim 70%$ under optimal latent selection. We then train a compact policy in the latent space that emits latents to control generation. Operating in a low-dimensional option space makes reward optimization far more sample-efficient and substantially reduces common misalignments (e.g., language switching or degenerate reasoning), as the policy is constrained to options learned during SFT. Crucially, this alignment arises from model structure rather than additional KL or handcrafted alignment losses. Our results demonstrate that optionized next-token modeling enhances controllability, robustness, and efficiency in math reasoning, and highlight latent-space policy learning as a promising direction for reinforcement learning in LLMs.
99. ❌ ProjLens: Unveiling the Role of Projectors in Multimodal Model Safety
作者: Kun Wang, Cheng Qian, Miao Yu, Lilan Peng, Liang Lin, Jiaming Zhang, Tianyu Zhang, Yu Cheng, Yang Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19083v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have achieved remarkable success in cross-modal understanding and generation, yet their deployment is threatened by critical safety vulnerabilities. While prior works have demonstrated the feasibility of backdoors in MLLMs via fine-tuning data poisoning to manipulate inference, the underlying mechanisms of backdoor attacks remain opaque, complicating the understanding and mitigation. To bridge this gap, we propose ProjLens, an interpretability framework designed to demystify MLLMs backdoors. We first establish that normal downstream task alignment–even when restricted to projector fine–tuning–introduces vulnerability to backdoor injection, whose activation mechanism is different from that observed in text-only LLMs. Through extensive experiments across four backdoor variants, we uncover:(1) Low-Rank Structure: Backdoor injection updates appear overall full-rank and lack dedicated ``trigger neurons’’, but the backdoor-critical parameters are encoded within a low-rank subspace of the projector;(2) Activation Mechanism: Both clean and poisoned embedding undergoes a semantic shift toward a shared direction aligned with the backdoor target, but the shifting magnitude scales linearly with the input norm, resulting in the distinct backdoor activation on poisoned samples. Our code is available at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/ProjLens-8FD7
100. ❌ Reducing the Offline-Streaming Gap for Unified ASR Transducer with Consistency Regularization
作者: Andrei Andrusenko, Vladimir Bataev, Lilit Grigoryan, Nune Tadevosyan, Vitaly Lavrukhin, Boris Ginsburg 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19079v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Unification of automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems reduces development and maintenance costs, but training a single model to perform well in both offline and low-latency streaming settings remains challenging. We present a Unified ASR framework for Transducer (RNNT) training that supports both offline and streaming decoding within a single model, using chunk-limited attention with right context and dynamic chunked convolutions. To further close the gap between offline and streaming performance, we introduce an efficient Triton implementation of mode-consistency regularization for RNNT (MCR-RNNT), which encourages agreement across training modes. Experiments show that the proposed approach improves streaming accuracy at low latency while preserving offline performance and scaling to larger model sizes and training datasets. The proposed Unified ASR framework and the English model checkpoint are open-sourced.
101. ❌ Discovering a Shared Logical Subspace: Steering LLM Logical Reasoning via Alignment of Natural-Language and Symbolic Views
作者: Feihao Fang, My T. Thai, Yuanyuan Lei 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19716v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large Language Models (LLMs) still struggle with multi-step logical reasoning. Existing approaches either purely refine the reasoning chain in natural language form or attach a symbolic solver as an external module. In this work, we instead ask whether LLMs contain a shared internal logical subspace that simultaneously aligns natural-language and symbolic-language views of the reasoning process. Our hypothesis is that this logical subspace captures logical reasoning capabilities in LLMs that are shared across views while remaining independent of surface forms. To verify this, we employ Canonical Correlation Analysis on the paired residual activations from natural-language and symbolic-language reasoning chains, learning a low-dimensional subspace with maximum cross-view correlation. Furthermore, we design a training-free approach that steers LLMs reasoning chain along this logical subspace, thereby leveraging the complementary reasoning signals from both views. Experiments on four logical reasoning benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, improving accuracy by up to 11 percentage points and generalizing well on out-of-domain problems.
102. ❌ Epistemic orientation in parliamentary discourse is associated with deliberative democracy
作者: Segun Aroyehun, Stephan Lewandowsky, David Garcia 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19699v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The pursuit of truth is central to democratic deliberation and governance, yet political discourse reflects varying epistemic orientations, ranging from evidence-based reasoning grounded in verifiable information to intuition-based reasoning rooted in beliefs and subjective interpretation. We introduce a scalable approach to measure epistemic orientation using the Evidence–Minus–Intuition (EMI) score, derived from large language model (LLM) ratings and embedding-based semantic similarity. Applying this approach to 15 million parliamentary speech segments spanning 1946 to 2025 across seven countries, we examine temporal patterns in discourse and its association with deliberative democracy and governance. We find that EMI is positively associated with deliberative democracy within countries over time, with consistent relationships in both contemporaneous and lagged analyses. EMI is also positively associated with the transparency and predictable implementation of laws as a dimension of governance. These findings suggest that the epistemic nature of political discourse is crucial for both the quality of democracy and governance.
103. ❌ An Answer is just the Start: Related Insight Generation for Open-Ended Document-Grounded QA
作者: Saransh Sharma, Pritika Ramu, Aparna Garimella, Koyel Mukherjee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19685v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Answering open-ended questions remains challenging for AI systems because it requires synthesis, judgment, and exploration beyond factual retrieval, and users often refine answers through multiple iterations rather than accepting a single response. Existing QA benchmarks do not explicitly support this refinement process. To address this gap, we introduce a new task, document-grounded related insight generation, where the goal is to generate additional insights from a document collection that help improve, extend, or rethink an initial answer to an open-ended question, ultimately supporting richer user interaction and a better overall question answering experience. We curate and release SCOpE-QA (Scientific Collections for Open-Ended QA), a dataset of 3,000 open-ended questions across 20 research collections. We present InsightGen, a two-stage approach that first constructs a thematic representation of the document collection using clustering, and then selects related context based on neighborhood selection from the thematic graph to generate diverse and relevant insights using LLMs. Extensive evaluation on 3,000 questions using two generation models and two evaluation settings shows that InsightGen consistently produces useful, relevant, and actionable insights, establishing a strong baseline for this new task.
104. ❌ Exploring Language-Agnosticity in Function Vectors: A Case Study in Machine Translation
作者: Nurkhan Laiyk, Gerard I. Gállego, Javier Ferrando, Fajri Koto 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19678v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Function vectors (FVs) are vector representations of tasks extracted from model activations during in-context learning. While prior work has shown that multilingual model representations can be language-agnostic, it remains unclear whether the same holds for function vectors. We study whether FVs exhibit language-agnosticity, using machine translation as a case study. Across three decoder-only multilingual LLMs, we find that translation FVs extracted from a single English$\rightarrow$Target direction transfer to other target languages, consistently improving the rank of correct translation tokens across multiple unseen languages. Ablation results show that removing the FV degrades translation across languages with limited impact on unrelated tasks. We further show that base-model FVs transfer to instruction-tuned variants and partially generalize from word-level to sentence-level translation.
105. ❌ Pause or Fabricate? Training Language Models for Grounded Reasoning
作者: Yiwen Qiu, Linjuan Wu, Yizhou Liu, Yuchen Yan, Jin Ma, Xu Tan, Yao Hu, Daoxin Zhang, Wenqi Zhang, Weiming Lu, Jun Xiao, Yongliang Shen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19656v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large language models have achieved remarkable progress on complex reasoning tasks. However, they often implicitly fabricate information when inputs are incomplete, producing confident but unreliable conclusions – a failure mode we term ungrounded reasoning. We argue that this issue arises not from insufficient reasoning capability, but from the lack of inferential boundary awareness – the ability to recognize when the necessary premises for valid inference are missing. To address this issue, we propose Grounded Reasoning via Interactive Reinforcement Learning (GRIL), a multi-turn reinforcement learning framework for grounded reasoning under incomplete information. GRIL decomposes the reasoning process into two stages: clarify and pause, which identifies whether the available information is sufficient, and grounded reasoning, which performs task solving once the necessary premises are established. We design stage-specific rewards to penalize hallucinations, enabling models to detect gaps, stop proactively, and resume reasoning after clarification. Experiments on GSM8K-Insufficient and MetaMATH-Insufficient show that GRIL significantly improves premise detection (up to 45%), leading to a 30% increase in task success while reducing average response length by over 20%. Additional analyses confirm robustness to noisy user responses and generalization to out-of-distribution tasks.
106. ❌ The signal is the ceiling: Measurement limits of LLM-predicted experience ratings from open-ended survey text
作者: Andrew Hong, Jason Potteiger, Luis E. Zapata 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19645v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
An earlier paper (Hong, Potteiger, and Zapata 2026) established that an unoptimized GPT 4.1 prompt predicts fan-reported experience ratings within one point 67% of the time from open-ended survey text. This paper tests the relative impact of prompt design and model selection on that performance. We compared four configurations on approximately 10,000 post-game surveys from five MLB teams: the original baseline prompt and a moderately customized version, crossed with three GPT models (4.1, 4.1-mini, 5.2). Prompt customization added roughly two percentage points of within +/-1 agreement on GPT 4.1 (from 67% to 69%). Both model swaps from that best configuration degraded performance: GPT 5.2 returned to the baseline, and GPT 4.1-mini fell six percentage points below it. Both levers combined were dwarfed by the input itself: across capable configurations, accuracy varied more than an order of magnitude more by the linguistic character of the text than by the choice of prompt or model. The ceiling has two parts. One is a bias in how the model reads text, which prompt design can correct. The other is a difference between what fans write about and what they actually decide, which no engineering can close because the missing information is not in the text. Prompt customization moved the first part; model selection moved neither reliably. The result is not that “prompt engineering helps a little” but that prompt engineering helps in a specific and predictable way, on the part of the ceiling it can reach.
107. ❌ The “Small World of Words” German Free-Association Norms
作者: Samuel Aeschbach, Rui Mata, Kaidi Lõo, Simon De Deyne, Dirk U. Wulff 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19620v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Free-association norms provide essential empirical data for investigating linguistic, semantic, and cultural phenomena in the cognitive sciences. Although large-scale norms exist for languages such as English, Dutch, Spanish, and Mandarin Chinese, no comparable resource has been available for German. To address this gap, we present free-association norms for 5,877 German cue words as part of the German version of the multilingual Small World of Words (SWOW) project. We describe the data collection procedures, participant characteristics, and our comprehensive preprocessing pipeline before introducing the resulting SWOW-DE data set. Using data from three established psycholinguistic paradigms, we show that SWOW-DE norms robustly predict performance in lexical decision tasks, relatedness judgments, and psycholinguistic word ratings. Furthermore, we demonstrate that SWOW-DE responses compare favorably with existing German resources and provide a preliminary cross-linguistic comparison revealing both shared and language-specific association patterns, highlighting promising directions for future research. Overall, SWOW-DE represents the largest collection of German free associations to date and offers a unique resource for linguistic, psychological, and cross-cultural research.
108. ❌ Micro Language Models Enable Instant Responses
作者: Wen Cheng, Tuochao Chen, Karim Helwani, Sriram Srinivasan, Luke Zettlemoyer, Shyamnath Gollakota 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19642v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Edge devices such as smartwatches and smart glasses cannot continuously run even the smallest 100M-1B parameter language models due to power and compute constraints, yet cloud inference introduces multi-second latencies that break the illusion of a responsive assistant. We introduce micro language models ($μ$LMs): ultra-compact models (8M-30M parameters) that instantly generate the first 4-8 words of a contextually grounded response on-device, while a cloud model completes it; thus, masking the cloud latency. We show that useful language generation survives at this extreme scale with our models matching several 70M-256M-class existing models. We design a collaborative generation framework that reframes the cloud model as a continuator rather than a respondent, achieving seamless mid-sentence handoffs and structured graceful recovery via three error correction methods when the local opener goes wrong. Empirical results show that $μ$LMs can initiate responses that larger models complete seamlessly, demonstrating that orders-of-magnitude asymmetric collaboration is achievable and unlocking responsive AI for extremely resource-constrained devices. The model checkpoint and demo are available at https://github.com/Sensente/micro_language_model_swen_project.
109. ❌ A Bolu: A Structured Dataset for the Computational Analysis of Sardinian Improvisational Poetry
作者: Silvio Calderaro, Johanna Monti 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19584v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The growing interest of Natural Language Processing (NLP) in minority languages has not yet bridged the gap in the preservation of oral linguistic heritage. In particular, extemporaneous poetry - a performative genre based on real-time improvisation, metrical-rhetorical competence - remains a largely unexplored area of computational linguistics. This methodological gap necessitates the creation of specific resources to document and analyse the structures of improvised poetry. This is the context in which A Bolu was created, the first structured corpus of extemporaneous poetry dedicated to cantada logudorese, a variant of the Sardinian language. The dataset comprises 2,835 stanzas for a total of 141,321 tokens. The study presents the architecture of the corpus and applies a multidimensional analysis combining descriptive statistical indices and computational linguistics techniques to map the characteristics of the poetic text. The results indicate that the production of Sardinian extemporaneous poets is characterised by recurring patterns that support Parry and Lord’s theory of formulaicity. This evidence not only provides a new key to understanding oral creativity, but also offers a significant contribution to the development of NLP tools that are more inclusive and sensitive to the specificities of less widely spoken languages.
110. ❌ A Self-Evolving Framework for Efficient Terminal Agents via Observational Context Compression
作者: Jincheng Ren, Siwei Wu, Yizhi Li, Kang Zhu, Shu Xu, Boyu Feng, Ruibin Yuan, Wei Zhang, Riza Batista-Navarro, Jian Yang, Chenghua Lin 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19572v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
As model capabilities advance, research has increasingly shifted toward long-horizon, multi-turn terminal-centric agentic tasks, where raw environment feedback is often preserved in the interaction history to support future decisions. However, repeatedly retaining such feedback introduces substantial redundancy and causes cumulative token cost to grow quadratically with the number of steps, hindering long-horizon reasoning. Although observation compression can mitigate this issue, the heterogeneity of terminal environments makes heuristic-based or fixed-prompt methods difficult to generalize. We propose TACO, a plug-and-play, self-evolving Terminal Agent Compression framework that automatically discovers and refines compression rules from interaction trajectories for existing terminal agents. Experiments on TerminalBench (TB 1.0 and TB 2.0) and four additional terminal-related benchmarks (i.e., SWE-Bench Lite, CompileBench, DevEval, and CRUST-Bench) show that TACO consistently improves performance across mainstream agent frameworks and strong backbone models. With MiniMax-2.5, it improves performance on most benchmarks while reducing token overhead by around 10%. On TerminalBench, it brings consistent gains of 1%-4% across strong agentic models, and further improves accuracy by around 2%-3% under the same token budget. These results demonstrate the effectiveness and generalization of self-evolving, task-aware compression for terminal agents.
111. ❌ Diagnosable ColBERT: Debugging Late-Interaction Retrieval Models Using a Learned Latent Space as Reference
作者: François Remy 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19566v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Reliable biomedical and clinical retrieval requires more than strong ranking performance: it requires a practical way to find systematic model failures and curate the training evidence needed to correct them. Late-interaction models such as ColBERT provide a first solution thanks to the interpretable token-level interaction scores they expose between document and query tokens. Yet this interpretability is shallow: it explains a particular document–query pairwise score, but does not reveal whether the model has learned a clinical concept in a stable, reusable, and context-sensitive way across diverse expressions. As a result, these scores provide limited support for diagnosing misunderstandings, identifying irreasonably distant biomedical concepts, or deciding what additional data or feedback is needed to address this. In this short position paper, we propose Diagnosable ColBERT, a framework that aligns ColBERT token embeddings to a reference latent space grounded in clinical knowledge and expert-provided conceptual similarity constraints. This alignment turns document encodings into inspectable evidence of what the model appears to understand, enabling more direct error diagnosis and more principled data curation without relying on large batteries of diagnostic queries.
112. ❌ Emotion-Cause Pair Extraction in Conversations via Semantic Decoupling and Graph Alignment
作者: Tianxiang Ma, Weijie Feng, Xinyu Wang, Zhiyong Cheng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19547v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Emotion-Cause Pair Extraction in Conversations (ECPEC) aims to identify the set of causal relations between emotion utterances and their triggering causes within a dialogue. Most existing approaches formulate ECPEC as an independent pairwise classification task, overlooking the distinct semantics of emotion diffusion and cause explanation, and failing to capture globally consistent many-to-many conversational causality. To address these limitations, we revisit ECPEC from a semantic perspective and seek to disentangle emotion-oriented semantics from cause-oriented semantics, mapping them into two complementary representation spaces to better capture their distinct conversational roles. Building on this semantic decoupling, we naturally formulate ECPEC as a global alignment problem between the emotion-side and cause-side representations, and employ optimal transport to enable many-to-many and globally consistent emotion-cause matching. Based on this perspective, we propose a unified framework SCALE that instantiates the above semantic decoupling and alignment principle within a shared conversational structure. Extensive experiments on several benchmark datasets demonstrate that SCALE consistently achieves state-of-the-art performance. Our codes are released at https://github.com/CoCoSphere/SCALE.
113. ❌ Bangla Key2Text: Text Generation from Keywords for a Low Resource Language
作者: Tonmoy Talukder, G M Shahariar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19508v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This paper introduces \textit{Bangla Key2Text}, a large-scale dataset of $2.6$ million Bangla keyword–text pairs designed for keyword-driven text generation in a low-resource language. The dataset is constructed using a BERT-based keyword extraction pipeline applied to millions of Bangla news texts, transforming raw articles into structured keyword–text pairs suitable for supervised learning. To establish baseline performance on this new benchmark, we fine-tune two sequence-to-sequence models, \texttt{mT5} and \texttt{BanglaT5}, and evaluate them using multiple automatic metrics and human judgments. Experimental results show that task-specific fine-tuning substantially improves keyword-conditioned text generation in Bangla compared to zero-shot large language models. The dataset, trained models, and code are publicly released to support future research in Bangla natural language generation and keyword-to-text generation tasks.
114. ❌ Enhancing Unsupervised Keyword Extraction in Academic Papers through Integrating Highlights with Abstract
作者: Yi Xiang, Chengzhi Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19505v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Automatic keyword extraction from academic papers is a key area of interest in natural language processing and information retrieval. Although previous research has mainly focused on utilizing abstract and references for keyword extraction, this paper focuses on the highlights section - a summary describing the key findings and contributions, offering readers a quick overview of the research. Our observations indicate that highlights contain valuable keyword information that can effectively complement the abstract. To investigate the impact of incorporating highlights into unsupervised keyword extraction, we evaluate three input scenarios: using only the abstract, the highlights, and a combination of both. Experiments conducted with four unsupervised models on Computer Science (CS), Library and Information Science (LIS) datasets reveal that integrating the abstract with highlights significantly improves extraction performance. Furthermore, we examine the differences in keyword coverage and content between abstract and highlights, exploring how these variations influence extraction outcomes. The data and code are available at https://github.com/xiangyi-njust/Highlight-KPE.
115. ❌ Beyond Rating: A Comprehensive Evaluation and Benchmark for AI Reviews
作者: Bowen Li, Haochen Ma, Yuxin Wang, Jie Yang, Xinchi Chen, Xuanjing Huang, Yining Zheng, Xipeng Qiu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19502v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The rapid adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) has spurred interest in automated peer review; however, progress is currently stifled by benchmarks that treat reviewing primarily as a rating prediction task. We argue that the utility of a review lies in its textual justification–its arguments, questions, and critique–rather than a scalar score. To address this, we introduce Beyond Rating, a holistic evaluation framework that assesses AI reviewers across five dimensions: Content Faithfulness, Argumentative Alignment, Focus Consistency, Question Constructiveness, and AI-Likelihood. Notably, we propose a Max-Recall strategy to accommodate valid expert disagreement and introduce a curated dataset of paper with high-confidence reviews, rigorously filtered to remove procedural noise. Extensive experiments demonstrate that while traditional n-gram metrics fail to reflect human preferences, our proposed text-centric metrics–particularly the recall of weakness arguments–correlate strongly with rating accuracy. These findings establish that aligning AI critique focus with human experts is a prerequisite for reliable automated scoring, offering a robust standard for future research.
116. ❌ Deep Supervised Contrastive Learning of Pitch Contours for Robust Pitch Accent Classification in Seoul Korean
作者: Hyunjung Joo, GyeongTaek Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19477v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The intonational structure of Seoul Korean has been defined with discrete tonal categories within the Autosegmental-Metrical model of intonational phonology. However, it is challenging to map continuous $F_0$ contours to these invariant categories due to variable $F_0$ realizations in real-world speech. Our paper proposes Dual-Glob, a deep supervised contrastive learning framework to robustly classify fine-grained pitch accent patterns in Seoul Korean. Unlike conventional local predictive models, our approach captures holistic $F_0$ contour shapes by enforcing structural consistency between clean and augmented views in a shared latent space. To this aim, we introduce the first large-scale benchmark dataset, consisting of manually annotated 10,093 Accentual Phrases in Seoul Korean. Experimental results show that our Dual-Glob significantly outperforms strong baseline models with state-of-the-art accuracy (77.75%) and F1-score (51.54%). Therefore, our work supports AM-based intonational phonology using data-driven methodology, showing that deep contrastive learning effectively captures holistic structural features of continuous $F_0$ contours.
117. ❌ Rank-Turbulence Delta and Interpretable Approaches to Stylometric Delta Metrics
作者: Dmitry Pronin, Evgeny Kazartsev 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19499v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This article introduces two new measures for authorship attribution - Rank-Turbulence Delta and Jensen-Shannon Delta - which generalise Burrows’s classical Delta by applying distance functions designed for probabilistic distributions. We first set out the theoretical basis of the measures, contrasting centred and uncentred z-scoring of word-frequency vectors and re-casting the uncentred vectors as probability distributions. Building on this representation, we develop a token-level decomposition that renders every Delta distance numerically interpretable, thereby facilitating close reading and the validation of results. The effectiveness of the methods is assessed on four literary corpora in English, German, French and Russian. The English, German and French datasets are compiled from Project Gutenberg, whereas the Russian benchmark is the SOCIOLIT corpus containing 755 works by 180 authors spanning the eighteenth to the twenty-first centuries. Rank-Turbulence Delta attains attribution accuracy comparable with Cosine Delta; Jensen-Shannon Delta consistently matches or exceeds the performance of canonical Burrows’s Delta. Finally, several established attribution algorithms are re-evaluated on the extended SOCIOLIT corpus.
118. ❌ ‘The Order in the Horse’s Heart’: A Case Study in LLM-Assisted Stylometry for the Discovery of Biblical Allusion in Modern Literary Fiction
作者: Ewan Cameron 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19447v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We present a dual-track pipeline for detecting biblical allusions in literary fiction and apply it to the novels of Cormac McCarthy. A bottom-up embedding track uses inverse document frequency to identify rare vocabulary shared with the King James Bible, embeds occurrences in their local context for sense disambiguation, and passes candidate passage pairs through cascaded LLM review. A top-down register track asks an LLM to read McCarthy’s prose undirected to any specific biblical passage for comparison, catching allusions not distinguished by word or phrase rarity. Both tracks are cross-validated by a long-context model that holds entire novels alongside the KJV in a single pass, and every finding is checked against published scholarship. Restricting attention to allusions that carry a textual echo–shared phrasing, reworked vocabulary, or transplanted cadence–and distinguishing literary allusions proper from signposted biblical references (similes naming biblical figures, characters overtly citing scripture), the pipeline surfaces 349 allusions across the corpus. Among a target set of 115 previously documented allusions retrieved through human review of the academic literature, the pipeline independently recovers 62 (54% recall), with recall varying by connection type from 30% (transformed imagery) to 80% (register collisions). We contextualise these results with respect to the value-add from LLMs as assistants to mechanical stylometric analyses, and their potential to facilitate the statistical study of intertextuality in massive literary corpora.
119. ❌ What Makes an LLM a Good Optimizer? A Trajectory Analysis of LLM-Guided Evolutionary Search
作者: Xinhao Zhang, Xi Chen, François Portet, Maxime Peyrard 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19440v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Recent work has demonstrated the promise of orchestrating large language models (LLMs) within evolutionary and agentic optimization systems. However, the mechanisms driving these optimization gains remain poorly understood. In this work, we present a large-scale study of LLM-guided evolutionary search, collecting optimization trajectories for 15 LLMs across 8 tasks. Although zero-shot problem-solving ability correlates with final optimization outcomes, it explains only part of the variance: models with similar initial capability often induce dramatically different search trajectories and outcomes. By analyzing these trajectories, we find that strong LLM optimizers behave as local refiners, producing frequent incremental improvements while progressively localizing the search in semantic space. Conversely, weaker optimizers exhibit large semantic drift, with sporadic breakthroughs followed by stagnation. Notably, various measures of solution novelty do not predict final performance; novelty is beneficial only when the search remains sufficiently localized around high-performing regions of the solution space. Our results highlight the importance of trajectory analysis for understanding and improving LLM-based optimization systems and provide actionable insights for their design and training.
120. ❌ VCE: A zero-cost hallucination mitigation method of LVLMs via visual contrastive editing
作者: Yanbin Huang, Yisen Li, Guiyao Tie, Xiaoye Qu, Pan Zhou, Hongfei Wang, Zhaofan Zou, Hao Sun, Xuelong Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19412v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large vision-language models (LVLMs) frequently suffer from Object Hallucination (OH), wherein they generate descriptions containing objects that are not actually present in the input image. This phenomenon is particularly problematic in real-world applications such as medical imaging and autonomous driving, where accuracy is critical. Recent studies suggest that the hallucination problem may stem from language priors: biases learned during pretraining that cause LVLMs to generate words based on their statistical co-occurrence. To mitigate this problem, we propose Visual Contrastive Editing (VCE), a novel post-hoc method that identifies and suppresses hallucinatory tendencies by analyzing the model’s response to contrastive visual perturbations. Using Singular Value Decomposition (SVD), we decompose the model’s activation patterns to isolate hallucination subspaces and apply targeted parameter edits to attenuate its influence. Unlike existing approaches that require fine-tuning or labeled data, VCE operates as a label-free intervention, making it both scalable and practical for deployment in resource-constrained settings. Experimental results demonstrate that VCE effectively reduces object hallucination across multiple benchmarks while maintaining the model’s original computational efficiency.
121. ❌ Lost in Translation: Do LVLM Judges Generalize Across Languages?
作者: Md Tahmid Rahman Laskar, Mohammed Saidul Islam, Mir Tafseer Nayeem, Amran Bhuiyan, Mizanur Rahman, Shafiq Joty, Enamul Hoque, Jimmy Huang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19405v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Automatic evaluators such as reward models play a central role in the alignment and evaluation of large vision-language models (LVLMs). Despite their growing importance, these evaluators are almost exclusively assessed on English-centric benchmarks, leaving open the question of how well these evaluators generalize across languages. To answer this question, we introduce MM-JudgeBench, the first large-scale benchmark for multilingual and multimodal judge model evaluation, which includes over 60K pairwise preference instances spanning 25 typologically diverse languages. MM-JudgeBench integrates two complementary subsets: a general vision-language preference evaluation subset extending VL-RewardBench, and a chart-centric visual-text reasoning subset derived from OpenCQA, enabling systematic analysis of reward models (i.e., LVLM judges) across diverse settings. We additionally release a multilingual training set derived from MM-RewardBench, disjoint from our evaluation data, to support domain adaptation. By evaluating 22 LVLMs (15 open-source, 7 proprietary), we uncover substantial cross-lingual performance variance in our proposed benchmark. Our analysis further shows that model size and architecture are poor predictors of multilingual robustness, and that even state-of-the-art LVLM judges exhibit inconsistent behavior across languages. Together, these findings expose fundamental limitations of current reward modeling and underscore the necessity of multilingual, multimodal benchmarks for developing reliable automated evaluators.
122. ❌ Does Self-Consistency Improve the Recall of Encyclopedic Knowledge?
作者: Sho Hoshino, Ukyo Honda, Peinan Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19395v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
While self-consistency is known to improve performance on symbolic reasoning, its effect on the recall of encyclopedic knowledge is unclear due to a lack of targeted evaluation grounds. To address this, we establish such a knowledge recall split for the popular MMLU benchmark by applying a data-driven heuristic from prior work. We validate this split by showing that the performance patterns on the symbolic reasoning and knowledge recall subsets mirror those of GSM8K and MedMCQA, respectively. Using this solid ground, we find that self-consistency consistently improves performance across both symbolic reasoning and knowledge recall, even though its underlying CoT prompting is primarily effective for symbolic reasoning. As a result, we achieve an 89% accuracy on MMLU, the best performance to date with the use of GPT-4o.
123. ❌ Can Continual Pre-training Bridge the Performance Gap between General-purpose and Specialized Language Models in the Medical Domain?
作者: Niclas Doll, Jasper Schulze Buschhoff, Shalaka Satheesh, Hammam Abdelwahab, Héctor Allende-Cid, Katrin Klug 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19394v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This paper narrows the performance gap between small, specialized models and significantly larger general-purpose models through domain adaptation via continual pre-training and merging. We address the scarcity of specialized non-English data by constructing a high-quality German medical corpus (FineMed-de) from FineWeb2. This corpus is used to continually pre-train and merge three well-known LLMs (ranging from $7B$ to $24B$ parameters), creating the DeFineMed model family. A comprehensive evaluation confirms that specialization dramatically enhances $7B$ model performance on German medical benchmarks. Furthermore, the pairwise win-rate analysis of the Qwen2.5-based models demonstrates an approximately $3.5$-fold increase in the win-rate against the much larger Mistral-Small-24B-Instruct through domain adaptation. This evidence positions specialized $7B$ models as a competitive, resource-efficient solution for complex medical instruction-following tasks. While model merging successfully restores instruction-following abilities, a subsequent failure mode analysis reveals inherent trade-offs, including the introduction of language mixing and increased verbosity, highlighting the need for more targeted fine-tuning in future work. This research provides a robust, compliant methodology for developing specialized LLMs, serving as the foundation for practical use in German-speaking healthcare contexts.
124. ❌ DASH-KV: Accelerating Long-Context LLM Inference via Asymmetric KV Cache Hashing
作者: Jinyu Guo, Zhihan Zhang, Yutong Li, Jiehui Xie, Md. Tamim Iqbal, Dongshen Han, Lik-Hang Lee, Sung-Ho Bae, Jie Zou, Yang Yang, Chaoning Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19351v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The quadratic computational complexity of the standard attention mechanism constitutes a fundamental bottleneck for large language models in long-context inference. While existing KV cache compression methods alleviate memory pressure, they often sacrifice generation quality and fail to address the high overhead of floating-point arithmetic. This paper introduces DASH-KV, an innovative acceleration framework that reformulates attention as approximate nearest-neighbor search via asymmetric deep hashing. Under this paradigm, we design an asymmetric encoding architecture that differentially maps queries and keys to account for their distinctions in precision and reuse characteristics. To balance efficiency and accuracy, we further introduce a dynamic mixed-precision mechanism that adaptively retains full-precision computation for critical tokens. Extensive experiments on LongBench demonstrate that DASH-KV significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baseline methods while matching the performance of full attention, all while reducing inference complexity from O(N^2) to linear O(N). The code is available at https://github.com/Zhihan-Zh/DASH-KV
125. ❌ Are Large Language Models Economically Viable for Industry Deployment?
作者: Abdullah Mohammad, Sushant Kumar Ray, Pushkar Arora, Rafiq Ali, Ebad Shabbir, Gautam Siddharth Kashyap, Jiechao Gao, Usman Naseem 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19342v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Generative AI-powered by Large Language Models (LLMs)-is increasingly deployed in industry across healthcare decision support, financial analytics, enterprise retrieval, and conversational automation, where reliability, efficiency, and cost control are critical. In such settings, models must satisfy strict constraints on energy, latency, and hardware utilization-not accuracy alone. Yet prevailing evaluation pipelines remain accuracy-centric, creating a Deployment-Evaluation Gap-the absence of operational and economic criteria in model assessment. To address this gap, we present EDGE-EVAL-a industry-oriented benchmarking framework that evaluates LLMs across their full lifecycle on legacy NVIDIA Tesla T4 GPUs. Benchmarking LLaMA and Qwen variants across three industrial tasks, we introduce five deployment metrics-Economic Break-Even (Nbreak), Intelligence-Per-Watt (IPW ), System Density (\r{ho}sys), Cold-Start Tax (Ctax), and Quantization Fidelity (Qret)-capturing profitability, energy efficiency, hardware scaling, serverless feasibility, and compression safety. Our results reveal a clear efficiency frontier-models in the <2B parameter class dominate larger baselines across economic and ecological dimensions. LLaMA-3.2-1B (INT4) achieves ROI break-even in 14 requests (median), delivers 3x higher energy-normalized intelligence than 7B models, and exceeds 6,900 tokens/s/GB under 4-bit quantization. We further uncover an efficiency anomaly-while QLoRA reduces memory footprint, it increases adaptation energy by up to 7x for small models-challenging prevailing assumptions about quantization-aware training in edge deployment.
126. ❌ Evaluating LLM-Driven Summarisation of Parliamentary Debates with Computational Argumentation
作者: Eoghan Cunningham, Derek Greene, James Cross, Antonio Rago 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19331v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Understanding how policy is debated and justified in parliament is a fundamental aspect of the democratic process. However, the volume and complexity of such debates mean that outside audiences struggle to engage. Meanwhile, Large Language Models (LLMs) have been shown to enable automated summarisation at scale. While summaries of debates can make parliamentary procedures more accessible, evaluating whether these summaries faithfully communicate argumentative content remains challenging. Existing automated summarisation metrics have been shown to correlate poorly with human judgements of consistency (i.e., faithfulness or alignment between summary and source). In this work, we propose a formal framework for evaluating parliamentary debate summaries that grounds argument structures in the contested proposals up for debate. Our novel approach, driven by computational argumentation, focuses the evaluation on formal properties concerning the faithful preservation of the reasoning presented to justify or oppose policy outcomes. We demonstrate our methods using a case-study of debates from the European Parliament and associated LLM-driven summaries.
127. ❌ HarDBench: A Benchmark for Draft-Based Co-Authoring Jailbreak Attacks for Safe Human-LLM Collaborative Writing
作者: Euntae Kim, Soomin Han, Buru Chang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19274v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as co-authors in collaborative writing, where users begin with rough drafts and rely on LLMs to complete, revise, and refine their content. However, this capability poses a serious safety risk: malicious users could jailbreak the models-filling incomplete drafts with dangerous content-to force them into generating harmful outputs. In this paper, we identify the vulnerability of current LLMs to such draft-based co-authoring jailbreak attacks and introduce HarDBench, a systematic benchmark designed to evaluate the robustness of LLMs against this emerging threat. HarDBench spans a range of high-risk domains-including Explosives, Drugs, Weapons, and Cyberattacks-and features prompts with realistic structure and domain-specific cues to assess the model susceptibility to harmful completions. To mitigate this risk, we introduce a safety-utility balanced alignment approach based on preference optimization, training models to refuse harmful completions while remaining helpful on benign drafts. Experimental results show that existing LLMs are highly vulnerable in co-authoring contexts and our alignment method significantly reduces harmful outputs without degrading performance on co-authoring capabilities. This presents a new paradigm for evaluating and aligning LLMs in human-LLM collaborative writing settings. Our new benchmark and dataset are available on our project page at https://github.com/untae0122/HarDBench
128. ❌ Towards a Linguistic Evaluation of Narratives: A Quantitative Stylistic Framework
作者: Alessandro Maisto 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19261v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The evaluation of narrative quality remains a complex challenge, as it involves subjective factors such as plot, character development, and emotional impact. This work proposes a quantitative approach to narrative assessment by focusing on the linguistic dimension as a primary indicator of quality. The paper presents a methodology for the automatic evaluation of narrative based on the extraction of a comprehensive set of 33 quantitative linguistic features categorized into lexical, syntactic, and semantic groups. To test the model, an experiment was conducted on a specialized corpus of 23 books, including canonical masterpieces and self-published works. Through a similarity matrix, the system successfully clustered the narratives, distinguishing almost perfectly between professionally edited and self-published texts. Furthermore, the methodology was validated against a human-annotated dataset; it significantly outperforms traditional story-level evaluation metrics, demonstrating the effectiveness of quantitative linguistic features in assessing narrative quality.
129. ❌ Headlines You Won’t Forget: Can Pronoun Insertion Increase Memorability?
作者: Selina Meyer, Magdalena Abel, Michael Roth 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19189v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
For news headlines to influence beliefs and drive action, relevant information needs to be retained and retrievable from memory. In this probing study we draw on experiment designs from cognitive psychology to examine how a specific linguistic feature, namely direct address through first- and second-person pronouns, affects memorability and to what extent it is feasible to use large language models for the targeted insertion of such a feature into existing text without changing its core meaning. Across three controlled memorization experiments with a total of 240 participants, yielding 7,680 unique memory judgments, we show that pronoun insertion has mixed effects on memorability. Exploratory analyses indicate that effects differ based on headline topic, how pronouns are inserted and their immediate contexts. Additional data and fine-grained analysis is needed to draw definitive conclusions on these mediating factors. We further show that automatic revisions by LLMs are not always appropriate: Crowdsourced evaluations find many of them to be lacking in content accuracy and emotion retention or resulting in unnatural writing style. We make our collected data available for future work.
130. ❌ Mind the Unseen Mass: Unmasking LLM Hallucinations via Soft-Hybrid Alphabet Estimation
作者: Hongxing Pan, Yingying Guo, Wenqing Kuang, Jiashi Lu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19162v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This paper studies uncertainty quantification for large language models (LLMs) under black-box access, where only a small number of responses can be sampled for each query. In this setting, estimating the effective semantic alphabet size–that is, the number of distinct meanings expressed in the sampled responses–provides a useful proxy for downstream risk. However, frequency-based estimators tend to undercount rare semantic modes when the sample size is small, while graph-spectral quantities alone are not designed to estimate semantic occupancy accurately. To address this issue, we propose SHADE (Soft-Hybrid Alphabet Dynamic Estimator), a simple and interpretable estimator that combines Generalized Good-Turing coverage with a heat-kernel trace of the normalized Laplacian constructed from an entailment-weighted graph over sampled responses. The estimated coverage adaptively determines the fusion rule: under high coverage, SHADE uses a convex combination of the two signals, while under low coverage it applies a LogSumExp fusion to emphasize missing or weakly observed semantic modes. A finite-sample correction is then introduced to stabilize the resulting cardinality estimate before converting it into a coverage-adjusted semantic entropy score. Experiments on pooled semantic alphabet-size estimation against large-sample references and on QA incorrectness detection show that SHADE achieves the strongest improvements in the most sample-limited regime, while the performance gap narrows as the number of samples increases. These results suggest that hybrid semantic occupancy estimation is particularly beneficial when black-box uncertainty quantification must operate under tight sampling budgets.
131. ❌ Voice of India: A Large-Scale Benchmark for Real-World Speech Recognition in India
作者: Kaushal Bhogale, Manas Dhir, Amritansh Walecha, Manmeet Kaur, Vanshika Chhabra, Aaditya Pareek, Hanuman Sidh, Sagar Jain, Bhaskar Singh, Utkarsh Singh, Tahir Javed, Shobhit Banga, Mitesh M. Khapra 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19151v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Existing Indic ASR benchmarks often use scripted, clean speech and leaderboard driven evaluation that encourages dataset specific overfitting. In addition, strict single reference WER penalizes natural spelling variation in Indian languages, including non standardized spellings of code-mixed English origin words. To address these limitations, we introduce Voice of India, a closed source benchmark built from unscripted telephonic conversations covering 15 major Indian languages across 139 regional clusters. The dataset contains 306230 utterances, totaling 536 hours of speech from 36691 speakers with transcripts accounting for spelling variations. We also analyze performance geographically at the district level, revealing disparities. Finally, we provide detailed analysis across factors such as audio quality, speaking rate, gender, and device type, highlighting where current ASR systems struggle and offering insights for improving real world Indic ASR systems.
132. ❌ ReflectMT: Internalizing Reflection for Efficient and High-Quality Machine Translation
作者: Kunquan Li, Yingxue Zhang, Fandong Meng, Jinsong Su 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19144v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Recent years have witnessed growing interest in applying Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) to Machine Translation (MT). Existing approaches predominantly adopt a “think-first-then-translate” paradigm. Although explicit reasoning trajectories significantly enhance translation quality, they incur prohibitive inference costs and latency. To address these limitations, we propose ReflectMT, a two-stage reflection internalization algorithm for machine translation that employs a “translate-first-think-later” paradigm. Our approach develops the model’s “translate-reflect-refine” capability through reinforcement learning. In the first stage, we cultivate the model’s capacity for high-quality reflection and refinement, thereby enhancing its semantic comprehension and task-specific knowledge. In the second stage, we train the model to internalize the knowledge acquired during reflection. As a result, during inference, ReflectMT operates in a direct translation mode, producing high-quality translations on the first attempt without any explicit reasoning steps. Experimental results on datasets such as WMT24 demonstrate that our model’s first-pass translations during inference outperform multi-step reasoning LRMs such as DeepSeek-R1 in both automatic metrics and GPT-based evaluation, achieving a 2.16-point improvement in GPT-based translation quality evaluation while reducing token consumption by 94.33%.
133. ❌ Construction of Knowledge Graph based on Language Model
作者: Qiubai Zhu, Qingwang Wang, Haibin Yuan, Wei Chen, Tao Shen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19137v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Knowledge Graph (KG) can effectively integrate valuable information from massive data, and thus has been rapidly developed and widely used in many fields. Traditional KG construction methods rely on manual annotation, which often consumes a lot of time and manpower. And KG construction schemes based on deep learning tend to have weak generalization capabilities. With the rapid development of Pre-trained Language Models (PLM), PLM has shown great potential in the field of KG construction. This paper provides a comprehensive review of recent research advances in the field of construction of KGs using PLM. In this paper, we explain how PLM can utilize its language understanding and generation capabilities to automatically extract key information for KGs, such as entities and relations, from textual data. In addition, We also propose a new Hyper-Relarional Knowledge Graph construction framework based on lightweight Large Language Model (LLM) named LLHKG and compares it with previous methods. Under our framework, the KG construction capability of lightweight LLM is comparable to GPT3.5.
134. ❌ Do Emotions Influence Moral Judgment in Large Language Models?
作者: Mohammad Saim, Tianyu Jiang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19125v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large language models have been extensively studied for emotion recognition and moral reasoning as distinct capabilities, yet the extent to which emotions influence moral judgment remains underexplored. In this work, we develop an emotion-induction pipeline that infuses emotion into moral situations and evaluate shifts in moral acceptability across multiple datasets and LLMs. We observe a directional pattern: positive emotions increase moral acceptability and negative emotions decrease it, with effects strong enough to reverse binary moral judgments in up to 20% of cases, and with susceptibility scaling inversely with model capability. Our analysis further reveals that specific emotions can sometimes behave contrary to what their valence would predict (e.g., remorse paradoxically increases acceptability). A complementary human annotation study shows humans do not exhibit these systematic shifts, indicating an alignment gap in current LLMs.
135. ❌ Detoxification for LLM: From Dataset Itself
作者: Wei Shao, Yihang Wang, Gaoyu Zhu, Ziqiang Cheng, Lei Yu, Jiafeng Guo, Xueqi Cheng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19124v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Existing detoxification methods for large language models mainly focus on post-training stage or inference time, while few tackle the source of toxicity, namely, the dataset itself. Such training-based or controllable decoding approaches cannot completely suppress the model’s inherent toxicity, whereas detoxifying the pretraining dataset can fundamentally reduce the toxicity that the model learns during training. Hence, we attempt to detoxify directly on raw corpora with SoCD (Soft Contrastive Decoding), which guides an LLM to localize and rewrite toxic spans in raw data while preserving semantics, in our proposed HSPD (Hierarchical Semantic-Preserving Detoxification) pipeline, yielding a detoxified corpus that can drop-in replace the original for fine-tuning or other training. On GPT2-XL, HSPD attains state-of-the-art detoxification, reducing Toxicity Probability (TP) from 0.42 to 0.18 and Expected Maximum Toxicity (EMT) from 0.43 to 0.20. We further validate consistent best-in-class results on LLaMA2-7B, OPT-6.7B, and Falcon-7B. These findings show that semantics-preserving, corpus-level rewriting with HSPD effectively suppresses downstream toxicity while retaining data utility and allowing seamless source-level mitigation, thereby reducing the cost of later model behavior adjustment. (Code is available at: https://github.com/ntsw2001/data_detox_for_llm)
136. ❌ HoWToBench: Holistic Evaluation for LLM’s Capability in Human-level Writing using Tree of Writing
作者: Andrew Zhuoer Feng, Cunxiang Wang, Yu Luo, Lin Fan, Yilin Zhou, Zikang Wang, Xiaotao Gu, Jie Tang, Hongning Wang, Minlie Huang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19071v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Evaluating the writing capabilities of large language models (LLMs) remains a significant challenge due to the multidimensional nature of writing skills and the limitations of existing metrics. LLM’s performance in thousand-words level and open-ended writing is inadequately assessed by traditional reference-based metrics or modern LLM-as-a-judge methods. We propose Tree-of-Writing (ToW), to resolve the implicit inconsistency often found when LLM-as-a-judge aggregates all sub-features in text evaluation. ToW incorporates a tree-structured workflow by explicitly modeling the aggregation weights of sub-features. We also present HowToBench, a large-scale Chinese writing benchmark encompassing 12 genres and 1302 instructions across three task categories: contextual completion, outline-guided writing, and open-ended generation. ToW successfully mitigates the biases, achieving a 0.93 Pearson correlation with human judgments. Furthermore, we detect that both overlap-based text generation metrics and popular LLM-as-a-judge practices are vulnerable to textual disturbances, while ToW is robust to them. We also uncover a negative correlation between input length and content-related scores in the Guide task, showcasing that it cannot be simply improved by input-side information piling.
137. ❌ TRN-R1-Zero: Text-rich Network Reasoning via LLMs with Reinforcement Learning Only
作者: Yilun Liu, Ruihong Qiu, Zi Huang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19070v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Zero-shot reasoning on text-rich networks (TRNs) remains a challenging frontier, as models must integrate textual semantics with relational structure without task-specific supervision. While graph neural networks rely on fixed label spaces and supervised objectives, recent large language model (LLM)-based approaches often overlook graph context or depend on distillation from larger models, limiting generalisation. We propose TRN-R1-Zero, a post-training framework for TRN reasoning trained solely via reinforcement learning. TRN-R1-Zero directly optimises base LLMs using a Neighbour-aware Group Relative Policy Optimisation objective that dynamically adjusts rewards based on a novel margin gain metric for the informativeness of neighbouring signals, effectively guiding the model toward relational reasoning. Unlike prior methods, TRN-R1-Zero requires no supervised fine-tuning or chain-of-thought data generated from large reasoning models. Extensive experiments across citation, hyperlink, social and co-purchase TRN benchmarks demonstrate the superiority and robustness of TRN-R1-Zero. Moreover, relying strictly on node-level training, TRN-R1-Zero achieves zero-shot inference on edge- and graph-level tasks, extending beyond cross-domain transfer. The codebase is publicly available at https://github.com/superallen13/TRN-R1-Zero.
138. ❌ Product-of-Experts Training Reduces Dataset Artifacts in Natural Language Inference
作者: Aby Mammen Mathew 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19069v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Neural NLI models overfit dataset artifacts instead of truly reasoning. A hypothesis-only model gets 57.7% in SNLI, showing strong spurious correlations, and 38.6% of the baseline errors are the result of these artifacts. We propose Product-of-Experts (PoE) training, which downweights examples where biased models are overconfident. PoE nearly preserves accuracy (89.10% vs. 89.30%) while cutting bias reliance by 4.71% (bias agreement 49.85% to 45%). An ablation finds lambda = 1.5 that best balances debiasing and accuracy. Behavioral tests still reveal issues with negation and numerical reasoning.
139. ❌ Cell-Based Representation of Relational Binding in Language Models
作者: Qin Dai, Benjamin Heinzerling, Kentaro Inui 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19052v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Understanding a discourse requires tracking entities and the relations that hold between them. While Large Language Models (LLMs) perform well on relational reasoning, the mechanism by which they bind entities, relations, and attributes remains unclear. We study discourse-level relational binding and show that LLMs encode it via a Cell-based Binding Representation (CBR): a low-dimensional linear subspace in which each ``cell’’ corresponds to an entity–relation index pair, and bound attributes are retrieved from the corresponding cell during inference. Using controlled multi-sentence data annotated with entity and relation indices, we identify the CBR subspace by decoding these indices from attribute-token activations with Partial Least Squares regression. Across domains and two model families, the indices are linearly decodable and form a grid-like geometry in the projected space. We further find that context-specific CBR representations are related by translation vectors in activation space, enabling cross-context transfer. Finally, activation patching shows that manipulating this subspace systematically changes relational predictions and that perturbing it disrupts performance, providing causal evidence that LLMs rely on CBR for relational binding.
140. ❌ SAMoRA: Semantic-Aware Mixture of LoRA Experts for Task-Adaptive Learning
作者: Boyan Shi, Wei Chen, Shuyuan Zhao, Junfeng Shen, Shengnan Guo, Shaojiang Wang, Huaiyu Wan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19048v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The combination of Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) and Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) has shown significant potential for enhancing the multi-task learning capabilities of Large Language Models. However, existing methods face two primary challenges: (1)Imprecise Routing in the current MoE-LoRA method fails to explicitly match input semantics with expert capabilities, leading to weak expert specialization. (2)Uniform weight fusion strategies struggle to provide adaptive update strengths, overlooking the varying complexity of different tasks. To address these limitations, we propose SAMoRA (Semantic-Aware Mixture of LoRA Experts), a novel parameter-efficient fine-tuning framework tailored for task-adaptive learning. Specifically, A Semantic-Aware Router is proposed to explicitly align textual semantics with the most suitable experts for precise routing. A Task-Adaptive Scaling mechanism is designed to regulate expert contributions based on specific task requirements dynamically. In addition, a novel regularization objective is proposed to jointly promote expert specialization and effective scaling. Extensive experiments on multiple multi-task benchmarks demonstrate that SAMoRA significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art methods and holds excellent task generalization capabilities. Code is available at https://github.com/boyan-code/SAMoRA
141. ❌ RARE: Redundancy-Aware Retrieval Evaluation Framework for High-Similarity Corpora
作者: Hanjun Cho, Jay-Yoon Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19047v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Existing QA benchmarks typically assume distinct documents with minimal overlap, yet real-world retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems operate on corpora such as financial reports, legal codes, and patents, where information is highly redundant and documents exhibit strong inter-document similarity. This mismatch undermines evaluation validity: retrievers can be unfairly undervalued even when they retrieve documents that provide sufficient evidence, because redundancy across documents is not accounted for in evaluation. On the other hand, retrievers that perform well on standard benchmarks often generalize poorly to real-world corpora with highly similar and redundant documents. We present RARE (Redundancy-Aware Retrieval Evaluation), a framework for constructing realistic benchmarks by (i) decomposing documents into atomic facts to enable precise redundancy tracking and (ii) enhancing LLM-based data generation with CRRF. RAG benchmark data usually requires multiple quality criteria, but LLMs often yield trivial outputs. CRRF scores criteria separately and fuses decisions by rank, improving the reliability of generated data. Applying RARE to Finance, Legal, and Patent corpora, we introduce RedQA, where a strong retriever baseline drops from 66.4% PerfRecall@10 on 4-hop General-Wiki to 5.0-27.9% PerfRecall@10 at 4-hop depth, revealing robustness gaps that current benchmarks fail to capture. RARE enables practitioners to build domain-specific RAG evaluations that faithfully reflect real-world deployment conditions.
142. ❌ AlignCultura: Towards Culturally Aligned Large Language Models?
作者: Gautam Siddharth Kashyap, Mark Dras, Usman Naseem 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19016v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Cultural alignment in Large Language Models (LLMs) is essential for producing contextually aware, respectful, and trustworthy outputs. Without it, models risk generating stereotyped, insensitive, or misleading responses that fail to reflect cultural diversity w.r.t Helpful, Harmless, and Honest (HHH) paradigm. Existing benchmarks represent early steps toward cultural alignment; yet, no benchmarks currently enables systematic evaluation of cultural alignment in line with UNESCO’s principles of cultural diversity w.r.t HHH paradigm. Therefore, to address this gap, we built Align-Cultura, two-stage pipeline for cultural alignment. Stage I constructs CULTURAX, the HHH-English dataset grounded in the UNESCO cultural taxonomy, through Query Construction, which reclassifies prompts, expands underrepresented domains (or labels), and prevents data leakage with SimHash. Then, Response Generation pairs prompts with culturally grounded responses via two-stage rejection sampling. The final dataset contains 1,500 samples spanning 30 subdomains of tangible and intangible cultural forms. Stage II benchmarks CULTURAX on general-purpose models, culturally fine-tuned models, and open-weight LLMs (Qwen3-8B and DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-7B). Empirically, culturally fine-tuned models improve joint HHH by 4%-6%, reduce cultural failures by 18%, achieve 10%-12% efficiency gains, and limit leakage to 0.3%.
143. ❌ Debating the Unspoken: Role-Anchored Multi-Agent Reasoning for Half-Truth Detection
作者: Yixuan Tang, Yirui Zhang, Hang Feng, Anthony K. H. Tung 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19005v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Half-truths, claims that are factually correct yet misleading due to omitted context, remain a blind spot for fact verification systems focused on explicit falsehoods. Addressing such omission-based manipulation requires reasoning not only about what is said, but also about what is left unsaid. We propose RADAR, a role-anchored multi-agent debate framework for omission-aware fact verification under realistic, noisy retrieval. RADAR assigns complementary roles to a Politician and a Scientist, who reason adversarially over shared retrieved evidence, moderated by a neutral Judge. A dual-threshold early termination controller adaptively decides when sufficient reasoning has been reached to issue a verdict. Experiments show that RADAR consistently outperforms strong single- and multi-agent baselines across datasets and backbones, improving omission detection accuracy while reducing reasoning cost. These results demonstrate that role-anchored, retrieval-grounded debate with adaptive control is an effective and scalable framework for uncovering missing context in fact verification. The code is available at https://github.com/tangyixuan/RADAR.
144. ❌ When Safety Fails Before the Answer: Benchmarking Harmful Behavior Detection in Reasoning Chains
作者: Ishita Kakkar, Enze Zhang, Rheeya Uppaal, Junjie Hu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19001v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large reasoning models (LRMs) produce complex, multi-step reasoning traces, yet safety evaluation remains focused on final outputs, overlooking how harm emerges during reasoning. When jailbroken, harm does not appear instantaneously but unfolds through distinct behavioral steps such as suppressing refusal, rationalizing compliance, decomposing harmful tasks, and concealing risk. However, no existing benchmark captures this process at sentence-level granularity within reasoning traces – a key step toward reliable safety monitoring, interventions, and systematic failure diagnosis. To address this gap, we introduce HarmThoughts, a benchmark for step-wise safety evaluation of reasoning traces. \ourdataset is built on our proposed harm taxonomy of 16 harmful reasoning behaviors across four functional groups that characterize how harm propagates rather than what harm is produced. The dataset consists of 56,931 sentences from 1,018 reasoning traces generated by four model families, each annotated with fine-grained sentence-level behavioral labels. Using HarmThoughts, we analyze harm propagation patterns across reasoning traces, identifying common behavioral trajectories and drift points where reasoning transitions from safe to unsafe. Finally, we systematically compare white-box and black-box detectors on the task of identifying harmful reasoning behaviours on HarmThoughts. Our results show that existing detectors struggle with fine-grained behavior detection in reasoning traces, particularly for nuanced categories within harm emergence and execution, highlighting a critical gap in process-level safety monitoring. HarmThoughts is available publicly at: https://huggingface.co/datasets/ishitakakkar-10/HarmThoughts
145. ❌ Assessing Capabilities of Large Language Models in Social Media Analytics: A Multi-task Quest
作者: Ramtin Davoudi, Kartik Thakkar, Nazanin Donyapour, Tyler Derr, Hamid Karimi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18955v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
In this study, we present the first comprehensive evaluation of modern LLMs - including GPT-4, GPT-4o, GPT-3.5-Turbo, Gemini 1.5 Pro, DeepSeek-V3, Llama 3.2, and BERT - across three core social media analytics tasks on a Twitter (X) dataset: (I) Social Media Authorship Verification, (II) Social Media Post Generation, and (III) User Attribute Inference. For the authorship verification, we introduce a systematic sampling framework over diverse user and post selection strategies and evaluate generalization on newly collected tweets from January 2024 onward to mitigate “seen-data” bias. For post generation, we assess the ability of LLMs to produce authentic, user-like content using comprehensive evaluation metrics. Bridging Tasks I and II, we conduct a user study to measure real users’ perceptions of LLM-generated posts conditioned on their own writing. For attribute inference, we annotate occupations and interests using two standardized taxonomies (IAB Tech Lab 2023 and 2018 U.S. SOC) and benchmark LLMs against existing baselines. Overall, our unified evaluation provides new insights and establishes reproducible benchmarks for LLM-driven social media analytics. The code and data are provided in the supplementary material and will also be made publicly available upon publication.
146. ❌ STAR-Teaming: A Strategy-Response Multiplex Network Approach to Automated LLM Red Teaming
作者: MinJae Jung, YongTaek Lim, Chaeyun Kim, Junghwan Kim, Kihyun Kim, Minwoo Kim 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18976v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
While Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used, they remain susceptible to jailbreak prompts that can elicit harmful or inappropriate responses. This paper introduces STAR-Teaming, a novel black-box framework for automated red teaming that effectively generates such prompts. STAR-Teaming integrates a Multi-Agent System (MAS) with a Strategy-Response Multiplex Network and employs network-driven optimization to sample effective attack strategies. This network-based approach recasts the intractable high-dimensional embedding space into a tractable structure, yielding two key advantages: it enhances the interpretability of the LLM’s strategic vulnerabilities, and it streamlines the search for effective strategies by organizing the search space into semantic communities, thereby preventing redundant exploration. Empirical results demonstrate that STAR-Teaming significantly surpasses existing methods, achieving a higher attack success rate (ASR) at a lower computational cost. Extensive experiments validate the effectiveness and explainability of the Multiplex Network. The code is available at https://github.com/selectstar-ai/STAR-Teaming-paper.
147. ❌ $R^2$-dLLM: Accelerating Diffusion Large Language Models via Spatio-Temporal Redundancy Reduction
作者: Zhenbang Du, Kejing Xia, Xinrui Zhong, Yonggan Fu, Nicolai Oswald, Binfei Ji, Brucek Khailany, Pavlo Molchanov, Yingyan Lin 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18995v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Diffusion Large Language Models (dLLMs) have emerged as a promising alternative to autoregressive generation by enabling parallel token prediction. However, practical dLLM decoding still suffers from high inference latency, which limits deployment. In this work, we observe that a substantial part of this inefficiency comes from recurring redundancy in the decoding process, including spatial redundancy caused by confidence clusters and positional ambiguity, and temporal redundancy caused by repeatedly remasking predictions that have already stabilized. Motivated by these patterns, we propose $R^2$-dLLM, a unified framework for reducing decoding redundancy from both inference and training perspectives. At inference time, we introduce training-free decoding rules that aggregate local confidence and token predictions, and finalize temporally stable tokens to avoid redundant decoding steps. We further propose a redundancy-aware supervised fine-tuning pipeline that aligns the model with efficient decoding trajectories and reduces reliance on manually tuned thresholds. Experiments demonstrate that $R^2$-dLLM consistently reduces the number of decoding steps by up to 75% compared to existing decoding strategies, while maintaining competitive generation quality across different models and tasks. These results validate that decoding redundancy is a central bottleneck in dLLMs, and that explicitly reducing it yields substantial practical efficiency gains.
148. ❌ Superficial Success vs. Internal Breakdown: An Empirical Study of Generalization in Adaptive Multi-Agent Systems
作者: Namyoung So, Seokgyu Jang, Taeuk Kim 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18951v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Adaptive multi-agent systems (MAS) are increasingly adopted to tackle complex problems.However, the narrow task coverage of their optimization raises the question of whether they can function as general-purpose systems.To address this gap, we conduct an extensive empirical study of adaptive MAS, revealing two key findings: (1) topological overfitting – they fail to generalize across different domains; and (2) illusory coordination – they achieve reasonable surface-level accuracy while the underlying agent interactions diverge from ideal MAS behavior, raising concerns about their practical utility.These findings highlight the pressing need to prioritize generalization in MAS development and motivate evaluation protocols that extend beyond simple final-answer correctness.
149. ❌ Personalized Benchmarking: Evaluating LLMs by Individual Preferences
作者: Cristina Garbacea, Heran Wang, Chenhao Tan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18943v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
With the rise in capabilities of large language models (LLMs) and their deployment in real-world tasks, evaluating LLM alignment with human preferences has become an important challenge. Current benchmarks average preferences across all users to compute aggregate ratings, overlooking individual user preferences when establishing model rankings. Since users have varying preferences in different contexts, we call for personalized LLM benchmarks that rank models according to individual needs. We compute personalized model rankings using ELO ratings and Bradley-Terry coefficients for 115 active Chatbot Arena users and analyze how user query characteristics (topics and writing style) relate to LLM ranking variations. We demonstrate that individual rankings of LLM models diverge dramatically from aggregate LLM rankings, with Bradley-Terry correlations averaging only $ρ= 0.04$ (57% of users show near-zero or negative correlation) and ELO ratings showing moderate correlation ($ρ= 0.43$). Through topic modeling and style analysis, we find users exhibit substantial heterogeneity in topical interests and communication styles, influencing their model preferences. We further show that a compact combination of topic and style features provides a useful feature space for predicting user-specific model rankings. Our results provide strong quantitative evidence that aggregate benchmarks fail to capture individual preferences for most users, and highlight the importance of developing personalized benchmarks that rank LLM models according to individual user preferences.
150. ❌ A Mechanism and Optimization Study on the Impact of Information Density on User-Generated Content Named Entity Recognition
作者: Jiang Xiaobo, Dinghong Lai, Song Qiu, Yadong Deng, Xinkai Zhan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18944v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Named Entity Recognition (NER) models trained on clean, high-resource corpora exhibit catastrophic performance collapse when deployed on noisy, sparse User-Generated Content (UGC), such as social media. Prior research has predominantly focused on point-wise symptom remediation – employing customized fine-tuning to address issues like neologisms, alias drift, non-standard orthography, long-tail entities, and class imbalance. However, these improvements often fail to generalize because they overlook the structural sparsity inherent in UGC. This study reveals that surface-level noise symptoms share a unified root cause: low Information Density (ID). Through hierarchical confounding-controlled resampling experiments (specifically controlling for entity rarity and annotation consistency), this paper identifies ID as an independent key factor. We introduce Attention Spectrum Analysis (ASA) to quantify how reduced ID causally leads to ``attention blunting,’’ ultimately degrading NER performance. Informed by these mechanistic insights, we propose the Window-Aware Optimization Module (WOM), an LLM-empowered, model-agnostic framework. WOM identifies information-sparse regions and utilizes selective back-translation to directionally enhance semantic density without altering model architecture. Deployed atop mainstream architectures on standard UGC datasets (WNUT2017, Twitter-NER, WNUT2016), WOM yields up to 4.5% absolute F1 improvement, demonstrating robustness and achieving new state-of-the-art (SOTA) results on WNUT2017.
151. ❌ Proposing Topic Models and Evaluation Frameworks for Analyzing Associations with External Outcomes: An Application to Leadership Analysis Using Large-Scale Corporate Review Data
作者: Yura Yoshida, Masato Kanai, Masataka Nakayama, Haruki Ohsawa, Yukiko Uchida, Arata Yuminaga, Gakuse Hoshina, Nobuo Sayama 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18919v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Analyzing topics extracted from text data in relation to external outcomes is important across fields such as computational social science and organizational research. However, existing topic modeling methods struggle to simultaneously achieve interpretability, topic specificity (alignment with concrete actions or characteristics), and polarity stance consistency (absence of mixed positive and negative evaluations within a topic). Focusing on leadership analysis using corporate review data, this study proposes a method leveraging large language models to generate topics that satisfy these properties, along with an evaluation framework tailored to external outcome analysis. The framework explicitly incorporates topic specificity and polarity stance consistency as evaluation criteria and examines automated evaluation methods based on existing metrics. Using employee reviews from OpenWork, a major corporate review platform in Japan, the proposed method achieves improved interpretability, specificity, and polarity consistency compared to existing approaches. In analyses of external outcomes such as employee morale, it also produces topics with higher explanatory power. These results suggest that the proposed method and evaluation framework provide a generalized approach for topic analysis in applications involving external outcomes.
152. ❌ Comparison of sEMG Encoding Accuracy Across Speech Modes Using Articulatory and Phoneme Features
作者: Chenqian Le, Ruisi Li, Beatrice Fumagalli, Xupeng Chen, Amirhossein Khalilian-Gourtani, Tianyu He, Adeen Flinker, Yao Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18920v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We test whether Speech Articulatory Coding (SPARC) features can linearly predict surface electromyography (sEMG) envelopes across aloud, mimed, and subvocal speech in twenty-four subjects. Using elastic-net multivariate temporal response function (mTRF) with sentence-level cross-validation, SPARC yields higher prediction accuracy than phoneme one-hot representations on nearly all electrodes and in all speech modes. Aloud and mimed speech perform comparably, and subvocal speech remains above chance, indicating detectable articulatory activity. Variance partitioning shows a substantial unique contribution from SPARC and a minimal unique contribution from phoneme features. mTRF weight patterns reveal anatomically interpretable relationships between electrode sites and articulatory movements that remain consistent across modes. This study focuses on representation/encoding analysis (not end-to-end decoding) and supports SPARC as a robust and interpretable intermediate target for sEMG-based silent-speech modeling.
153. ❌ Disparities In Negation Understanding Across Languages In Vision-Language Models
作者: Charikleia Moraitaki, Sarah Pan, Skyler Pulling, Gwendolyn Flusche, Kumail Alhamoud, Marzyeh Ghassemi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18942v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Vision-language models (VLMs) exhibit affirmation bias: a systematic tendency to select positive captions (“X is present”) even when the correct description contains negation (“no X”). While prior work has documented this failure mode in English and proposed solutions, negation manifests differently across languages through varying morphology, word order, and cliticization patterns, raising the question of whether these solutions serve all linguistic communities equitably. We introduce the first human-verified multilingual negation benchmark, spanning seven typologically diverse languages: English, Mandarin Chinese, Arabic, Greek, Russian, Tagalog, and Spanish. Evaluating three VLMs - CLIP, SigLIP, and MultiCLIP - we find that standard CLIP performs at or below chance on non-Latin-script languages, while MultiCLIP achieves the highest and most uniform accuracy. We also evaluate SpaceVLM, a proposed negation correction, and find that it produces substantial improvements for several languages - particularly English, Greek, Spanish, and Tagalog - while showing varied effectiveness across typologically different languages. This variation reveals that linguistic properties like morphology, script, and negation structure interact with model improvements in fairness-relevant ways. As VLMs are deployed globally, multilingual benchmarks are essential for understanding not just whether solutions work, but for whom.
154. ❌ LogosKG: Hardware-Optimized Scalable and Interpretable Knowledge Graph Retrieval
作者: He Cheng, Yifu Wu, Saksham Khatwani, Maya Kruse, Dmitriy Dligach, Timothy A. Miller, Majid Afshar, Yanjun Gao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18913v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Knowledge graphs (KGs) are increasingly integrated with large language models (LLMs) to provide structured, verifiable reasoning. A core operation in this integration is multi-hop retrieval, yet existing systems struggle to balance efficiency, scalability, and interpretability. We introduce LogosKG, a novel, hardware-aligned framework that enables scalable and interpretable k-hop retrieval on large KGs by building on symbolic KG formulations and executing traversal as hardware-efficient operations over decomposed subject, object, and relation representations. To scale to billion-edge graphs, LogosKG integrates degree-aware partitioning, cross-graph routing, and on-demand caching. Experiments show substantial efficiency gains over CPU and GPU baselines without loss of retrieval fidelity. With proven performance in KG retrieval, a downstream two-round KG-LLM interaction demonstrates how LogosKG enables large-scale, evidence-grounded analysis of how KG topology, such as hop distribution and connectivity, shapes the alignment between structured biomedical knowledge and LLM diagnostic reasoning, thereby opening the door for next-generation KG-LLM integration. The source code is publicly available at https://github.com/LARK-NLP-Lab/LogosKG, and an online demo is available at https://lark-nlp-lab-logoskg.hf.space/.
155. ❌ MORPHOGEN: A Multilingual Benchmark for Evaluating Gender-Aware Morphological Generation
作者: Mehul Agarwal, Aditya Aggarwal, Arnav Goel, Medha Hira, Anubha Gupta 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18914v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
While multilingual large language models (LLMs) perform well on high-level tasks like translation and question answering, their ability to handle grammatical gender and morphological agreement remains underexplored. In morphologically rich languages, gender influences verb conjugation, pronouns, and even first-person constructions with explicit and implicit mentions of gender. We introduce MORPHOGEN, a morphologically grounded large-scale benchmark dataset for evaluating gender-aware generation in three typologically diverse grammatically gendered languages: French, Arabic, and Hindi. The core task, GENFORM, requires models to rewrite a first-person sentence in the opposite gender while preserving its meaning and structure. We construct a high-quality synthetic dataset spanning these three languages and benchmark 15 popular multilingual LLMs (2B-70B) on their ability to perform this transformation. Our results reveal significant gaps and interesting insights into how current models handle morphological gender. MORPHOGEN provides a focused diagnostic lens for gender-aware language modeling and lays the groundwork for future research on inclusive and morphology-sensitive NLP.
156. ❌ Harmful Intent as a Geometrically Recoverable Feature of LLM Residual Streams
作者: Isaac Llorente-Saguer 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18901v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Harmful intent is geometrically recoverable from large language model residual streams: as a linear direction in most layers, and as angular deviation in layers where projection methods fail. Across 12 models spanning four architectural families (Qwen2.5, Qwen3.5, Llama-3.2, Gemma-3) and three alignment variants (base, instruction-tuned, abliterated), under single-turn, English evaluation, we characterise this geometry through six direction-finding strategies. Three succeed: a soft-AUC-optimised linear direction reaches mean AUROC 0.98 and TPR@1%FPR 0.80; a class-mean probe reaches 0.98 and 0.71 at <1ms fitting cost; a supervised angular-deviation strategy reaches AUROC 0.96 and TPR of 0.61 along a representationally distinct direction ($73^\circ$ from projection-based solutions), uniquely sustaining detection in middle layers where projection methods collapse. Detection remains stable across alignment variants, including abliterated models from which refusal has been surgically removed: harmful intent and refusal behaviour are functionally dissociated features of the representation. A direction fitted on AdvBench transfers to held-out HarmBench and JailbreakBench with worst-case AUROC 0.96. The same picture holds at scale: across Qwen3.5 from 0.8B to 9B parameters, AUROC remains $\geq$0.98 and cross-variant transfer stays within 0.018 of own-direction performance This is consistent with a simple account: models acquire a linearly decodable representation of harmful intent as part of general language understanding, and alignment then shapes what they do with such inputs without reorganising the upstream recognition signal. As a practical consequence, AUROC in the 0.97+ regime can substantially overestimate operational detectability; TPR@$1%$FPR should accompany AUROC in safety-adjacent evaluation.
157. ❌ Prioritizing the Best: Incentivizing Reliable Multimodal Reasoning by Rewarding Beyond Answer Correctness
作者: Mengzhao Jia, Zhihan Zhang, Meng Jiang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18892v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) improves multimodal reasoning by rewarding verifiable final answers. Yet answer-correct trajectories may still rely on incomplete derivations, weak evidence, or statements that contradict their conclusions. This gap between answer correctness and reasoning validity, which we call reasoning-answer inconsistency, motivates trajectory supervision in multimodal RL. We compare two main approaches: reward models (RMs), and Generative Rewards (GRs). RMs are efficient and help early in training, but their gains weaken as the policy distribution shifts; GRs improve performance, but may give unstable rewards and computationally expensive. We therefore propose Groupwise Ranking Reward, which ranks verifier-passed trajectories for the same prompt in one pass and redistributes reward accordingly. Groupwise comparison better separates stronger and weaker correct trajectories with lower judge overhead than GRs. Experiments show that RLVR aggravates reasoning-answer inconsistency, while trajectory supervision alleviates it. Groupwise Ranking Reward performs best overall, improving reliability-conditioned accuracy from 47.4% to 54.7% over RLVR.
158. ❌ Less Is More: Cognitive Load and the Single-Prompt Ceiling in LLM Mathematical Reasoning
作者: Manuel Israel Cazares 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18897v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We present a systematic empirical study of prompt engineering for formal mathematical reasoning in the context of the SAIR Equational Theories Stage 1 competition. The task requires deciding whether one equational law implies another over all magmas – a problem that is undecidable in general but decidable for FALSE via finite model search. Over five weeks, we designed, tested, and analyzed more than 40 prompt variants, ranging from 0 to 4,878 bytes, across four evaluation splits and three language models (gpt-oss-120b, Llama 3.3 70B, Gemma 4 31B). Our central finding is a single-prompt ceiling: despite substantial engineering effort, balanced hard accuracy plateaus in an empirical saturation region of approximately 60–79% for gpt-oss-120b, compared to a 59.75% no-cheatsheet baseline. We identify three mechanisms underlying this ceiling: (1) the mathematical undecidability of the TRUE case limits what any finite prompt can encode; (2) complex rule systems decrease performance on weaker models (Llama 3.3 70B collapses to 0% TRUE recall with prompts exceeding 2KB); and (3) prompt ordering effects interact with model attention in fragile, non-monotonic ways. Our best submission (AN45c, 2,252 bytes) achieves 79.25% accuracy on hard3 (n=400; 95% CI: [75.0%, 82.9%]), with TRUE recall of 95.9% and FALSE recall of 63.4%, representing a +19.5 percentage-point improvement over the no-cheatsheet baseline (59.75%). We release all prompt variants, evaluation scripts, and results at https://github.com/israelcazares/sair-prompt-engineering
159. ❌ Where Fake Citations Are Made: Tracing Field-Level Hallucination to Specific Neurons in LLMs
作者: Yuefei Chen, Yihao Quan, Xiaodong Lin, Ruixiang Tang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18880v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
LLMs frequently generate fictitious yet convincing citations, often expressing high confidence even when the underlying reference is wrong. We study this failure across 9 models and 108{,}000 generated references, and find that author names fail far more often than other fields across all models and settings. Citation style has no measurable effect, while reasoning-oriented distillation degrades recall. Probes trained on one field transfer at near-chance levels to the others, suggesting that hallucination signals do not generalize across fields. Building on this finding, we apply elastic-net regularization with stability selection to neuron-level CETT values of Qwen2.5-32B-Instruct and identify a sparse set of field-specific hallucination neurons (FH-neurons). Causal intervention further confirms their role: amplifying these neurons increases hallucination, while suppressing them improves performance across fields, with larger gains in some fields. These results suggest a lightweight approach to detecting and mitigating citation hallucination using internal model signals alone.
160. ❌ LegalBench-BR: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Brazilian Legal Decision Classification
作者: Pedro Barbosa de Carvalho Neto 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18878v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We introduce LegalBench-BR, the first public benchmark for evaluating language models on Brazilian legal text classification. The dataset comprises 3,105 appellate proceedings from the Santa Catarina State Court (TJSC), collected via the DataJud API (CNJ) and annotated across five legal areas through LLM-assisted labeling with heuristic validation. On a class-balanced test set, BERTimbau-LoRA, updating only 0.3% of model parameters, achieves 87.6% accuracy and 0.87 macro-F1 (+22pp over Claude 3.5 Haiku, +28pp over GPT-4o mini). The gap is most striking on administrativo (administrative law): GPT-4o mini scores F1 = 0.00 and Claude 3.5 Haiku scores F1 = 0.08 on this class, while the fine-tuned model reaches F1 = 0.91. Both commercial LLMs exhibit a systematic bias toward civel (civil law), absorbing ambiguous classes rather than discriminating them, a failure mode that domain-adapted fine-tuning eliminates. These results demonstrate that general-purpose LLMs cannot substitute for domain-adapted models in Brazilian legal classification, even when the task is a simple 5-class problem, and that LoRA fine-tuning on a consumer GPU closes the gap at zero marginal inference cost. We release the full dataset, model, and pipeline to enable reproducible research in Portuguese legal NLP.
161. ❌ Human-Guided Harm Recovery for Computer Use Agents
作者: Christy Li, Sky CH-Wang, Andi Peng, Andreea Bobu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18847v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
As LM agents gain the ability to execute actions on real computer systems, we need ways to not only prevent harmful actions at scale but also effectively remediate harm when prevention fails. We formalize a solution to this neglected challenge in post-execution safeguards as harm recovery: the problem of optimally steering an agent from a harmful state back to a safe one in alignment with human preferences. We ground preference-aligned recovery through a formative user study that identifies valued recovery dimensions and produces a natural language rubric. Our dataset of 1,150 pairwise judgments reveals context-dependent shifts in attribute importance, such as preferences for pragmatic, targeted strategies over comprehensive long-term approaches. We operationalize these learned insights in a reward model, re-ranking multiple candidate recovery plans generated by an agent scaffold at test time. To evaluate recovery capabilities systematically, we introduce BackBench, a benchmark of 50 computer-use tasks that test an agent’s ability to recover from harmful states. Human evaluation shows our reward model scaffold yields higher-quality recovery trajectories than base agents and rubric-based scaffolds. Together, these contributions lay the foundation for a new class of agent safety methods – ones that confront harm not only by preventing it, but by navigating its aftermath with alignment and intent.
162. ❌ Semantic Needles in Document Haystacks: Sensitivity Testing of LLM-as-a-Judge Similarity Scoring
作者: Sinan G. Aksoy, Alexandra A. Sabrio, Erik VonKaenel, Lee Burke 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18835v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We propose a scalable, multifactorial experimental framework that systematically probes LLM sensitivity to subtle semantic changes in pairwise document comparison. We analogize this as a needle-in-a-haystack problem: a single semantically altered sentence (the needle) is embedded within surrounding context (the hay), and we vary the perturbation type (negation, conjunction swap, named entity replacement), context type (original vs. topically unrelated), needle position, and document length across all combinations, testing five LLMs on tens of thousands of document pairs. Our analysis reveals several striking findings. First, LLMs exhibit a within-document positional bias distinct from previously studied candidate-order effects: most models penalize semantic differences more harshly when they occur earlier in a document. Second, when the altered sentence is surrounded by topically unrelated context, it systematically lowers similarity scores and induces bipolarized scores that indicate either very low or very high similarity. This is consistent with an interpretive frame account in which topically-related context may allow models to contextualize and downweight the alterations. Third, each LLM produces a qualitatively distinct scoring distribution, a stable “fingerprint” that is invariant to perturbation type, yet all models share a universal hierarchy in how leniently they treat different perturbation types. Together, these results demonstrate that LLM semantic similarity scores are sensitive to document structure, context coherence, and model identity in ways that go beyond the semantic change itself, and that the proposed framework offers a practical, LLM-agnostic toolkit for auditing and comparing scoring behavior across current and future models.
163. ❌ Mango: Multi-Agent Web Navigation via Global-View Optimization
作者: Weixi Tong, Yifeng Di, Tianyi Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18779v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Existing web agents typically initiate exploration from the root URL, which is inefficient for complex websites with deep hierarchical structures. Without a global view of the website’s structure, agents frequently fall into navigation traps, explore irrelevant branches, or fail to reach target information within a limited budget. We propose Mango, a multi-agent web navigation method that leverages the website structure to dynamically determine optimal starting points. We formulate URL selection as a multi-armed bandit problem and employ Thompson Sampling to adaptively allocate the navigation budget across candidate URLs. Furthermore, we introduce an episodic memory component to store navigation history, enabling the agent to learn from previous attempts. Experiments on WebVoyager demonstrate that Mango achieves a success rate of 63.6% when using GPT-5-mini, outperforming the best baseline by 7.3%. Furthermore, on WebWalkerQA, Mango attains a 52.5% success rate, surpassing the best baseline by 26.8%. We also demonstrate the generalizability of Mango using both open-source and closed-source models as backbones. Our data and code are open-source and available at https://github.com/VichyTong/Mango.
164. ❌ Experiments or Outcomes? Probing Scientific Feasibility in Large Language Models
作者: Seyedali Mohammadi, Manas Gaur, Francis Ferraro 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18786v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Scientific feasibility assessment asks whether a claim is consistent with established knowledge and whether experimental evidence could support or refute it. We frame feasibility assessment as a diagnostic reasoning task in which, given a hypothesis, a model predicts feasible or infeasible and justifies its decision. We evaluate large language models (LLMs) under controlled knowledge conditions (hypothesis-only, with experiments, with outcomes, or both) and probe robustness by progressively removing portions of the experimental and/or outcome context. Across multiple LLMs and two datasets, providing outcome evidence is generally more reliable than providing experiment descriptions. Outcomes tend to improve accuracy beyond what internal knowledge alone provides, whereas experimental text can be brittle and may degrade performance when the context is incomplete. These findings clarify when experimental evidence benefits LLM-based feasibility assessment and when it introduces fragility.
165. ❌ An Empirical Study of Multi-Generation Sampling for Jailbreak Detection in Large Language Models
作者: Hanrui Luo, Shreyank N Gowda 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18775v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Detecting jailbreak behaviour in large language models remains challenging, particularly when strongly aligned models produce harmful outputs only rarely. In this work, we present an empirical study of output based jailbreak detection under realistic conditions using the JailbreakBench Behaviors dataset and multiple generator models with varying alignment strengths. We evaluate both a lexical TF-IDF detector and a generation inconsistency based detector across different sampling budgets. Our results show that single output evaluation systematically underestimates jailbreak vulnerability, as increasing the number of sampled generations reveals additional harmful behaviour. The most significant improvements occur when moving from a single generation to moderate sampling, while larger sampling budgets yield diminishing returns. Cross generator experiments demonstrate that detection signals partially generalise across models, with stronger transfer observed within related model families. A category level analysis further reveals that lexical detectors capture a mixture of behavioural signals and topic specific cues, rather than purely harmful behaviour. Overall, our findings suggest that moderate multi sample auditing provides a more reliable and practical approach for estimating model vulnerability and improving jailbreak detection in large language models. Code will be released.
166. ❌ Syntax as a Rosetta Stone: Universal Dependencies for In-Context Coptic Translation
作者: Abhishek Purushothama, Emma Thronson, Alexia Guo, Amir Zeldes 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18758v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Low-resource machine translation requires methods that differ from those used for high-resource languages. This paper proposes a novel in-context learning approach to support low-resource machine translation of the Coptic language to English, with syntactic augmentation from Universal Dependencies parses of input sentences. Building on existing work using bilingual dictionaries to support inference for vocabulary items, we add several representations of syntactic analyses to our inputs , specifically exploring the inclusion of raw parser outputs, verbalizations of parses in plain English, and targeted instructions of difficult constructions identified in sub-trees and how they can be translated. Our results show that while syntactic information alone is not as useful as dictionary-based glosses, combining retrieved dictionary items with syntactic information achieves significant gains across model sizes, achieving new state-of-the-art translation results for Coptic.
167. ❌ Model-Agnostic Meta Learning for Class Imbalance Adaptation
作者: Hanshu Rao, Guangzeng Han, Xiaolei Huang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18759v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Class imbalance is a widespread challenge in NLP tasks, significantly hindering robust performance across diverse domains and applications. We introduce Hardness-Aware Meta-Resample (HAMR), a unified framework that adaptively addresses both class imbalance and data difficulty. HAMR employs bi-level optimizations to dynamically estimate instance-level weights that prioritize genuinely challenging samples and minority classes, while a neighborhood-aware resampling mechanism amplifies training focus on hard examples and their semantically similar neighbors. We validate HAMR on six imbalanced datasets covering multiple tasks and spanning biomedical, disaster response, and sentiment domains. Experimental results show that HAMR achieves substantial improvements for minority classes and consistently outperforms strong baselines. Extensive ablation studies demonstrate that our proposed modules synergistically contribute to performance gains and highlight HAMR as a flexible and generalizable approach for class imbalance adaptation. Code is available at https://github.com/trust-nlp/ImbalanceLearning.
168. ❌ Towards Understanding the Robustness of Sparse Autoencoders
作者: Ahson Saiyed, Sabrina Sadiekh, Chirag Agarwal 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18756v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Large Language Models (LLMs) remain vulnerable to optimization-based jailbreak attacks that exploit internal gradient structure. While Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) are widely used for interpretability, their robustness implications remain underexplored. We present a study of integrating pretrained SAEs into transformer residual streams at inference time, without modifying model weights or blocking gradients. Across four model families (Gemma, LLaMA, Mistral, Qwen) and two strong white-box attacks (GCG, BEAST) plus three black-box benchmarks, SAE-augmented models achieve up to a 5x reduction in jailbreak success rate relative to the undefended baseline and reduce cross-model attack transferability. Parametric ablations reveal (i) a monotonic dose-response relationship between L0 sparsity and attack success rate, and (ii) a layer-dependent defense-utility tradeoff, where intermediate layers balance robustness and clean performance. These findings are consistent with a representational bottleneck hypothesis: sparse projection reshapes the optimization geometry exploited by jailbreak attacks.
169. ❌ Remask, Don’t Replace: Token-to-Mask Refinement in Masked Diffusion Language Models
作者: Lin Yao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18738v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Masked diffusion language models such as LLaDA2.1 rely on Token-to-Token (T2T) editing to correct their own generation errors: whenever a different token crosses a confidence threshold, the committed token is overwritten. We identify three structural failure modes of this rule. The trigger cannot fire when no single alternative is confident enough; the replacement is computed under a context that may itself contain errors; and the uniform perturbations used to train the T2T stream do not resemble the coherent, semantically plausible mistakes that the model actually makes at inference. As an alternative, we propose Token-to-Mask (T2M) remasking. Rather than overwriting a suspect token with a new guess, T2M resets the position to the mask state, so that the next denoising step re-predicts it from an in-distribution context. The method is training-free, modifies only the editing rule, and introduces no new parameters. We pair it with three detection heuristics and give a short theoretical account of why a mask is a better conditioning signal than an erroneous token. Across 8 benchmarks, T2M improves accuracy on tasks that require exact token-level output. Its largest gain is +5.92 points on CMATH, where we attribute 79.9% of baseline errors to last-mile corruption (correct reasoning followed by a garbled final answer); T2M repairs 41.3% of these cases.
170. ❌ Investigating Counterfactual Unfairness in LLMs towards Identities through Humor
作者: Shubin Kim, Yejin Son, Junyeong Park, Keummin Ka, Seungbeen Lee, Jaeyoung Lee, Hyeju Jang, Alice Oh, Youngjae Yu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18729v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Humor holds up a mirror to social perception: what we find funny often reflects who we are and how we judge others. When language models engage with humor, their reactions expose the social assumptions they have internalized from training data. In this paper, we investigate counterfactual unfairness through humor by observing how the model’s responses change when we swap who speaks and who is addressed while holding other factors constant. Our framework spans three tasks: humor generation refusal, speaker intention inference, and relational/societal impact prediction, covering both identity-agnostic humor and identity-specific disparagement humor. We introduce interpretable bias metrics that capture asymmetric patterns under identity swaps. Experiments across state-of-the-art models reveal consistent relational disparities: jokes told by privileged speakers are refused up to 67.5% more often, judged as malicious 64.7% more frequently, and rated up to 1.5 points higher in social harm on a 5-point scale. These patterns highlight how sensitivity and stereotyping coexist in generative models, complicating efforts toward fairness and cultural alignment.
171. ❌ Scripts Through Time: A Survey of the Evolving Role of Transliteration in NLP
作者: Thanmay Jayakumar, Deepon Halder, Raj Dabre 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18722v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Cross-lingual transfer in NLP is often hindered by the ``script barrier’’ where differences in writing systems inhibit transfer learning between languages. Transliteration, the process of converting the script, has emerged as a powerful technique to bridge this gap by increasing lexical overlap. This paper provides a comprehensive survey of the application of transliteration in cross-lingual NLP. We present a taxonomy of key motivations to utilize transliterations in language models, and provide an overview of different approaches of incorporating transliterations as input. We analyze the evolution and effectiveness of these methods, discussing the critical trade-offs involved, and contextualize their need in modern LLMs. The review explores various settings that show how transliteration is beneficial, including handling code-mixed text, leveraging language family relatedness, and pragmatic gains in inference efficiency. Based on this analysis, we provide concrete recommendations for researchers on selecting and implementing the most appropriate transliteration strategy based on their specific language, task, and resource constraints.
172. ❌ Probing for Reading Times
作者: Eleftheria Tsipidi, Samuel Kiegeland, Francesco Ignazio Re, Tianyang Xu, Mario Giulianelli, Karolina Stanczak, Ryan Cotterell 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18712v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Probing has shown that language model representations encode rich linguistic information, but it remains unclear whether they also capture cognitive signals about human processing. In this work, we probe language model representations for human reading times. Using regularized linear regression on two eye-tracking corpora spanning five languages (English, Greek, Hebrew, Russian, and Turkish), we compare the representations from every model layer against scalar predictors – surprisal, information value, and logit-lens surprisal. We find that the representations from early layers outperform surprisal in predicting early-pass measures such as first fixation and gaze duration. The concentration of predictive power in the early layers suggests that human-like processing signatures are captured by low-level structural or lexical representations, pointing to a functional alignment between model depth and the temporal stages of human reading. In contrast, for late-pass measures such as total reading time, scalar surprisal remains superior, despite its being a much more compressed representation. We also observe performance gains when using both surprisal and early-layer representations. Overall, we find that the best-performing predictor varies strongly depending on the language and eye-tracking measure.
173. ❌ Characterizing AlphaEarth Embedding Geometry for Agentic Environmental Reasoning
作者: Mashrekur Rahman, Samuel J. Barrett, Christina Last 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18715v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Earth observation foundation models encode land surface information into dense embedding vectors, yet the geometric structure of these representations and its implications for downstream reasoning remain underexplored. We characterize the manifold geometry of Google AlphaEarth’s 64-dimensional embeddings across 12.1 million Continental United States samples (2017–2023) and develop an agentic system that leverages this geometric understanding for environmental reasoning. The manifold is non-Euclidean: effective dimensionality is 13.3 (participation ratio) from 64 raw dimensions, with local intrinsic dimensionality of approximately 10. Tangent spaces rotate substantially, with 84% of locations exceeding 60\textdegree{} and local-global alignment (mean$|\cosθ| = 0.17$) approaching the random baseline of 0.125. Supervised linear probes indicate that concept directions rotate across the manifold, and compositional vector arithmetic using both PCA-derived and probe-derived directions yields poor precision. Retrieval instead produces physically coherent results, with local geometry predicting retrieval coherence ($R^2 = 0.32$). Building on this characterization, we introduce an agentic system with nine specialized tools that decomposes environmental queries into reasoning chains over a FAISS-indexed embedding database. A five-condition ablation (120 queries, three complexity tiers) shows that embedding retrieval dominates response quality ($μ= 3.79 \pm 0.90$ vs.\ $3.03 \pm 0.77$ parametric-only; scale 1–5), with peak performance on multi-step comparisons ($μ= 4.28 \pm 0.43$). A cross-model benchmark show that geometric tools reduce Sonnet 4.5’s score by 0.12 points but improve Opus 4.6’s by 0.07, with Opus achieving higher geometric grounding (3.38 vs.\ 2.64), suggesting that the value of geometric characterization scales with the reasoning capability of the consuming model.
174. ❌ Beyond Indistinguishability: Measuring Extraction Risk in LLM APIs
作者: Ruixuan Liu, David Evans, Li Xiong 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18697v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Indistinguishability properties such as differential privacy bounds or low empirically measured membership inference are widely treated as proxies to show a model is sufficiently protected against broader memorization risks. However, we show that indistinguishability properties are neither sufficient nor necessary for preventing data extraction in LLM APIs. We formalize a privacy-game separation between extraction and indistinguishability-based privacy, showing that indistinguishability and inextractability are incomparable: upper-bounding distinguishability does not upper-bound extractability. To address this gap, we introduce $(l, b)$-inextractability as a definition that requires at least $2^b$ expected queries for any black-box adversary to induce the LLM API to emit a protected $l$-gram substring. We instantiate this via a worst-case extraction game and derive a rank-based extraction risk upper bound for targeted exact extraction, as well as extensions to cover untargeted and approximate extraction. The resulting estimator captures the extraction risk over multiple attack trials and prefix adaptations. We show that it can provide a tight and efficient estimation for standard greedy extraction and an upper bound on the probabilistic extraction risk given any decoding configuration. We empirically evaluate extractability across different models, clarifying its connection to distinguishability, demonstrating its advantage over existing extraction risk estimators, and providing actionable mitigation guidelines across model training, API access, and decoding configurations in LLM API deployment. Our code is publicly available at: https://github.com/Emory-AIMS/Inextractability.
175. ❌ Tstars-Tryon 1.0: Robust and Realistic Virtual Try-On for Diverse Fashion Items
作者: Mengting Chen, Zhengrui Chen, Yongchao Du, Zuan Gao, Taihang Hu, Jinsong Lan, Chao Lin, Yefeng Shen, Xingjian Wang, Zhao Wang, Zhengtao Wu, Xiaoli Xu, Zhengze Xu, Hao Yan, Mingzhou Zhang, Jun Zheng, Qinye Zhou, Xiaoyong Zhu, Bo Zheng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19748v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Recent advances in image generation and editing have opened new opportunities for virtual try-on. However, existing methods still struggle to meet complex real-world demands. We present Tstars-Tryon 1.0, a commercial-scale virtual try-on system that is robust, realistic, versatile, and highly efficient. First, our system maintains a high success rate across challenging cases like extreme poses, severe illumination variations, motion blur, and other in-the-wild conditions. Second, it delivers highly photorealistic results with fine-grained details, faithfully preserving garment texture, material properties, and structural characteristics, while largely avoiding common AI-generated artifacts. Third, beyond apparel try-on, our model supports flexible multi-image composition (up to 6 reference images) across 8 fashion categories, with coordinated control over person identity and background. Fourth, to overcome the latency bottlenecks of commercial deployment, our system is heavily optimized for inference speed, delivering near real-time generation for a seamless user experience. These capabilities are enabled by an integrated system design spanning end-to-end model architecture, a scalable data engine, robust infrastructure, and a multi-stage training paradigm. Extensive evaluation and large-scale product deployment demonstrate that Tstars-Tryon1.0 achieves leading overall performance. To support future research, we also release a comprehensive benchmark. The model has been deployed at an industrial scale on the Taobao App, serving millions of users with tens of millions of requests.
176. ❌ Sessa: Selective State Space Attention
作者: Liubomyr Horbatko 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18580v2
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Modern sequence modeling is dominated by two families: Transformers, whose self-attention can access arbitrary elements of the visible sequence, and structured state-space models, which propagate information through an explicit recurrent state. These mechanisms face different limitations on long contexts: when attention is diffuse, the influence of individual tokens is diluted across the effective support, while recurrent state propagation can lose long-range sensitivity unless information is actively preserved. As a result, both mechanisms face challenges in preserving and selectively retrieving information over long contexts. We propose Sessa, a decoder that places attention inside a recurrent feedback path. This creates many attention-based paths through which past tokens can influence future states, rather than relying on a single attention read or a single recurrent chain. We prove that, under explicit assumptions and matched regimes, Sessa admits power-law memory tails $O(\ell^{-β})$ for $0 < β< 1$, with slower decay than in the corresponding Transformer and Mamba-style baselines. We further give an explicit construction that achieves this power-law rate. Under the same assumptions, Sessa is the only model class among those considered that realizes flexible selective retrieval, including profiles whose influence does not decay with distance. Consistent with this theoretical advantage, across matched experiments, Sessa achieves the strongest performance on long-context benchmarks while remaining competitive with Transformer and Mamba-style baselines on short-context language modeling.
177. ❌ AnyRecon: Arbitrary-View 3D Reconstruction with Video Diffusion Model
作者: Yutian Chen, Shi Guo, Renbiao Jin, Tianshuo Yang, Xin Cai, Yawen Luo, Mingxin Yang, Mulin Yu, Linning Xu, Tianfan Xue 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19747v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Sparse-view 3D reconstruction is essential for modeling scenes from casual captures, but remain challenging for non-generative reconstruction. Existing diffusion-based approaches mitigates this issues by synthesizing novel views, but they often condition on only one or two capture frames, which restricts geometric consistency and limits scalability to large or diverse scenes. We propose AnyRecon, a scalable framework for reconstruction from arbitrary and unordered sparse inputs that preserves explicit geometric control while supporting flexible conditioning cardinality. To support long-range conditioning, our method constructs a persistent global scene memory via a prepended capture view cache, and removes temporal compression to maintain frame-level correspondence under large viewpoint changes. Beyond better generative model, we also find that the interplay between generation and reconstruction is crucial for large-scale 3D scenes. Thus, we introduce a geometry-aware conditioning strategy that couples generation and reconstruction through an explicit 3D geometric memory and geometry-driven capture-view retrieval. To ensure efficiency, we combine 4-step diffusion distillation with context-window sparse attention to reduce quadratic complexity. Extensive experiments demonstrate robust and scalable reconstruction across irregular inputs, large viewpoint gaps, and long trajectories.
178. ❌ Generative Drifting for Conditional Medical Image Generation
作者: Zirong Li, Siyuan Mei, Weiwen Wu, Andreas Maier, Lina Gölz, Yan Xia 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19736v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Conditional medical image generation plays an important role in many clinically relevant imaging tasks. However, existing methods still face a fundamental challenge in balancing inference efficiency, patient-specific fidelity, and distribution-level plausibility, particularly in high-dimensional 3D medical imaging. In this work, we propose GDM, a generative drifting framework that reformulates deterministic medical image prediction as a multi-objective learning problem to jointly promote distribution-level plausibility and patient-specific fidelity while retaining one-step inference. GDM extends drifting to 3D medical imaging through an attractive-repulsive drift that minimizes the discrepancy between the generator pushforward and the target distribution. To enable stable drifting-based learning in 3D volumetric data, GDM constructs a multi-level feature bank from a medical foundation encoder to support reliable affinity estimation and drifting field computation across complementary global, local, and spatial representations. In addition, a gradient coordination strategy in the shared output space improves optimization balance under competing distribution-level and fidelity-oriented objectives. We evaluate the proposed framework on two representative tasks, MRI-to-CT synthesis and sparse-view CT reconstruction. Experimental results show that GDM consistently outperforms a wide range of baselines, including GAN-based, flow-matching-based, and SDE-based generative models, as well as supervised regression methods, while improving the balance among anatomical fidelity, quantitative reliability, perceptual realism, and inference efficiency. These findings suggest that GDM provides a practical and effective framework for conditional 3D medical image generation.
179. ❌ ReImagine: Rethinking Controllable High-Quality Human Video Generation via Image-First Synthesis
作者: Zhengwentai Sun, Keru Zheng, Chenghong Li, Hongjie Liao, Xihe Yang, Heyuan Li, Yihao Zhi, Shuliang Ning, Shuguang Cui, Xiaoguang Han 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19720v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Human video generation remains challenging due to the difficulty of jointly modeling human appearance, motion, and camera viewpoint under limited multi-view data. Existing methods often address these factors separately, resulting in limited controllability or reduced visual quality. We revisit this problem from an image-first perspective, where high-quality human appearance is learned via image generation and used as a prior for video synthesis, decoupling appearance modeling from temporal consistency. We propose a pose- and viewpoint-controllable pipeline that combines a pretrained image backbone with SMPL-X-based motion guidance, together with a training-free temporal refinement stage based on a pretrained video diffusion model. Our method produces high-quality, temporally consistent videos under diverse poses and viewpoints. We also release a canonical human dataset and an auxiliary model for compositional human image synthesis. Code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/Taited/ReImagine.
180. ❌ CityRAG: Stepping Into a City via Spatially-Grounded Video Generation
作者: Gene Chou, Charles Herrmann, Kyle Genova, Boyang Deng, Songyou Peng, Bharath Hariharan, Jason Y. Zhang, Noah Snavely, Philipp Henzler 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19741v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We address the problem of generating a 3D-consistent, navigable environment that is spatially grounded: a simulation of a real location. Existing video generative models can produce a plausible sequence that is consistent with a text (T2V) or image (I2V) prompt. However, the capability to reconstruct the real world under arbitrary weather conditions and dynamic object configurations is essential for downstream applications including autonomous driving and robotics simulation. To this end, we present CityRAG, a video generative model that leverages large corpora of geo-registered data as context to ground generation to the physical scene, while maintaining learned priors for complex motion and appearance changes. CityRAG relies on temporally unaligned training data, which teaches the model to semantically disentangle the underlying scene from its transient attributes. Our experiments demonstrate that CityRAG can generate coherent minutes-long, physically grounded video sequences, maintain weather and lighting conditions over thousands of frames, achieve loop closure, and navigate complex trajectories to reconstruct real-world geography.
181. ❌ SpanVLA: Efficient Action Bridging and Learning from Negative-Recovery Samples for Vision-Language-Action Model
作者: Zewei Zhou, Ruining Yang, Xuewei, Qi, Yiluan Guo, Sherry X. Chen, Tao Feng, Kateryna Pistunova, Yishan Shen, Lili Su, Jiaqi Ma 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19710v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models offer a promising autonomous driving paradigm for leveraging world knowledge and reasoning capabilities, especially in long-tail scenarios. However, existing VLA models often struggle with the high latency in action generation using an autoregressive generation framework and exhibit limited robustness. In this paper, we propose SpanVLA, a novel end-to-end autonomous driving framework, integrating an autoregressive reasoning and a flow-matching action expert. First, SpanVLA introduces an efficient bridge to leverage the vision and reasoning guidance of VLM to efficiently plan future trajectories using a flow-matching policy conditioned on historical trajectory initialization, which significantly reduces inference time. Second, to further improve the performance and robustness of the SpanVLA model, we propose a GRPO-based post-training method to enable the VLA model not only to learn from positive driving samples but also to learn how to avoid the typical negative behaviors and learn recovery behaviors. We further introduce mReasoning, a new real-world driving reasoning dataset, focusing on complex, reasoning-demanding scenarios and negative-recovery samples. Extensive experiments on the NAVSIM (v1 and v2) demonstrate the competitive performance of the SpanVLA model. Additionally, the qualitative results across diverse scenarios highlight the planning performance and robustness of our model.
182. ❌ A Network-Aware Evaluation of Distributed Energy Resource Control in Smart Distribution Systems
作者: Houchao Gan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19715v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Distribution networks with high penetration of Distributed Energy Resources (DERs) increasingly rely on communication networks to coordinate grid-interactive control. While many distributed control schemes have been proposed, they are often evaluated under idealized communication assumptions, making it difficult to assess their performance under realistic network conditions. This work presents an implementation-driven evaluation of a representative virtual power plant (VPP) dispatch algorithm using a co-simulation framework that couples a linearized distribution-system model with packet-level downlink emulation in ns-3. The study considers a modified IEEE~37-node feeder with high photovoltaic penetration and a primal–dual VPP dispatch that simultaneously targets feeder-head active power tracking and voltage regulation. Communication effects are introduced only on the downlink path carrying dual-variable updates, where per-DER packet delays and a hold-last-value strategy are modeled. Results show that, under ideal communication, the dispatch achieves close tracking of the feeder-head power reference while maintaining voltages within the prescribed limits at selected buses. When realistic downlink delay is introduced, the same controller exhibits large oscillations in feeder-head power and more frequent voltage limit violations. These findings highlight that distributed DER control performance can be strongly influenced by communication behavior and motivate evaluation frameworks that explicitly incorporate network dynamics into the assessment of grid-interactive control schemes.
183. ❌ Face Anything: 4D Face Reconstruction from Any Image Sequence
作者: Umut Kocasari, Simon Giebenhain, Richard Shaw, Matthias Nießner 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19702v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Accurate reconstruction and tracking of dynamic human faces from image sequences is challenging because non-rigid deformations, expression changes, and viewpoint variations occur simultaneously, creating significant ambiguity in geometry and correspondence estimation. We present a unified method for high-fidelity 4D facial reconstruction based on canonical facial point prediction, a representation that assigns each pixel a normalized facial coordinate in a shared canonical space. This formulation transforms dense tracking and dynamic reconstruction into a canonical reconstruction problem, enabling temporally consistent geometry and reliable correspondences within a single feed-forward model. By jointly predicting depth and canonical coordinates, our method enables accurate depth estimation, temporally stable reconstruction, dense 3D geometry, and robust facial point tracking within a single architecture. We implement this formulation using a transformer-based model that jointly predicts depth and canonical facial coordinates, trained using multi-view geometry data that non-rigidly warps into the canonical space. Extensive experiments on image and video benchmarks demonstrate state-of-the-art performance across reconstruction and tracking tasks, achieving approximately 3$\times$ lower correspondence error and faster inference than prior dynamic reconstruction methods, while improving depth accuracy by 16%. These results highlight canonical facial point prediction as an effective foundation for unified feed-forward 4D facial reconstruction.
184. ❌ Unveiling Fine-Grained Visual Traces: Evaluating Multimodal Interleaved Reasoning Chains in Multimodal STEM Tasks
作者: Jing Jin, Hao Liu, Yan Bai, Yihang Lou, Zhenke Wang, Tianrun Yuan, Juntong Chen, Yongkang Zhu, Fanhu Zeng, Xuanyu Zhu, Yige Xu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19697v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have shown promising reasoning abilities, yet evaluating their performance in specialized domains remains challenging. STEM reasoning is a particularly valuable testbed because it provides highly verifiable feedback, but existing benchmarks often permit unimodal shortcuts due to modality redundancy and focus mainly on final-answer accuracy, overlooking the reasoning process itself. To address this challenge, we introduce StepSTEM: a graduate-level benchmark of 283 problems across mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, and engineering for fine-grained evaluation of cross-modal reasoning in MLLMs. StepSTEM is constructed through a rigorous curation pipeline that enforces strict complementarity between textual and visual inputs. We further propose a general step-level evaluation framework for both text-only chain-of-thought and interleaved image-text reasoning, using dynamic programming to align predicted reasoning steps with multiple reference solutions. Experiments across a wide range of models show that current MLLMs still rely heavily on textual reasoning, with even Gemini 3.1 Pro and Claude Opus 4.6 achieving only 38.29% accuracy. These results highlight substantial headroom for genuine cross-modal STEM reasoning and position StepSTEM as a benchmark for fine-grained evaluation of multimodal reasoning. Source code is available at https://github.com/lll-hhh/STEPSTEM.
185. ❌ IR-Flow: Bridging Discriminative and Generative Image Restoration via Rectified Flow
作者: Zihao Fan, Xin Lu, Jie Xiao, Dong Li, Jie Huang, Xueyang Fu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19680v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
In image restoration, single-step discriminative mappings often lack fine details via expectation learning, whereas generative paradigms suffer from inefficient multi-step sampling and noise-residual coupling. To address this dilemma, we propose IR-Flow, a novel image restoration method based on Rectified Flow that serves as a unified framework bridging the gap between discriminative and generative paradigms. Specifically, we first construct multilevel data distribution flows, which expand the ability of models to learn from and adapt to various levels of degradation. Subsequently, cumulative velocity fields are proposed to learn transport trajectories across varying degradation levels, guiding intermediate states toward the clean target, while a multi-step consistency constraint is presented to enforce trajectory coherence and boost few-step restoration performance. We show that directly establishing a linear transport flow between degraded and clean image domains not only enables fast inference but also improves adaptability to out-of-distribution degradations. Extensive evaluations on deraining, denoising and raindrop removal tasks demonstrate that IR-Flow achieves competitive quantitative results with only a few sampling steps, offering an efficient and flexible framework that maintains an excellent distortion-perception balance. Our code is available at https://github.com/fanzh03/IR-Flow.
186. ❌ MMControl: Unified Multi-Modal Control for Joint Audio-Video Generation
作者: Liyang Li, Wen Wang, Canyu Zhao, Tianjian Feng, Zhiyue Zhao, Hao Chen, Chunhua Shen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19679v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Recent advances in Diffusion Transformers (DiTs) have enabled high-quality joint audio-video generation, producing videos with synchronized audio within a single model. However, existing controllable generation frameworks are typically restricted to video-only control. This restricts comprehensive controllability and often leads to suboptimal cross-modal alignment. To bridge this gap, we present MMControl, which enables users to perform Multi-Modal Control in joint audio-video generation. MMControl introduces a dual-stream conditional injection mechanism. It incorporates both visual and acoustic control signals, including reference images, reference audio, depth maps, and pose sequences, into a joint generation process. These conditions are injected through bypass branches into a joint audio-video Diffusion Transformer, enabling the model to simultaneously generate identity-consistent video and timbre-consistent audio under structural constraints. Furthermore, we introduce modality-specific guidance scaling, which allows users to independently and dynamically adjust the influence strength of each visual and acoustic condition at inference time. Extensive experiments demonstrate that MMControl achieves fine-grained, composable control over character identity, voice timbre, body pose, and scene layout in joint audio-video generation.
187. ❌ MedFlowSeg: Flow Matching for Medical Image Segmentation with Frequency-Aware Attention
作者: Zhi Chen, Runze Hu, Le Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19675v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Flow matching has recently emerged as a principled framework for learning continuous-time transport maps, enabling efficient deterministic generation without relying on stochastic diffusion processes. While generative modeling has shown promise for medical image segmentation, particularly in capturing uncertainty and complex anatomical variability, existing approaches are predominantly built upon diffusion models, which incur substantial computational overhead due to iterative sampling and are often constrained by UNet-based parameterizations. In this work, we introduce MedFlowSeg, a conditional flow matching framework that formulates medical image segmentation as learning a time-dependent vector field that transports a simple prior distribution to the target segmentation distribution. This formulation enables one-step deterministic inference while preserving the expressiveness of generative modeling. We further develop a dual-conditioning mechanism to incorporate structured priors into the learned flow. Specifically, we propose a Dual-Branch Spatial Attention module that injects multi-scale structural information into the flow field, and a Frequency-Aware Attention module that models cross-domain interactions between spatial and spectral representations via discrepancy-aware fusion and time-dependent modulation. Together, these components provide an effective parameterization of conditional flows that capture both global anatomical structure and fine-grained boundary details. We provide extensive empirical validation across multiple medical imaging modalities, demonstrating that MedFlowSeg achieves state-of-the-art performance while significantly reducing computational cost compared to diffusion-based methods. Our results highlight the potential of flow matching as a theoretically grounded and computationally efficient alternative for generative medical image segmentation.
188. ❌ CoInteract: Physically-Consistent Human-Object Interaction Video Synthesis via Spatially-Structured Co-Generation
作者: Xiangyang Luo, Xiaozhe Xin, Tao Feng, Xu Guo, Meiguang Jin, Junfeng Ma 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19636v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Synthesizing human–object interaction (HOI) videos has broad practical value in e-commerce, digital advertising, and virtual marketing. However, current diffusion models, despite their photorealistic rendering capability, still frequently fail on (i) the structural stability of sensitive regions such as hands and faces and (ii) physically plausible contact (e.g., avoiding hand–object interpenetration). We present CoInteract, an end-to-end framework for HOI video synthesis conditioned on a person reference image, a product reference image, text prompts, and speech audio. CoInteract introduces two complementary designs embedded into a Diffusion Transformer (DiT) backbone. First, we propose a Human-Aware Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) that routes tokens to lightweight, region-specialized experts via spatially supervised routing, improving fine-grained structural fidelity with minimal parameter overhead. Second, we propose Spatially-Structured Co-Generation, a dual-stream training paradigm that jointly models an RGB appearance stream and an auxiliary HOI structure stream to inject interaction geometry priors. During training, the HOI stream attends to RGB tokens and its supervision regularizes shared backbone weights; at inference, the HOI branch is removed for zero-overhead RGB generation. Experimental results demonstrate that CoInteract significantly outperforms existing methods in structural stability, logical consistency, and interaction realism.
189. ❌ InHabit: Leveraging Image Foundation Models for Scalable 3D Human Placement
作者: Nikita Kister, Pradyumna YM, István Sárándi, Jiayi Wang, Anna Khoreva, Gerard Pons-Moll 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19673v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Training embodied agents to understand 3D scenes as humans do requires large-scale data of people meaningfully interacting with diverse environments, yet such data is scarce. Real-world motion capture is costly and limited to controlled settings, while existing synthetic datasets rely on simple geometric heuristics that ignore rich scene context. In contrast, 2D foundation models trained on internet-scale data have implicitly acquired commonsense knowledge of human-environment interactions. To transfer this knowledge into 3D, we introduce InHabit, a fully automatic and scalable data generator for populating 3D scenes with interacting humans. InHabit follows a render-generate-lift principle: given a rendered 3D scene, a vision-language model proposes contextually meaningful actions, an image-editing model inserts a human, and an optimization procedure lifts the edited result into physically plausible SMPL-X bodies aligned with the scene geometry. Applied to Habitat-Matterport3D, InHabit produces the first large-scale photorealistic 3D human-scene interaction dataset, containing 78K samples across 800 building-scale scenes with complete 3D geometry, SMPL-X bodies, and RGB images. Augmenting standard training data with our samples improves RGB-based 3D human-scene reconstruction and contact estimation, and in a perceptual user study our data is preferred in 78% of cases over the state of the art.
190. ❌ GRAFT: Geometric Refinement and Fitting Transformer for Human Scene Reconstruction
作者: Pradyumna YM, Yuxuan Xue, Yue Chen, Nikita Kister, István Sárándi, Gerard Pons-Moll 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19624v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Reconstructing physically plausible 3D human-scene interactions (HSI) from a single image currently presents a trade-off: optimization based methods offer accurate contact but are slow (~20s), while feed-forward approaches are fast yet lack explicit interaction reasoning, producing floating and interpenetration artifacts. Our key insight is that geometry-based human–scene fitting can be amortized into fast feed-forward inference. We present GRAFT (Geometric Refinement And Fitting Transformer), a learned HSI prior that predicts Interaction Gradients: corrective parameter updates that iteratively refine human meshes by reasoning about their 3D relationship to the surrounding scene. GRAFT encodes the interaction state into compact body-anchored tokens, each grounded in the scene geometry via Geometric Probes that capture spatial relationships with nearby surfaces. A lightweight transformer recurrently updates human meshes and re-probes the scene, ensuring the final pose aligns with both learned priors and observed geometry. GRAFT operates either as an end-to-end reconstructor using image features, or with geometry alone as a transferable plug-and-play HSI prior that improves feed-forward methods without retraining. Experiments show GRAFT improves interaction quality by up to 113% over state-of-the-art feed-forward methods and matches optimization-based interaction quality at ${\sim}50{\times}$ lower runtime, while generalizing seamlessly to in-the-wild multi-person scenes and being preferred in 64.8% of three-way user study. Project page: https://pradyumnaym.github.io/graft .
191. ❌ CreatiParser: Generative Image Parsing of Raster Graphic Designs into Editable Layers
作者: Weidong Chen, Dexiang Hong, Zhendong Mao, Yutao Cheng, Xinyan Liu, Lei Zhang, Yongdong Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19632v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Graphic design images consist of multiple editable layers, such as text, background, and decorative elements, while most generative models produce rasterized outputs without explicit layer structures, limiting downstream editing. Existing graphic design parsing methods typically rely on multi-stage pipelines combining layout prediction, matting, and inpainting, which suffer from error accumulation and limited controllability. We propose a hybrid generative framework for raster-to-layer graphic design parsing that decomposes a design image into editable text, background, and sticker layers. Text regions are parsed using a vision-language model into a text rendering protocol, enabling faithful reconstruction and flexible re-editing, while background and sticker layers are generated using a multi-branch diffusion architecture with RGBA support. We further introduce ParserReward and integrate it with Group Relative Policy Optimization to align generation quality with human design preferences. Extensive experiments on two challenging datasets, \emph{i.e.,} the Parser-40K and Crello datasets, demonstrate superior performance over existing methods, \emph{eg.,} achieving an overall average improvement of 23.7% across all metrics.
192. ❌ MOSA: Motion-Guided Semantic Alignment for Dynamic Scene Graph Generation
作者: Xuejiao Wang, Bohao Zhang, Changbo Wang, Gaoqi He 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19631v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Dynamic Scene Graph Generation (DSGG) aims to structurally model objects and their dynamic interactions in video sequences for high-level semantic understanding. However, existing methods struggle with fine-grained relationship modeling, semantic representation utilization, and the ability to model tail relationships. To address these issues, this paper proposes a motion-guided semantic alignment method for DSGG (MoSA). First, a Motion Feature Extractor (MFE) encodes object-pair motion attributes such as distance, velocity, motion persistence, and directional consistency. Then, these motion attributes are fused with spatial relationship features through the Motion-guided Interaction Module (MIM) to generate motion-aware relationship representations. To further enhance semantic discrimination capabilities, the cross-modal Action Semantic Matching (ASM) mechanism aligns visual relationship features with text embeddings of relationship categories. Finally, a category-weighted loss strategy is introduced to emphasize learning of tail relationships. Extensive and rigorous testing shows that MoSA performs optimally on the Action Genome dataset.
193. ❌ SAGE: Training-Free Semantic Evidence Composition for Edge-Cloud Inference under Hard Uplink Budgets
作者: Inhyeok Choi, Hyuncheol Park 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19623v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Edge-cloud hybrid inference offloads difficult inputs to a powerful remote model, but the uplink channel imposes hard per-request constraints on the number of bits that can be transmitted. We show that selecting transmitted content based solely on attention-based importance, the standard approach in collaborative inference, is inherently limited under hard budgets. Two findings support this claim. First, replacing high-importance units with low-importance but complementary ones improves server accuracy. This shows that what matters is not individual importance but how well the transmitted set covers diverse aspects of the input. Second, spatially uniform selection without any content information achieves competitive accuracy at moderate budgets. This confirms that spatial coverage alone carries independent value. Based on this analysis, we propose SAGE (Semantic Attention-Guided Evidence), a principled, training-free method that combines importance filtering with embedding-diversity sampling. SAGE achieves 93% of the server ceiling in offloaded accuracy while transmitting fewer than half of the available evidence units on ImageNet-1K, substantially outperforming importance-only composition.
194. ❌ Volume Transformer: Revisiting Vanilla Transformers for 3D Scene Understanding
作者: Kadir Yilmaz, Adrian Kruse, Tristan Höfer, Daan de Geus, Bastian Leibe 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19609v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Transformers have become a common foundation across deep learning, yet 3D scene understanding still relies on specialized backbones with strong domain priors. This keeps the field isolated from the broader Transformer ecosystem, limiting the transfer of new advances as well as the benefits of increasingly optimized software and hardware stacks. To bridge this gap, we adapt the vanilla Transformer encoder to 3D scenes with minimal modifications. Given an input 3D scene, we partition it into volumetric patch tokens, process them with full global self-attention, and inject positional information via a 3D extension of rotary positional embeddings. We call the resulting model the Volume Transformer (Volt) and apply it to 3D semantic segmentation. Naively training Volt on standard 3D benchmarks leads to shortcut learning, highlighting the limited scale of current 3D supervision. To overcome this, we introduce a data-efficient training recipe based on strong 3D augmentations, regularization, and distillation from a convolutional teacher, making Volt competitive with state-of-the-art methods. We then scale supervision through joint training on multiple datasets and show that Volt benefits more from increased scale than domain-specific 3D backbones, achieving state-of-the-art results across indoor and outdoor datasets. Finally, when used as a drop-in backbone in a standard 3D instance segmentation pipeline, Volt again sets a new state of the art, highlighting its potential as a simple, scalable, general-purpose backbone for 3D scene understanding.
195. ❌ PC2Model: ISPRS benchmark on 3D point cloud to model registration
作者: Mehdi Maboudi, Said Harb, Jackson Ferrao, Kourosh Khoshelham, Yelda Turkan, Karam Mawas 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19596v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Point cloud registration involves aligning one point cloud with another or with a three-dimensional (3D) model, enabling the integration of multimodal data into a unified representation. This is essential in applications such as construction monitoring, autonomous driving, robotics, and virtual or augmented reality (VR/AR).With the increasing accessibility of point cloud acquisition technologies, such as Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) and structured light scanning, along with recent advances in deep learning, the research focus has increasingly shifted towards downstream tasks, particularly point cloud-to-model (PC2Model) registration. While data-driven methods aim to automate this process, they struggle with sparsity, noise, clutter, and occlusions in real-world scans, which limit their performance. To address these challenges, this paper introduces the PC2Model benchmark, a publicly available dataset designed to support the training and evaluation of both classical and data-driven methods. Developed under the leadership of ICWG II/Ib, the PC2Model benchmark adopts a hybrid design that combines simulated point clouds with, in some cases, real-world scans and their corresponding 3D models. Simulated data provide precise ground truth and controlled conditions, while real-world data introduce sensor and environmental artefacts. This design supports robust training and evaluation across domains and enables the systematic analysis of model transferability from simulated to real-world scenarios. The dataset is publicly accessible at: https://zenodo.org/uploads/17581812.
196. ❌ Structure-Semantic Decoupled Modulation of Global Geospatial Embeddings for High-Resolution Remote Sensing Mapping
作者: Jienan Lyu, Miao Yang, Jinchen Cai, Yiwen Hu, Guanyi Lu, Junhao Qiu, Runmin Dong 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19591v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Fine-grained high-resolution remote sensing mapping typically relies on localized visual features, which restricts cross-domain generalizability and often leads to fragmented predictions of large-scale land covers. While global geospatial foundation models offer powerful, generalizable representations, directly fusing their high-dimensional implicit embeddings with high-resolution visual features frequently triggers feature interference and spatial structure degradation due to a severe semantic-spatial gap. To overcome these limitations, we propose a Structure-Semantic Decoupled Modulation (SSDM) framework, which decouples global geospatial representations into two complementary cross-modal injection pathways. First, the structural prior modulation branch introduces the macroscopic receptive field priors from global representations into the self-attention modules of the high-resolution encoder. By guiding local feature extraction with holistic structural constraints, it effectively suppresses prediction fragmentation caused by high-frequency detail noise and excessive intra-class variance. Second, the global semantic injection branch explicitly aligns holistic context with the deep high-resolution feature space and directly supplements global semantics via cross-modal integration, thereby significantly enhancing the semantic consistency and category-level discrimination of complex land covers. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance compared to existing cross-modal fusion approaches. By unleashing the potential of global embeddings, SSDM consistently improves high-resolution mapping accuracy across diverse scenarios, providing a universal and effective paradigm for integrating geospatial foundation models into high-resolution vision tasks.
197. ❌ SmartPhotoCrafter: Unified Reasoning, Generation and Optimization for Automatic Photographic Image Editing
作者: Ying Zeng, Miaosen Luo, Guangyuan Li, Yang Yang, Ruiyang Fan, Linxiao Shi, Qirui Yang, Jian Zhang, Chengcheng Liu, Siming Zheng, Jinwei Chen, Bo Li, Peng-Tao Jiang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19587v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Traditional photographic image editing typically requires users to possess sufficient aesthetic understanding to provide appropriate instructions for adjusting image quality and camera parameters. However, this paradigm relies on explicit human instruction of aesthetic intent, which is often ambiguous, incomplete, or inaccessible to non-expert users. In this work, we propose SmartPhotoCrafter, an automatic photographic image editing method which formulates image editing as a tightly coupled reasoning-to-generation process. The proposed model first performs image quality comprehension and identifies deficiencies by the Image Critic module, and then the Photographic Artist module realizes targeted edits to enhance image appeal, eliminating the need for explicit human instructions. A multi-stage training pipeline is adopted: (i) Foundation pretraining to establish basic aesthetic understanding and editing capabilities, (ii) Adaptation with reasoning-guided multi-edit supervision to incorporate rich semantic guidance, and (iii) Coordinated reasoning-to generation reinforcement learning to jointly optimize reasoning and generation. During training, SmartPhotoCrafter emphasizes photo-realistic image generation, while supporting both image restoration and retouching tasks with consistent adherence to color- and tone-related semantics. We also construct a stage-specific dataset, which progressively builds reasoning and controllable generation, effective cross-module collaboration, and ultimately high-quality photographic enhancement. Experiments demonstrate that SmartPhotoCrafter outperforms existing generative models on the task of automatic photographic enhancement, achieving photo-realistic results while exhibiting higher tonal sensitivity to retouching instructions. Project page: https://github.com/vivoCameraResearch/SmartPhotoCrafter.
198. ❌ TransSplat: Unbalanced Semantic Transport for Language-Driven 3DGS Editing
作者: Yanhui Chen, Jiahong Li, Jingchao Wang, Junyi Lin, Zixin Zeng, Yang Shi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19571v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Language-driven 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) editing provides a more convenient approach for modifying complex scenes in VR/AR. Standard pipelines typically adopt a two-stage strategy: first editing multiple 2D views, and then optimizing the 3D representation to match these edited observations. Existing methods mainly improve view consistency through multi-view feature fusion, attention filtering, or iterative recalibration. However, they fail to explicitly address a more fundamental issue: the semantic correspondence between edited 2D evidence and 3D Gaussians. To tackle this problem, we propose TransSplat, which formulates language-driven 3DGS editing as a multi-view unbalanced semantic transport problem. Specifically, our method establishes correspondences between visible Gaussians and view-specific editing prototypes, thereby explicitly characterizing the semantic relationship between edited 2D evidence and 3D Gaussians. It further recovers a cross-view shared canonical 3D edit field to guide unified 3D appearance updates. In addition, we use transport residuals to suppress erroneous edits in non-target regions, mitigating edit leakage and improving local control precision. Qualitative and quantitative results show that, compared with existing 3D editing methods centered on enhancing view consistency, TransSplat achieves superior performance in local editing accuracy and structural consistency.
199. ❌ RF-HiT: Rectified Flow Hierarchical Transformer for General Medical Image Segmentation
作者: Ahmed Marouane Djouama, Abir Belaala, Abdellah Zakaria Sellam, Salah Eddine Bekhouche, Cosimo Distante, Abdenour Hadid 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19570v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Accurate medical image segmentation requires both long-range contextual reasoning and precise boundary delineation, a task where existing transformer- and diffusion-based paradigms are frequently bottlenecked by quadratic computational complexity and prohibitive inference latency. We propose RF-HiT, a Rectified Flow Hierarchical Transformer that integrates an hourglass transformer backbone with a multi-scale hierarchical encoder for anatomically guided feature conditioning. Unlike prior diffusion-based approaches, RF-HiT leverages rectified flow with efficient transformer blocks to achieve linear complexity while requiring only a few discretization steps. The model further fuses conditioning features across resolutions via learnable interpolation, enabling effective multi-scale representation with minimal computational overhead. As a result, RF-HiT achieves a strong efficiency-performance trade-off, requiring only 10.14 GFLOPs, 13.6M parameters, and inference in as few as three steps. Despite its compact design, RF-HiT attains 91.27% mean Dice on ACDC and 87.40% on BraTS 2021, achieving performance comparable to or exceeding that of significantly more intensive architectures. This demonstrates its strong potential as a robust, computationally efficient foundation for real-time clinical segmentation.
200. ❌ Paparazzo: Active Mapping of Moving 3D Objects
作者: Davide Allegro, Shiyao Li, Stefano Ghidoni, Vincent Lepetit 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19556v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Current 3D mapping pipelines generally assume static environments, which limits their ability to accurately capture and reconstruct moving objects. To address this limitation, we introduce the novel task of active mapping of moving objects, in which a mapping agent must plan its trajectory while compensating for the object’s motion. Our approach, Paparazzo, provides a learning-free solution that robustly predicts the target’s trajectory and identifies the most informative viewpoints from which to observe it, to plan its own path. We also contribute a comprehensive benchmark designed for this new task. Through extensive experiments, we show that Paparazzo significantly improves 3D reconstruction completeness and accuracy compared to several strong baselines, marking an important step toward dynamic scene understanding. Project page: https://davidea97.github.io/paparazzo-page/
201. ❌ Evaluating Histogram Matching for Robust Deep learning-Based Grapevine Disease Detection
作者: Ruben Pascual, Inés Hernández, Salvador Gutiérrez, Javier Tardaguila, Pedro Melo-Pinto, Daniel Paternain, Mikel Galar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19510v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Variability in illumination is a primary factor limiting deep learning robustness for field-based plant disease detection. This study evaluates Histogram Matching (HM), a technique that transforms the pixel intensity distribution of an image to match a reference profile, to mitigate this in grapevine classification, distinguishing among healthy leaves, downy mildew, and spider mite damage. We propose a dual-stage integration of HM: (i) as a preprocessing step for normalization, and (ii) as a data augmentation technique to introduce controlled training variability. Experiments using 1,469 RGB images (comprising homogeneous leaf-focused and heterogeneous canopy samples) to train ResNet-18 models demonstrate that this combination significantly enhances robustness on real-world canopy images. While leaf-focused samples showed marginal gains, the canopy subset improved markedly, indicating that balancing normalization with histogram-based diversification effectively bridges the domain gap caused by uncontrolled lighting.
202. ❌ Deep sprite-based image models: An analysis
作者: Zeynep Sonat Baltacı, Romain Loiseau, Mathieu Aubry 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19480v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
While foundation models drive steady progress in image segmentation and diffusion algorithms compose always more realistic images, the seemingly simple problem of identifying recurrent patterns in a collection of images remains very much open. In this paper, we focus on sprite-based image decomposition models, which have shown some promise for clustering and image decomposition and are appealing because of their high interpretability. These models come in different flavors, need to be tailored to specific datasets, and struggle to scale to images with many objects. We dive into the details of their design, identify their core components, and perform an extensive analysis on clustering benchmarks. We leverage this analysis to propose a deep sprite-based image decomposition method that performs on par with state-of-the-art unsupervised class-aware image segmentation methods on the standard CLEVR benchmark, scales linearly with the number of objects, identifies explicitly object categories, and fully models images in an easily interpretable way.
203. ❌ Seeing Candidates at Scale: Multimodal LLMs for Visual Political Communication on Instagram
作者: Michael Achmann-Denkler, Mario Haim, Christian Wolff 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19489v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This paper presents a computational case study that evaluates the capabilities of specialized machine learning models and emerging multimodal large language models for Visual Political Communication (VPC) analysis. Focusing on concentrated visibility in Instagram stories and posts during the 2021 German federal election campaign, we compare the performance of traditional computer vision models (FaceNet512, RetinaFace, Google Cloud Vision) with a multimodal large language model (GPT-4o) in identifying front-runner politicians and counting individuals in images. GPT-4o outperformed the other models, achieving a macro F1-score of 0.89 for face recognition and 0.86 for person counting in stories. These findings demonstrate the potential of advanced AI systems to scale and refine visual content analysis in political communication while highlighting methodological considerations for future research.
204. ❌ TS-Attn: Temporal-wise Separable Attention for Multi-Event Video Generation
作者: Hongyu Zhang, Yufan Deng, Zilin Pan, Peng-Tao Jiang, Bo Li, Qibin Hou, Zhiyang Dou, Zhen Dong, Daquan Zhou 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19473v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Generating high-quality videos from complex temporal descriptions that contain multiple sequential actions is a key unsolved problem. Existing methods are constrained by an inherent trade-off: using multiple short prompts fed sequentially into the model improves action fidelity but compromises temporal consistency, while a single complex prompt preserves consistency at the cost of prompt-following capability. We attribute this problem to two primary causes: 1) temporal misalignment between video content and the prompt, and 2) conflicting attention coupling between motion-related visual objects and their associated text conditions. To address these challenges, we propose a novel, training-free attention mechanism, Temporal-wise Separable Attention (TS-Attn), which dynamically rearranges attention distribution to ensure temporal awareness and global coherence in multi-event scenarios. TS-Attn can be seamlessly integrated into various pre-trained text-to-video models, boosting StoryEval-Bench scores by 33.5% and 16.4% on Wan2.1-T2V-14B and Wan2.2-T2V-A14B with only a 2% increase in inference time. It also supports plug-and-play usage across models for multi-event image-to-video generation. The source code and project page are available at https://github.com/Hong-yu-Zhang/TS-Attn.
205. ❌ LoViF 2026 Challenge on Real-World All-in-One Image Restoration: Methods and Results
作者: Xiang Chen, Hao Li, Jiangxin Dong, Jinshan Pan, Xin Li, Xin He, Naiwei Chen, Shengyuan Li, Fengning Liu, Haoyi Lv, Haowei Peng, Yilian Zhong, Yuxiang Chen, Shibo Yin, Yushun Fang, Xilei Zhu, Yahui Wang, Chen Lu, Kaibin Chen, Xu Zhang, Xuhui Cao, Jiaqi Ma, Ziqi Wang, Shengkai Hu, Yuning Cui, Huan Zhang, Shi Chen, Bin Ren, Lefei Zhang, Guanglu Dong, Qiyao Zhao, Tianheng Zheng, Chunlei Li, Lichao Mou, Chao Ren, Wangzhi Xing, Xin Lu, Enxuan Gu, Jingxi Zhang, Diqi Chen, Qiaosi Yi, Bingcai Wei, Mingyu Liu, Pengyu Wang, Ce Liu, Miaoxin Guan, Boyu Chen, Hongyu Li, Jian Zhu, Xinrui Luo, Ziyang He, Jiayu Wang, Yichen Xiang, Huayi Qi, Haoyu Bian, Yiran Li, Sunlichen Zhou 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19445v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This paper presents a review for the LoViF Challenge on Real-World All-in-One Image Restoration. The challenge aimed to advance research on real-world all-in-one image restoration under diverse real-world degradation conditions, including blur, low-light, haze, rain, and snow. It provided a unified benchmark to evaluate the robustness and generalization ability of restoration models across multiple degradation categories within a common framework. The competition attracted 124 registered participants and received 9 valid final submissions with corresponding fact sheets, significantly contributing to the progress of real-world all-in-one image restoration. This report provides a detailed analysis of the submitted methods and corresponding results, emphasizing recent progress in unified real-world image restoration. The analysis highlights effective approaches and establishes a benchmark for future research in real-world low-level vision.
206. ❌ DINO Eats CLIP: Adapting Beyond Knowns for Open-set 3D Object Retrieval
作者: Xinwei He, Yansong Zheng, Qianru Han, Zhichuan Wang, Yuxuan Cai, Yang Zhou, Jingbo Xia, Yulong Wang, Jinhai Xiang, Xiang Bai 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19432v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Vision foundation models have shown great promise for open-set 3D object retrieval (3DOR) through efficient adaptation to multi-view images. Leveraging semantically aligned latent space, previous work typically adapts the CLIP encoder to build view-based 3D descriptors. Despite CLIP’s strong generalization ability, its lack of fine-grainedness prompted us to explore the potential of a more recent self-supervised encoder-DINO. To address this, we propose DINO Eats CLIP (DEC), a novel framework for dynamic multi-view integration that is regularized by synthesizing data for unseen classes. We first find that simply mean-pooling over view features from a frozen DINO backbone gives decent performance. Yet, further adaptation causes severe overfitting on average view patterns of known classes. To combat it, we then design a module named Chunking and Adapting Module (CAM). It segments multi-view images into chunks and dynamically integrates local view relations, yielding more robust features than the standard pooling strategy. Finally, we propose Virtual Feature Synthesis (VFS) module to mitigate bias towards known categories explicitly. Under the hood, VFS leverages CLIP’s broad, pre-aligned vision-language space to synthesize virtual features for unseen classes. By exposing DEC to these virtual features, we greatly enhance its open-set discrimination capacity. Extensive experiments on standard open-set 3DOR benchmarks demonstrate its superior efficacy.
207. ❌ TESO: Online Tracking of Essential Matrix by Stochastic Optimization
作者: Jaroslav Moravec, Radim Šára, Akihiro Sugimoto 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19420v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Maintaining long-term accuracy of stereo camera calibration parameters is important for autonomous systems’ perception. This work proposes Online Tracking of Essential Matrix by Stochastic Optimization (TESO). The core mechanisms of TESO are: 1) a robust loss function based on kernel correlation over tentative correspondences, 2) an adaptive online stochastic optimization on the essential manifold. TESO has low CPU and memory requirements, relies on a few hyperparameters, and eliminates the need for data-driven training, enabling the usage in resource-constrained online perception systems. We evaluated the influence of TESO on geometric precision, rectification quality, and stereo depth consistency. On the large-scale MAN TruckScenes dataset, TESO tracks rotational calibration drift with 0.12 deg precision in the Y-axis (critical for stereo accuracy) while the X- and Z-axes are five times more precise. Tracking applied to sequences with simulated drift shows similar precision with respect to the reference as tracking applied to no-drift sequences, indicating the tracker is unbiased. On the KITTI dataset, TESO revealed systematic inconsistencies in extrinsic parameters across stereo pairs, confirming previous published findings. We verified that intrinsic decalibration affected these errors, as evidenced by the conflicting behavior of the rectification and depth metrics. After correcting the reference calibration, TESO improved its rotation precision around the Y-axis 20 times to 0.025 deg and its depth accuracy 50 times. Despite its lightweight design, direct optimization of the proposed TESO loss function alone achieves accuracy comparable to that of neural network-based single-frame methods.
208. ❌ VecHeart: Holistic Four-Chamber Cardiac Anatomy Modeling via Hybrid VecSets
作者: Yihong Chen, Pascal Fua 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19403v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Accurate cardiac anatomy modeling requires the model to be able to handle intricate interrelations among structures. In this paper, we propose VecHeart, a unified framework for holistic reconstruction and generation of four-chamber cardiac structures. To overcome the limitations of current feed-forward implicit methods, specifically their restriction to single-object modeling and their neglect of inter-part correlations, we introduce Hybrid Part Transformer, which leverages part-specific learnable queries and interleaved attention to capture complex inter-chamber dependencies. Furthermore, we propose Anatomical Completion Masking and Modality Alignment strategies, enabling the model to infer complete four-chamber structures from partial, sparse, or noisy observations, even when certain anatomical parts are entirely missing. VecHeart also seamlessly extends to 3D+t dynamic mesh sequence generation, demonstrating exceptional versatility. Experiments show that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance, maintaining high-fidelity reconstruction across diverse challenging scenarios. Code will be released.
209. ❌ HarmoniDiff-RS: Training-Free Diffusion Harmonization for Satellite Image Composition
作者: Xiaoqi Zhuang, Jefersson A. Dos Santos, Jungong Han 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19392v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Satellite image composition plays a critical role in remote sensing applications such as data augmentation, disaste simulation, and urban planning. We propose HarmoniDiff-RS, a training-free diffusion-based framework for harmonizing composite satellite images under diverse domain conditions. Our method aligns the source and target domains through a Latent Mean Shift operation that transfers radiometric characteristics between them. To balance harmonization and content preservation, we introduce a Timestep-wise Latent Fusion strategy by leveraging early inverted latents for high harmonization and late latents for semantic consistency to generate a set of composite candidates. A lightweight harmony classifier is trained to further automatically select the most coherent result among them. We also construct RSIC-H, a benchmark dataset for satellite image harmonization derived from fMoW, providing 500 paired composition samples. Experiments demonstrate that our method effectively performs satellite image composition, showing strong potential for scalable remote-sensing synthesis and simulation tasks. Code is available at: https://github.com/XiaoqiZhuang/HarmoniDiff-RS.
210. ❌ Air-Know: Arbiter-Calibrated Knowledge-Internalizing Robust Network for Composed Image Retrieval
作者: Zhiheng Fu, Yupeng Hu, Qianyun Yang, Shiqi Zhang, Zhiwei Chen, Zixu Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19386v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Composed Image Retrieval (CIR) has attracted significant attention due to its flexible multimodal query method, yet its development is severely constrained by the Noisy Triplet Correspondence (NTC) problem. Most existing robust learning methods rely on the “small loss hypothesis”, but the unique semantic ambiguity in NTC, such as “partial matching”, invalidates this assumption, leading to unreliable noise identification. This entraps the model in a self dependent vicious cycle where the learner is intertwined with the arbiter, ultimately causing catastrophic “representation pollution”. To address this critical challenge, we propose a novel “Expert-Proxy-Diversion” decoupling paradigm, named Air-Know (ArbIteR calibrated Knowledge iNternalizing rObust netWork). Air-Know incorporates three core modules: (1) External Prior Arbitration (EPA), which utilizes Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) as an offline expert to construct a high precision anchor dataset; (2) Expert Knowledge Internalization (EKI), which efficiently guides a lightweight proxy “arbiter” to internalize the expert’s discriminative logic; (3) Dual Stream Reconciliation (DSR), which leverages the EKI’s matching confidence to divert the training data, achieving a clean alignment stream and a representation feedback reconciliation stream. Extensive experiments on multiple CIR benchmark datasets demonstrate that Air-Know significantly outperforms existing SOTA methods under the NTC setting, while also showing strong competitiveness in traditional CIR.
211. ❌ IonMorphNet: Generalizable Learning of Ion Image Morphologies for Peak Picking in Mass Spectrometry Imaging
作者: Philipp Weigand, Niels Nawrot, Nikolas Ebert, Carsten Hopf, Oliver Wasenmüller 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19369v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Peak picking is a fundamental preprocessing step in Mass Spectrometry Imaging (MSI), where each sample is represented by hundreds to thousands of ion images. Existing approaches require careful dataset-specific hyperparameter tuning, and often fail to generalize across acquisition protocols. We introduce IonMorphNet, a spatial-structure-aware representation model for ion images that enables fully data-driven peak picking without any task-specific supervision. We curate 53 publicly available MSI datasets and define six structural classes capturing representative spatial patterns in ion images to train standard image backbones for structural pattern classification. Once trained, IonMorphNet can assess ion images and perform peak picking without additional hyperparameter tuning. Using a ConvNeXt V2-Tiny backbone, our approach improves peak picking performance by +7 % mSCF1 compared to state-of-the-art methods across multiple datasets. Beyond peak picking, we demonstrate that spatially informed channel reduction enables a 3D CNN for patch-based tumor classification in MSI. This approach matches or exceeds pixel-wise spectral classifiers by up to +7.3 % Balanced Accuracy on three tumor classification tasks, indicating meaningful ion image selection. The source code and model weights are available at https://github.com/CeMOS-IS/IonMorphNet.
212. ❌ PanDA: Unsupervised Domain Adaptation for Multimodal 3D Panoptic Segmentation in Autonomous Driving
作者: Yining Pan, Shijie Li, Yuchen Wu, Xulei Yang, Na Zhao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19379v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This paper presents the first study on Unsupervised Domain Adaptation (UDA) for multimodal 3D panoptic segmentation (mm-3DPS), aiming to improve generalization under domain shifts commonly encountered in real-world autonomous driving. A straightforward solution is to employ a pseudo-labeling strategy, which is widely used in UDA to generate supervision for unlabeled target data, combined with an mm-3DPS backbone. However, existing supervised mm-3DPS methods rely heavily on strong cross-modal complementarity between LiDAR and RGB inputs, making them fragile under domain shifts where one modality degrades (e.g., poor lighting or adverse weather). Moreover, conventional pseudo-labeling typically retains only high-confidence regions, leading to fragmented masks and incomplete object supervision, which are issues particularly detrimental to panoptic segmentation. To address these challenges, we propose PanDA, the first UDA framework specifically designed for multimodal 3D panoptic segmentation. To improve robustness against single-sensor degradation, we introduce an asymmetric multimodal augmentation that selectively drops regions to simulate domain shifts and improve robust representation learning. To enhance pseudo-label completeness and reliability, we further develop a dual-expert pseudo-label refinement module that extracts domain-invariant priors from both 2D and 3D modalities. Extensive experiments across diverse domain shifts, spanning time, weather, location, and sensor variations, significantly surpass state-of-the-art UDA baselines for 3D semantic segmentation.
213. ❌ Mind2Drive: Predicting Driver Intentions from EEG in Real-world On-Road Driving
作者: Ghadah Alosaimi, Hanadi Alhamdan, Wenke E, Stamos Katsigiannis, Amir Atapour-Abarghouei, Toby P. Breckon 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19368v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Predicting driver intention from neurophysiological signals offers a promising pathway for enhancing proactive safety in advanced driver assistance systems, yet remains challenging in real-world driving due to EEG signal non-stationarity and the complexity of cognitive-motor preparation. This study proposes and evaluates an EEG-based driver intention prediction framework using a synchronised multi-sensor platform integrated into a real electric vehicle. A real-world on-road dataset was collected across 32 driving sessions, and 12 deep learning architectures were evaluated under consistent experimental conditions. Among the evaluated architectures, TSCeption achieved the highest average accuracy (0.907) and Macro-F1 score (0.901). The proposed framework demonstrates strong temporal stability, maintaining robust decoding performance up to 1000 ms before manoeuvre execution with minimal degradation. Furthermore, additional analyses reveal that minimal EEG preprocessing outperforms artefact-handling pipelines, and prediction performance peaks within a 400-600 ms interval, corresponding to a critical neural preparatory phase preceding driving manoeuvres. Overall, these findings support the feasibility of early and stable EEG-based driver intention decoding under real-world on-road conditions. Code: https://github.com/galosaimi/Mind2Drive.
214. ❌ Attend what matters: Leveraging vision foundational models for breast cancer classification using mammograms
作者: Samyak Sanghvi, Piyush Miglani, Sarvesh Shashikumar, Kaustubh R Borgavi, Veenu Singla, Chetan Arora 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19350v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Vision Transformers $(\texttt{ViT})$ have become the architecture of choice for many computer vision tasks, yet their performance in computer-aided diagnostics remains limited. Focusing on breast cancer detection from mammograms, we identify two main causes for this shortfall. First, medical images are high-resolution with small abnormalities, leading to an excessive number of tokens and making it difficult for the softmax-based attention to localize and attend to relevant regions. Second, medical image classification is inherently fine-grained, with low inter-class and high intra-class variability, where standard cross-entropy training is insufficient. To overcome these challenges, we propose a framework with three key components: (1) Region of interest $(\texttt{RoI})$ based token reduction using an object detection model to guide attention; (2) contrastive learning between selected $\texttt{RoI}$ to enhance fine-grained discrimination through hard-negative based training; and (3) a $\texttt{DINOv2}$ pretrained $\texttt{ViT}$ that captures localization-aware, fine-grained features instead of global $\texttt{CLIP}$ representations. Experiments on public mammography datasets demonstrate that our method achieves superior performance over existing baselines, establishing its effectiveness and potential clinical utility for large-scale breast cancer screening. Our code is available for reproducibility here: https://aih-iitd.github.io/publications/attend-what-matters
215. ❌ Detection of T-shirt Presentation Attacks in Face Recognition Systems
作者: Mathias Ibsen, Loris Tim Ide, Christian Rathgeb, Christoph Busch 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19365v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Face recognition systems are often used for biometric authentication. Nevertheless, it is known that without any protective measures, face recognition systems are vulnerable to presentation attacks. To tackle this security problem, methods for detecting presentation attacks have been developed and shown good detection performance on several benchmark datasets. However, generalising presentation attack detection methods to new and novel types of attacks is an ongoing challenge. In this work, we employ 1,608 T-shirt attacks of the T-shirt Face Presentation Attack (TFPA) database using 100 unique presentation attack instruments together with 152 bona fide presentations. In a comprehensive evaluation, we show that this type of attack can compromise the security of face recognition systems. Furthermore, we propose a detection method based on spatial consistency checks in order to detect said T-shirt attacks. Precisely, state-of-the-art face and person detectors are combined to analyse the spatial positions of detected faces and persons based on which T-shirt attacks can be reliably detected.
216. ❌ RAFT-MSF++: Temporal Geometry-Motion Feature Fusion for Self-Supervised Monocular Scene Flow
作者: Xunpei Sun, Zuoxun Hou, Yi Chang, Gang Chen, Wei-Shi Zheng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19349v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Monocular scene flow estimation aims to recover dense 3D motion from image sequences, yet most existing methods are limited to two-frame inputs, restricting temporal modeling and robustness to occlusions. We propose RAFT-MSF++, a self-supervised multi-frame framework that recurrently fuses temporal features to jointly estimate depth and scene flow. Central to our approach is the Geometry-Motion Feature (GMF), which compactly encodes coupled motion and geometry cues and is iteratively updated for effective temporal reasoning. To ensure the robustness of this temporal fusion against occlusions, we incorporate relative positional attention to inject spatial priors and an occlusion regularization module to propagate reliable motion from visible regions. These components enable the GMF to effectively propagate information even in ambiguous areas. Extensive experiments show that RAFT-MSF++ achieves 24.14% SF-all on the KITTI Scene Flow benchmark, with a 30.99% improvement over the baseline and better robustness in occluded regions. The code is available at https://github.com/sunzunyi/RAFT-MSF-PlusPlus.
217. ❌ Divide-and-Conquer Approach to Holistic Cognition in High-Similarity Contexts with Limited Data
作者: Shijie Wang, Zijian Wang, Yadan Luo, Haojie Li, Zi Huang, Mahsa Baktashmotlagh 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19339v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Ultra-fine-grained visual categorization (Ultra-FGVC) aims to classify highly similar subcategories within fine-grained objects using limited training samples. However, holistic yet discriminative cues, such as leaf contours in extremely similar cultivars, remain under-explored in current studies, thereby limiting recognition performance. Though crucial, modeling holistic cues with complex morphological structures typically requires massive training samples, posing significant challenges in data-limited scenarios. To address this challenge, we propose a novel Divide-and-Conquer Holistic Cognition Network (DHCNet) that implements a divide-and-conquer strategy by decomposing holistic cues into spatially-associated subtle discrepancies and progressively establishing the holistic cognition process, significantly simplifying holistic cognition while reducing dependency on training data. Technically, DHCNet begins by progressively analyzing subtle discrepancies, transitioning from smaller local patches to larger ones using a self-shuffling operation on local regions. Simultaneously, it leverages the unaffected local regions to potentially guide the perception of the original topological structure among the shuffled patches, thereby aiding in the establishment of spatial associations for these discrepancies. Additionally, DHCNet incorporates the online refinement of these holistic cues discovered from local regions into the training process to iteratively improve their quality. As a result, DHCNet uses these holistic cues as supervisory signals to fine-tune the parameters of the recognition model, thus improving its sensitivity to holistic cues across the entire objects. Extensive evaluations demonstrate that DHCNet achieves remarkable performance on five widely-used Ultra-FGVC datasets.
218. ❌ Geometry-Guided Self-Supervision for Ultra-Fine-Grained Recognition with Limited Data
作者: Shijie Wang, Yadan Luo, Zijian Wang, Haojie Li, Zi Huang, Mahsa Baktashmotlagh 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19345v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This paper investigates the intrinsic geometrical features of highly similar objects and introduces a general self-supervised framework called the Geometric Attribute Exploration Network (GAEor), which is designed to address the ultra-fine-grained visual categorization (Ultra-FGVC) task in data-limited scenarios. Unlike prior work that often captures subtle yet critical distinctions, GAEor generates geometric attributes as novel alternative recognition cues. These attributes are determined by various details within the object, aligned with its geometric patterns, such as the intricate vein structures in soybean leaves. Crucially, each category exhibits distinct geometric descriptors that serve as powerful cues, even among objects with minimal visual variation – a factor largely overlooked in recent research. GAEor discovers these geometric attributes by first amplifying geometry-relevant details via visual feedback from a backbone network, then embedding the relative polar coordinates of these details into the final representation. Extensive experiments demonstrate that GAEor significantly sets new state-of-the-art records in five widely-used Ultra-FGVC benchmarks.
219. ❌ Silicon Aware Neural Networks
作者: Sebastian Fieldhouse, Kea-Tiong Tang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19334v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Recent work in the machine learning literature has demonstrated that deep learning can train neural networks made of discrete logic gate functions to perform simple image classification tasks at very high speeds on CPU, GPU and FPGA platforms. By virtue of being formed by discrete logic gates, these Differentiable Logic Gate Networks (DLGNs) lend themselves naturally to implementation in custom silicon - in this work we present a method to map DLGNs in a one-to-one fashion to a digital CMOS standard cell library by converting the trained model to a gate-level netlist. We also propose a novel loss function whereby the DLGN can optimize the area, and indirectly power consumption, of the resulting circuit by minimizing the expected area per neuron based on the area of the standard cells in the target standard cell library. Finally, we also show for the first time an implementation of a DLGN as a silicon circuit in simulation, performing layout of a DLGN in the SkyWater 130nm process as a custom hard macro using a Cadence standard cell library and performing post-layout power analysis. We find that our custom macro can perform classification on MNIST with 97% accuracy 41.8 million times a second at a power consumption of 83.88 mW.
220. ❌ Multi-view Crowd Tracking Transformer with View-Ground Interactions Under Large Real-World Scenes
作者: Qi Zhang, Jixuan Chen, Kaiyi Zhang, Xinquan Yu, Antoni B. Chan, Hui Huang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19318v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Multi-view crowd tracking estimates each person’s tracking trajectories on the ground of the scene. Recent research works mainly rely on CNNs-based multi-view crowd tracking architectures, and most of them are evaluated and compared on relatively small datasets, such as Wildtrack and MultiviewX. Since these two datasets are collected in small scenes and only contain tens of frames in the evaluation stage, it is difficult for the current methods to be applied to real-world applications where scene size and occlusion are more complicated. In this paper, we propose a Transformer-based multi-view crowd tracking model, \textit{MVTrackTrans}, which adopts interactions between camera views and the ground plane for enhanced multi-view tracking performance. Besides, for better evaluation, we collect and label two large real-world multi-view tracking datasets, MVCrowdTrack and CityTrack, which contain a much larger scene size over a longer time period. Compared with existing methods on the two large and new datasets, the proposed MVTrackTrans model achieves better performance, demonstrating the advantages of the model design in dealing with large scenes. We believe the proposed datasets and model will push the frontiers of the task to more practical scenarios, and the datasets and code are available at: https://github.com/zqyq/MVTrackTrans.
221. ❌ Concept Inconsistency in Dermoscopic Concept Bottleneck Models: A Rough-Set Analysis of the Derm7pt Dataset
作者: Gonzalo Nápoles, Isel Grau, Yamisleydi Salgueiro 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19323v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) route predictions exclusively through a clinically grounded concept layer, binding interpretability to concept-label consistency. When a dataset contains concept-level inconsistencies, identical concept profiles mapped to conflicting diagnosis labels create an unresolvable bottleneck that imposes a hard ceiling on achievable accuracy. In this paper, we apply rough set theory to the Derm7pt dermoscopy benchmark and characterize the full extent and clinical structure of this inconsistency. Among 305 unique concept profiles formed by the 7 dermoscopic criteria of the 7-point melanoma checklist, 50 (16.4%) are inconsistent, spanning 306 images (30.3% of the dataset). This yields a theoretical accuracy ceiling of 92.1%, independent of backbone architecture or training strategy for CBMs that exclusively operate with hard concepts. In addition, we characterize the conflict-severity distribution, identify the clinical features most responsible for boundary ambiguity, and evaluate two filtering strategies with quantified effects on dataset composition and CBM interpretability. Symmetric removal of all boundary-region images yields Derm7pt+, a fully consistent benchmark subset of 705 images with perfect quality of classification and no hard accuracy ceiling. Building on this filtered dataset, we present a hard CBM evaluated across 19 backbone architectures from the EfficientNet, DenseNet, ResNet, and Wide ResNet families. Under symmetric filtering, explored for completeness, EfficientNet-B5 achieves the best label F1 score (0.85) and label accuracy (0.90) on the held-out test set, with a concept accuracy of 0.70. Under asymmetric filtering, EfficientNet-B7 leads across all four metrics, reaching a label F1 score of 0.82 and concept accuracy of 0.70. These results establish reproducible baselines for concept-consistent CBM evaluation on dermoscopic data.
222. ❌ Framelet-Based Blind Image Restoration with Minimax Concave Regularization
作者: Heng Zhang, Reza Parvaz, Rui Yang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19314v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Recovering corrupted images is one of the most challenging problems in image processing. Among various restoration tasks, blind image deblurring has been extensively studied due to its practical importance and inherent difficulty. In this problem, both the point spread function (PSF) and the underlying latent sharp image must be estimated simultaneously. This problem cannot be solved directly due to its ill-posed nature. One powerful tool for solving such problems is total variation (TV) regularization. The $\ell_0$-norm regularization within the TV framework has been widely adopted to promote sparsity in image gradients or transform domains, leading to improved preservation of edges and fine structures. However, the use of the $\ell_0$-norm results in a highly nonconvex and computationally intractable optimization problem, which limits its practical applicability. To overcome these difficulties, we employ the minimax concave penalty (MCP), which promotes enhanced sparsity and provides a closer approximation to the $\ell_0$-norm. In addition, a reweighted $\ell_1$-norm regularization is incorporated to further reduce estimation bias and improve the preservation of fine image details and textures. After introducing the proposed model, a numerical algorithm is developed to solve the resulting optimization problem. The effectiveness of the proposed approach is then demonstrated through experimental evaluations on several test images.
223. ❌ DR-MMSearchAgent: Deepening Reasoning in Multimodal Search Agents
作者: Shengqin Wang, Wentao Yan, Huichi Zhou, Yihang Chen, Kun Shao, Zhizhong Zhang, Yuan Xie 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19264v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Agentic multimodal models have garnered significant attention for their ability to leverage external tools to tackle complex tasks. However, it is observed that such agents often meet premature interaction collapse, caused by two primary reasons: 1) the terminal reward often appending on the last token prevents the advantage from distinguishing trajectories with exploratory behavior; 2) excessively redundant context hinders the agent from absorbing useful feedback. To address these issues, we propose the Deepening Reasoning MMSearchAgent, the framework leverages the structural proximity to derive advantage signals from the whole rollout trajectories in an entire batch, such that trajectories of different lengths are further encouraged to be generated, even when containing the same correct answer. Additionally, differentiated gaussian rewards are employed to dynamically calibrate interaction tolerance, thereby ensuring information reliability and reduce redundancy. To support multi-turn interaction training, we have constructed a multi-step deep-reasoning dataset including 3602 high-quality QA pair with at least 3 reasonning steps. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance, outperforming the MMSearch-R1 by 8.4$%$ on FVQA-test.
224. ❌ Feature Perturbation Pool-based Fusion Network for Unified Multi-Class Industrial Defect Detection
作者: Yuanchan Xu, Wenjun Zang, Ying Wu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19259v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Multi-class defect detection constitutes a critical yet challenging task in industrial quality inspection, where existing approaches typically suffer from two fundamental limitations: (i) the necessity of training separate models for each defect category, resulting in substantial computational and memory overhead, and (ii) degraded robustness caused by inter-class feature perturbation when heterogeneous defect categories are jointly modeled. In this paper, we present FPFNet, a Feature Perturbation Pool-based Fusion Network that synergistically integrates a stochastic feature perturbation pool with a multi-layer feature fusion strategy to address these challenges within a unified detection framework. The feature perturbation pool enriches the training distribution by randomly injecting diverse noise patterns – including Gaussian noise, F-Noise, and F-Drop – into the extracted feature representations, thereby strengthening the model’s robustness against domain shifts and unseen defect morphologies. Concurrently, the multi-layer feature fusion module aggregates hierarchical feature representations from both the encoder and decoder through residual connections and normalization, enabling the network to capture complex cross-scale relationships while preserving fine-grained spatial details essential for precise defect localization. Built upon the UniAD architecture~\cite{you2022unified}, our method achieves state-of-the-art performance on two widely adopted benchmarks: 97.17% image-level AUROC and 96.93% pixel-level AUROC on MVTec-AD, and 91.08% image-level AUROC and 99.08% pixel-level AUROC on VisA, surpassing existing methods by notable margins while introducing no additional learnable parameters or computational complexity.
225. ❌ Unposed-to-3D: Learning Simulation-Ready Vehicles from Real-World Images
作者: Hongyuan Liu, Bochao Zou, Qiankun Liu, Haochen Yu, Qi Mei, Jianfei Jiang, Chen Liu, Cheng Bi, Zhao Wang, Xueyang Zhang, Yifei Zhan, Jiansheng Chen, Huimin Ma 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19257v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Creating realistic and simulation-ready 3D assets is crucial for autonomous driving research and virtual environment construction. However, existing 3D vehicle generation methods are often trained on synthetic data with significant domain gaps from real-world distributions. The generated models often exhibit arbitrary poses and undefined scales, resulting in poor visual consistency when integrated into driving scenes. In this paper, we present Unposed-to-3D, a novel framework that learns to reconstruct 3D vehicles from real-world driving images using image-only supervision. Our approach consists of two stages. In the first stage, we train an image-to-3D reconstruction network using posed images with known camera parameters. In the second stage, we remove camera supervision and use a camera prediction head that directly estimates the camera parameters from unposed images. The predicted pose is then used for differentiable rendering to provide self-supervised photometric feedback, enabling the model to learn 3D geometry purely from unposed images. To ensure simulation readiness, we further introduce a scale-aware module to predict real-world size information, and a harmonization module that adapts the generated vehicles to the target driving scene with consistent lighting and appearance. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Unposed-to-3D effectively reconstructs realistic, pose-consistent, and harmonized 3D vehicle models from real-world images, providing a scalable path toward creating high-quality assets for driving scene simulation and digital twin environments.
226. ❌ Allo{SR}$^2$: Rectifying One-Step Super-Resolution to Stay Real via Allomorphic Generative Flows
作者: Zihan Wang, Xudong Huang, Junbo Qiao, Wei Li, Jie Hu, Xinghao Chen, Shaohui Lin 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19238v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Real-world image super-resolution (Real-SR) has been revolutionized by leveraging the powerful generative priors of large-scale diffusion and flow-based models. However, fine-tuning these models on limited LR-HR pairs often precipitates “prior collapse” that the model sacrifices its inherent generative richness to overfit specific training degradations. This issue is further exacerbated in one-step generation, where the absence of multi-step refinement leads to significant trajectory drift and artifact generation. In this paper, we propose Allo{SR}$^2$, a novel framework that rectifies one-step SR trajectories via allomorphic generative flows to maintain high-fidelity generative realism. Specifically, we utilize Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) Guided Trajectory Initialization to establish a physically grounded starting state by aligning the degradation level of LR latent features with the optimal anchoring timestep of the pre-trained flow. To ensure a stable, curvature-free path for one-step inference, we propose Flow-Anchored Trajectory Consistency (FATC), which enforces velocity-level supervision across intermediate states. Furthermore, we develop Allomorphic Trajectory Matching (ATM), a self-adversarial alignment strategy that minimizes the distributional discrepancy between the SR flow and the generative flow in a unified vector field. Extensive experiments on both synthetic and real-world benchmarks demonstrate that Allo{SR}$^2$ achieves state-of-the-art performance in one-step Real-SR, offering a superior balance between restoration fidelity and generative realism while maintaining extreme efficiency.
227. ❌ Learning to Credit the Right Steps: Objective-aware Process Optimization for Visual Generation
作者: Rui Li, Ke Hao, Yuanzhi Liang, Haibin Huang, Chi Zhang, YunGu, XueLong Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19234v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Reinforcement learning, particularly Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), has emerged as an effective framework for post-training visual generative models with human preference signals. However, its effectiveness is fundamentally limited by coarse reward credit assignment. In modern visual generation, multiple reward models are often used to capture heterogeneous objectives, such as visual quality, motion consistency, and text alignment. Existing GRPO pipelines typically collapse these rewards into a single static scalar and propagate it uniformly across the entire diffusion trajectory. This design ignores the stage-specific roles of different denoising steps and produces mistimed or incompatible optimization signals. To address this issue, we propose Objective-aware Trajectory Credit Assignment (OTCA), a structured framework for fine-grained GRPO training. OTCA consists of two key components. Trajectory-Level Credit Decomposition estimates the relative importance of different denoising steps. Multi-Objective Credit Allocation adaptively weights and combines multiple reward signals throughout the denoising process. By jointly modeling temporal credit and objective-level credit, OTCA converts coarse reward supervision into a structured, timestep-aware training signal that better matches the iterative nature of diffusion-based generation. Extensive experiments show that OTCA consistently improves both image and video generation quality across evaluation metrics.
228. ❌ Adaptive Slicing-Assisted Hyper Inference for Enhanced Small Object Detection in High-Resolution Imagery
作者: Francesco Moretti, Yi Jin, Guiqin Mario 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19233v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Deep learning-based object detectors have achieved remarkable success across numerous computer vision applications, yet they continue to struggle with small object detection in high-resolution aerial and satellite imagery, where dense object distributions, variable shooting angles, diminutive target sizes, and substantial inter-class variability pose formidable challenges. Existing slicing strategies that partition high-resolution images into manageable patches have demonstrated promising results for enlarging the effective receptive field of small targets; however, their reliance on fixed slice dimensions introduces significant redundant computation, inflating inference cost and undermining detection speed. In this paper, we propose \textbf{Adaptive Slicing-Assisted Hyper Inference (ASAHI)}, a novel slicing framework that shifts the paradigm from prescribing a fixed slice size to adaptively determining the optimal number of slices according to image resolution, thereby substantially mitigating redundant computation while preserving beneficial overlap between adjacent patches. ASAHI integrates three synergistic components: (1)an adaptive resolution-aware slicing algorithm that dynamically generates 6 or 12 overlapping patches based on a learned threshold, (2)a slicing-assisted fine-tuning (SAF) strategy that constructs augmented training data comprising both full-resolution and sliced image patches, and (3)a Cluster-DIoU-NMS (CDN) post-processing module that combines the geometric merging efficiency of Cluster-NMS with the center-distance-aware suppression of DIoU-NMS to achieve robust duplicate elimination in crowded scenes. Extensive experiments on VisDrone2019 and xView, demonstrate that ASAHI achieves state-of-the-art performance with 56.8% on VisDrone2019-DET-val and 22.7% on xView-test, while reducing inference time by 20-25% compared to the baseline SAHI method.
229. ❌ Thinking Before Matching: A Reinforcement Reasoning Paradigm Towards General Person Re-Identification
作者: Quan Zhang, Jingze Wu, Jialong Wang, Xiaohua Xie, Jianhuang Lai, Hongbo Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19218v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Learning identity-discriminative representations with multi-scene generality has become a critical objective in person re-identification (ReID). However, mainstream perception-driven paradigms tend to identify fitting from massive annotated data rather than identity-causal cues understanding, which presents a fragile representation against multiple disruptions. In this work, ReID-R is proposed as a novel reasoning-driven paradigm that achieves explicit identity understanding and reasoning by incorporating chain-of-thought into the ReID pipeline. Specifically, ReID-R consists of a two-stage contribution: (i) Discriminative reasoning warm-up, where a model is trained in a CoT label-free manner to acquire identity-aware feature understanding; and (ii) Efficient reinforcement learning, which proposes a non-trivial sampling to construct scene-generalizable data. On this basis, ReID-R leverages high-quality reward signals to guide the model toward focusing on ID-related cues, achieving accurate reasoning and correct responses. Extensive experiments on multiple ReID benchmarks demonstrate that ReID-R achieves competitive identity discrimination as superior methods using only 14.3K non-trivial data (20.9% of the existing data scale). Furthermore, benefit from inherent reasoning, ReID-R can provide high-quality interpretation for results.
230. ❌ An Object-Centered Data Acquisition Method for 3D Gaussian Splatting using Mobile Phones
作者: Yuezhe Zhang, Luqian Bai, Mengting Yu, Lei Wei, Shuai Wan, Yifan Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19216v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Data acquisition through mobile phones remains a challenge for 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS). In this work we target the object-centered scenario and enable reliable mobile acquisition by providing on-device capture guidance and recording onboard sensor signals for offline reconstruction. After the calibration step, the device orientations are aligned to a baseline frame to obtain relative poses, and the optical axis of the camera is mapped to an object-centered spherical grid for uniform viewpoint indexing. To curb polar sampling bias, we compute area-weighted spherical coverage in real-time and guide the user’s motion accordingly. We compare the proposed method with RealityScan and the free-capture strategy. Our method achieves superior reconstruction quality using fewer input images compared to free capture and RealityScan. Further analysis shows that the proposed method is able to obtain more comprehensive and uniform viewpoint coverage during object-centered acquisition.
231. ❌ When Can We Trust Deep Neural Networks? Towards Reliable Industrial Deployment with an Interpretability Guide
作者: Hang-Cheng Dong, Yuhao Jiang, Yibo Jiao, Lu Zou, Kai Zheng, Bingguo Liu, Dong Ye, Guodong Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19206v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The deployment of AI systems in safety-critical domains, such as industrial defect inspection, autonomous driving, and medical diagnosis, is severely hampered by their lack of reliability. A single undetected erroneous prediction can lead to catastrophic outcomes. Unfortunately, there is often no alternative but to place trust in the outputs of a trained AI system, which operates without an internal safeguard to flag unreliable predictions, even in cases of high accuracy. We propose a post-hoc explanation-based indicator to detect false negatives in binary defect detection networks. To our knowledge, this is the first method to proactively identify potentially erroneous network outputs. Our core idea leverages the difference between class-specific discriminative heatmaps and class-agnostic ones. We compute the difference in their intersection over union (IoU) as a reliability score. An adversarial enhancement method is further introduced to amplify this disparity. Evaluations on two industrial defect detection benchmarks show our method effectively identifies false negatives. With adversarial enhancement, it achieves 100% recall, albeit with a trade-off for true negatives. Our work thus advocates for a new and trustworthy deployment paradigm: data-model-explanation-output, moving beyond conventional end-to-end systems to provide critical support for reliable AI in real-world applications.
232. ❌ SketchFaceGS: Real-Time Sketch-Driven Face Editing and Generation with Gaussian Splatting
作者: Bo Li, Jiahao Kang, Yubo Ma, Feng-Lin Liu, Bin Liu, Fang-Lue Zhang, Lin Gao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19202v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
3D Gaussian representations have emerged as a powerful paradigm for digital head modeling, achieving photorealistic quality with real-time rendering. However, intuitive and interactive creation or editing of 3D Gaussian head models remains challenging. Although 2D sketches provide an ideal interaction modality for fast, intuitive conceptual design, they are sparse, depth-ambiguous, and lack high-frequency appearance cues, making it difficult to infer dense, geometrically consistent 3D Gaussian structures from strokes - especially under real-time constraints. To address these challenges, we propose SketchFaceGS, the first sketch-driven framework for real-time generation and editing of photorealistic 3D Gaussian head models from 2D sketches. Our method uses a feed-forward, coarse-to-fine architecture. A Transformer-based UV feature-prediction module first reconstructs a coarse but geometrically consistent UV feature map from the input sketch, and then a 3D UV feature enhancement module refines it with high-frequency, photorealistic detail to produce a high-fidelity 3D head. For editing, we introduce a UV Mask Fusion technique combined with a layer-by-layer feature-fusion strategy, enabling precise, real-time, free-viewpoint modifications. Extensive experiments show that SketchFaceGS outperforms existing methods in both generation fidelity and editing flexibility, producing high-quality, editable 3D heads from sketches in a single forward pass.
233. ❌ Benchmarking Vision Foundation Models for Domain-Generalizable Face Anti-Spoofing
作者: Mika Feng, Pierre Gallin-Martel, Koichi Ito, Takafumi Aoki 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19196v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Face Anti-Spoofing (FAS) remains challenging due to the requirement for robust domain generalization across unseen environments. While recent trends leverage Vision-Language Models (VLMs) for semantic supervision, these multimodal approaches often demand prohibitive computational resources and exhibit high inference latency. Furthermore, their efficacy is inherently limited by the quality of the underlying visual features. This paper revisits the potential of vision-only foundation models to establish a highly efficient and robust baseline for FAS. We conduct a systematic benchmarking of 15 pre-trained models, such as supervised CNNs, supervised ViTs, and self-supervised ViTs, under severe cross-domain scenarios including the MICO and Limited Source Domains (LSD) protocols. Our comprehensive analysis reveals that self-supervised vision models, particularly DINOv2 with Registers, significantly suppress attention artifacts and capture critical, fine-grained spoofing cues. Combined with Face Anti-Spoofing Data Augmentation (FAS-Aug), Patch-wise Data Augmentation (PDA) and Attention-weighted Patch Loss (APL), our proposed vision-only baseline achieves state-of-the-art performance in the MICO protocol. This baseline outperforms existing methods under the data-constrained LSD protocol while maintaining superior computational efficiency. This work provides a definitive vision-only baseline for FAS, demonstrating that optimized self-supervised vision transformers can serve as a backbone for both vision-only and future multimodal FAS systems. The project page is available at: https://gsisaoki.github.io/FAS-VFMbenchmark-CVPRW2026/ .
234. ❌ How Far Are Video Models from True Multimodal Reasoning?
作者: Xiaotian Zhang, Jianhui Wei, Yuan Wang, Jie Tan, Yichen Li, Yan Zhang, Ziyi Chen, Daoan Zhang, Dezhi YU, Wei Xu, Songtao Jiang, Zuozhu Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19193v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Despite remarkable progress toward general-purpose video models, a critical question remains unanswered: how far are these models from achieving true multimodal reasoning? Existing benchmarks fail to address this question rigorously, as they remain constrained by straightforward task designs and fragmented evaluation metrics that neglect complex multimodal reasoning. To bridge this gap, we introduce CLVG-Bench, an evaluation framework designed to probe video models’ zero-shot reasoning capabilities via Context Learning in Video Generation. CLVG-Bench comprises more than 1,000 high-quality, manually annotated metadata across 6 categories and 47 subcategories, covering complex scenarios including physical simulation, logical reasoning, and interactive contexts. To enable rigorous and scalable assessment, we further propose an Adaptive Video Evaluator (AVE) that aligns with human expert perception using minimal annotations, delivering interpretable textual feedback across diverse video context tasks. Extensive experiments reveal a striking answer to our central question: while state-of-the-art (SOTA) video models, such as Seedance 2.0, demonstrate competence on certain understanding and reasoning subtasks, they fall substantially short with logically grounded and interactive generation tasks (achieving success rates <25% and ~0%, respectively), exposing multimodal reasoning and physical grounding as critical bottlenecks. By systematically quantifying these limitations, the proposed method provides actionable feedbacks and a clear roadmap toward truly robust, general-purpose video models. CLVG-Bench and code are released here.
235. ❌ MSDS: Deep Structural Similarity with Multiscale Representation
作者: Danling Kang, Xue-Hua Chen, Bin Liu, Keke Zhang, Weiling Chen, Tiesong Zhao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19159v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Deep-feature-based perceptual similarity models have demonstrated strong alignment with human visual perception in Image Quality Assessment (IQA). However, most existing approaches operate at a single spatial scale, implicitly assuming that structural similarity at a fixed resolution is sufficient. The role of spatial scale in deep-feature similarity modeling thus remains insufficiently understood. In this letter, we isolate spatial scale as an independent factor using a minimal multiscale extension of DeepSSIM, referred to as Deep Structural Similarity with Multiscale Representation (MSDS). The proposed framework decouples deep feature representation from cross-scale integration by computing DeepSSIM independently across pyramid levels and fusing the resulting scores with a lightweight set of learnable global weights. Experiments on multiple benchmark datasets demonstrate consistent and statistically significant improvements over the single-scale baseline, while introducing negligible additional complexity. The results empirically confirm spatial scale as a non-negligible factor in deep perceptual similarity, isolated here via a minimal testbed.
236. ❌ Denoising, Fast and Slow: Difficulty-Aware Adaptive Sampling for Image Generation
作者: Johannes Schusterbauer, Ming Gui, Yusong Li, Pingchuan Ma, Felix Krause, Björn Ommer 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19141v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Diffusion- and flow-based models usually allocate compute uniformly across space, updating all patches with the same timestep and number of function evaluations. While convenient, this ignores the heterogeneity of natural images: some regions are easy to denoise, whereas others benefit from more refinement or additional context. Motivated by this, we explore patch-level noise scales for image synthesis. We find that naively varying timesteps across image tokens performs poorly, as it exposes the model to overly informative training states that do not occur at inference. We therefore introduce a timestep sampler that explicitly controls the maximum patch-level information available during training, and show that moving from global to patch-level timesteps already improves image generation over standard baselines. By further augmenting the model with a lightweight per-patch difficulty head, we enable adaptive samplers that allocate compute dynamically where it is most needed. Combined with noise levels varying over both space and diffusion time, this yields Patch Forcing (PF), a framework that advances easier regions earlier so they can provide context for harder ones. PF achieves superior results on class-conditional ImageNet, remains orthogonal to representation alignment and guidance methods, and scales to text-to-image synthesis. Our results suggest that patch-level denoising schedules provide a promising foundation for adaptive image generation.
237. ❌ Diff-SBSR: Learning Multimodal Feature-Enhanced Diffusion Models for Zero-Shot Sketch-Based 3D Shape Retrieval
作者: Hang Cheng, Fanhe Dong, Long Zeng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19135v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This paper presents the first exploration of text-to-image diffusion models for zero-shot sketch-based 3D shape retrieval (ZS-SBSR). Existing sketch-based 3D shape retrieval methods struggle in zero-shot settings due to the absence of category supervision and the extreme sparsity of sketch inputs. Our key insight is that large-scale pretrained diffusion models inherently exhibit open-vocabulary capability and strong shape bias, making them well suited for zero-shot visual retrieval. We leverage a frozen Stable Diffusion backbone to extract and aggregate discriminative representations from intermediate U-Net layers for both sketches and rendered 3D views. Diffusion models struggle with sketches due to their extreme abstraction and sparsity, compounded by a significant domain gap from natural images. To address this limitation without costly retraining, we introduce a multimodal feature-enhanced strategy that conditions the frozen diffusion backbone with complementary visual and textual cues from CLIP, explicitly enhancing the ability of semantic context capture and concentrating on sketch contours. Specifically, we inject global and local visual features derived from a pretrained CLIP visual encoder, and incorporate enriched textual guidance by combining learnable soft prompts with hard textual descriptions generated by BLIP. Furthermore, we employ the Circle-T loss to dynamically strengthen positive-pair attraction once negative samples are sufficiently separated, thereby adapting to sketch noise and enabling more effective sketch-3D alignment. Extensive experiments on two public benchmarks demonstrate that our method consistently outperforms state-of-the-art approaches in ZS-SBSR.
238. ❌ BALTIC: A Benchmark and Cross-Domain Strategy for 3D Reconstruction Across Air and Underwater Domains Under Varying Illumination
作者: Michele Grimaldi, David Nakath, Oscar Pizarro, Jonatan Scharff Willners, Ignacio Carlucho, Yvan R. Petillot 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19133v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Robust 3D reconstruction across varying environmental conditions remains a critical challenge for robotic perception, particularly when transitioning between air and water. To address this, we introduce BALTIC, a controlled benchmark designed to systematically evaluate modern 3D reconstruction methods under variations in medium and lighting. The benchmark comprises 13 datasets spanning two media (air and water) and three lighting conditions (ambient, artificial, and mixed), with additional variations in motion type, scanning pattern, and initialization trajectory, resulting in a diverse set of sequences. Our experimental setup features a custom water tank equipped with a monocular camera and an HTC Vive tracker, enabling accurate ground-truth pose estimation. We further investigate cross-domain reconstruction by augmenting underwater image sequences with a small number of in-air views captured under similar lighting conditions. We evaluate Structure-from-Motion reconstruction using COLMAP in terms of both trajectory accuracy and scene geometry, and use these reconstructions as input to Neural Radiance Fields and 3D Gaussian Splatting methods. The resulting models are assessed against ground-truth trajectories and in-air references, while rendered outputs are compared using perceptual and photometric metrics. Additionally, we perform a color restoration analysis to evaluate radiometric consistency across domains. Our results show that under controlled, texture-consistent conditions, Gaussian Splatting with simple preprocessing (e.g., white balance correction) can achieve performance comparable to specialized underwater methods, although its robustness decreases in more complex and heterogeneous real-world environments
239. ❌ PortraitDirector: A Hierarchical Disentanglement Framework for Controllable and Real-time Facial Reenactment
作者: Chaonan Ji, Jinwei Qi, Sheng Xu, Peng Zhang, Bang Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19129v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Existing facial reenactment methods struggle with a trade-off between expressiveness and fine-grained controllability. Holistic facial reenactment models often sacrifice granular control for expressiveness, while methods designed for control may struggle with fidelity and robust disentanglement. Instead of treating facial motion as a monolithic signal, we explore an alternative compositional perspective. In this paper, we introduce PortraitDirector, a novel framework that formulates face reenactment as a hierarchical composition task, achieving high-fidelity and controllable results. We employ a Hierarchical Motion Disentanglement and Composition strategy, deconstructing facial motion into a Spatial Layer for physical movements and a Semantic Layer for emotional content. The Spatial Layer comprises: (i) global head pose, managed via a dedicated representation and injection pathway; (ii) spatially separated local facial expressions, distilled from cropped facial regions and purged of emotional cues via Emotion-Filtering Module leveraging an information bottleneck. The Semantic Layer contains a derived global emotion. The disentangled components are then recomposed into an expressive motion latent. Furthermore, we engineer the framework for real-time performance through a suite of optimizations, including diffusion distillation, causal attention and VAE acceleration. PortraitDirector achieves streaming, high-fidelity, controllable 512 x 512 face reenactment at 20 FPS with a end-to-end 800 ms latency on a single 5090 GPU.
240. ❌ Robust Continual Unlearning against Knowledge Erosion and Forgetting Reversal
作者: Eun-Ju Park, Youjin Shin, Simon S. Woo 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19108v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
As a means to balance the growth of the AI industry with the need for privacy protection, machine unlearning plays a crucial role in realizing the ``right to be forgotten’’ in artificial intelligence. This technique enables AI systems to remove the influence of specific data while preserving the rest of the learned knowledge. Although it has been actively studied, most existing unlearning methods assume that unlearning is performed only once. In this work, we evaluate existing unlearning algorithms in a more realistic scenario where unlearning is conducted repeatedly, and in this setting, we identify two critical phenomena: (1) Knowledge Erosion, where the accuracy on retain data progressively degrades over unlearning phases, and (2) Forgetting Reversal, where previously forgotten samples become recognizable again in later phases. To address these challenges, we propose SAFER (StAbility-preserving Forgetting with Effective Regularization), a continual unlearning framework that maintains representation stability for retain data while enforcing negative logit margins for forget data. Extensive experiments show that SAFER mitigates not only knowledge erosion but also forgetting reversal, achieving stable performance across multiple unlearning phases.
241. ❌ EgoMotion: Hierarchical Reasoning and Diffusion for Egocentric Vision-Language Motion Generation
作者: Ruibing Hou, Mingyue Zhou, Yuwei Gui, Mingshuang Luo, Bingpeng Ma, Hong Chang, Shiguang Shan, Xilin Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19105v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Faithfully modeling human behavior in dynamic environments is a foundational challenge for embodied intelligence. While conditional motion synthesis has achieved significant advances, egocentric motion generation remains largely underexplored due to the inherent complexity of first-person perception. In this work, we investigate Egocentric Vision-Language (Ego-VL) motion generation. This task requires synthesizing 3D human motion conditioned jointly on first-person visual observations and natural language instructions. We identify a critical \textit{reasoning-generation entanglement} challenge: the simultaneous optimization of semantic reasoning and kinematic modeling introduces gradient conflicts. These conflicts systematically degrade the fidelity of multimodal grounding and motion quality. To address this challenge, we propose a hierarchical generative framework \textbf{EgoMotion}. Inspired by the biological decoupling of cognitive reasoning and motor control, EgoMotion operates in two stages. In the Cognitive Reasoning stage, A vision-language model (VLM) projects multimodal inputs into a structured space of discrete motion primitives. This forces the VLM to acquire goal-consistent representations, effectively bridging the semantic gap between high-level perceptual understanding and low-level action execution. In the Motion Generation stage, these learned representations serve as expressive conditioning signals for a diffusion-based motion generator. By performing iterative denoising within a continuous latent space, the generator synthesizes physically plausible and temporally coherent trajectories. Extensive evaluations demonstrate that EgoMotion achieves state-of-the-art performance, and produces motion sequences that are both semantically grounded and kinematically superior to existing approaches.
242. ❌ The Essence of Balance for Self-Improving Agents in Vision-and-Language Navigation
作者: Zhen Liu, Yuhan Liu, Jinjun Wang, Jianyi Liu, Wei Song, Jingwen Fu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19064v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
In vision-and-language navigation (VLN), self-improvement from policy-induced experience, using only standard VLN action supervision, critically depends on balancing behavioral diversity and learning stability, which governs whether the agent can extract a reliable learning signal for improvement. Increasing behavioral diversity is necessary to expose alternative action hypotheses but can destabilize policy-induced learning signals, whereas overly conservative stability constraints suppress exploration and induce early commitment, making reliable self-improvement difficult. To address this challenge, we propose Stability-Diversity Balance (SDB), a plug-and-play mechanism for balanced self-improvement in VLN. SDB expands each decision step into multiple latent behavioral hypotheses by applying controlled shifts in the instruction-conditioned hidden states, and then performs reliability-aware soft evaluation and aggregation to retain diverse yet instruction-consistent alternatives during learning. An explicit regularizer further constrains hypothesis interactions, preventing excessive drift or premature collapse of hypothesis diversity and stabilizing self-improvement without discarding training signals. Experiments on R2R, SOON, and REVERIE show consistent improvements; for example, on REVERIE val-unseen, SDB improves SPL from 33.73 to 35.93 and OSR from 51.07 to 54.25.
243. ❌ Evaluation of Winning Solutions of 2025 Low Power Computer Vision Challenge
作者: Zihao Ye, Yung Hsiang Lu, Xiao Hu, Shuai Zhang, Taotao Jing, Xin Li, Zhen Yao, Bo Lang, Zhihao Zheng, Seungmin Oh, Hankyul Kang, Seunghun Kang, Jongbin Ryu, Kexin Chen, Yuan Qi, George K Thiruvathukal, Mooi Choo Chuah 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19054v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The IEEE Low-Power Computer Vision Challenge (LPCVC) aims to promote the development of efficient vision models for edge devices, balancing accuracy with constraints such as latency, memory capacity, and energy use. The 2025 challenge featured three tracks: (1) Image classification under various lighting conditions and styles, (2) Open-Vocabulary Segmentation with Text Prompt, and (3) Monocular Depth Estimation. This paper presents the design of LPCVC 2025, including its competition structure and evaluation framework, which integrates the Qualcomm AI Hub for consistent and reproducible benchmarking. The paper also introduces the top-performing solutions from each track and outlines key trends and observations. The paper concludes with suggestions for future computer vision competitions.
244. ❌ Generative Texture Filtering
作者: Rongjia Zheng, Shangwei Huang, Lei Zhu, Wei-Shi Zheng, Qing Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19039v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We present a generative method for texture filtering, which exhibits surprisingly good performance and generalizability. Our core idea is to empower texture filtering by taking full advantage of the strong learned image prior of pre-trained generative models. To this end, we propose to fine-tune a pre-trained generative model via a two-stage strategy. Specifically, we first conduct supervised fine-tuning on a very small set of paired images, and then perform reinforcement fine-tuning on a large-scale unlabeled dataset under the guidance of a reward function that quantifies the quality of texture removal and structure preservation. Extensive experiments show that our method clearly outperforms previous methods, and is effective to deal with previously challenging cases. Our code is available at https://github.com/OnlyZZZZ/Generative_Texture_Filtering.
245. ❌ Explore Like Humans: Autonomous Exploration with Online SG-Memo Construction for Embodied Agents
作者: Xu Chen, Shichao Xie, Zhining Gu, Lu Jia, Minghua Luo, Fei Liu, Zedong Chu, Yanfen Shen, Xiaolong Wu, Mu Xu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19034v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Constructing structured spatial memory is essential for enabling long-horizon reasoning in complex embodied navigation tasks. Current memory construction predominantly relies on a decoupled, two-stage paradigm: agents first aggregate environmental data through exploration, followed by the offline reconstruction of spatial memory. However, this post-hoc and geometry-centric approach precludes agents from leveraging high-level semantic intelligence, often causing them to overlook navigationally critical landmarks (e.g., doorways and staircases) that serve as fundamental semantic anchors in human cognitive maps. To bridge this gap, we propose ABot-Explorer, a novel active exploration framework that unifies memory construction and exploration into an online, RGB-only process. At its core, ABot-Explorer leverages Large Vision-Language Models (VLMs) to distill Semantic Navigational Affordances (SNA), which act as cognitive-aligned anchors to guide the agent’s movement. By dynamically integrating these SNAs into a hierarchical SG-Memo, ABot-Explorer mirrors human-like exploratory logic by prioritizing structural transit nodes to facilitate efficient coverage. To support this framework, we contribute a large-scale dataset extending InteriorGS with SNA and SG-Memo annotations. Experimental results demonstrate that ABot-Explorer significantly outperforms current state-of-the-art methods in both exploration efficiency and environment coverage, while the resulting SG-Memo is shown to effectively support diverse downstream tasks.
246. ❌ Guiding Distribution Matching Distillation with Gradient-Based Reinforcement Learning
作者: Linwei Dong, Ruoyu Guo, Ge Bai, Zehuan Yuan, Yawei Luo, Changqing Zou 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19009v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Diffusion distillation, exemplified by Distribution Matching Distillation (DMD), has shown great promise in few-step generation but often sacrifices quality for sampling speed. While integrating Reinforcement Learning (RL) into distillation offers potential, a naive fusion of these two objectives relies on suboptimal raw sample evaluation. This sample-based scoring creates inherent conflicts with the distillation trajectory and produces unreliable rewards due to the noisy nature of early-stage generation. To overcome these limitations, we propose GDMD, a novel framework that redefines the reward mechanism by prioritizing distillation gradients over raw pixel outputs as the primary signal for optimization. By reinterpreting the DMD gradients as implicit target tensors, our framework enables existing reward models to directly evaluate the quality of distillation updates. This gradient-level guidance functions as an adaptive weighting that synchronizes the RL policy with the distillation objective, effectively neutralizing optimization divergence. Empirical results show that GDMD sets a new SOTA for few-step generation. Specifically, our 4-step models outperform the quality of their multi-step teacher and substantially exceed previous DMDR results in GenEval and human-preference metrics, exhibiting strong scalability potential.
247. ❌ A Multi-Agent Framework with Structured Reasoning and Reflective Refinement for Multimodal Empathetic Response Generation
作者: Liping Wang, Cheng Ye, Weidong Chen, Peipei Song, Bo Hu, Zhendong Mao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18988v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Multimodal empathetic response generation (MERG) aims to generate emotionally engaging and empathetic responses based on users’ multimodal contexts. Existing approaches usually rely on an implicit one-pass generation paradigm from multimodal context to the final response, which overlooks two intrinsic characteristics of MERG: (1) Human perception of emotional cues is inherently structured rather than a direct mapping. The conventional paradigm neglects the hierarchical progression of emotion perception, leading to distorted emotional judgments. (2) Given the inherent complexity and ambiguity of human emotions, the conventional paradigm is prone to significant emotional biases, ultimately resulting in suboptimal empathy. In this paper, we propose a multi-agent framework for MERG, which enhances empathy through structured reasoning and reflective refinement. Specifically, we first introduce a structured empathetic reasoning-to-generation module that explicitly decomposes response generation via multimodal perception, consistency-aware emotion forecasting, pragmatic strategy planning, and strategy-guided response generation, providing a clearer intermediate path from multimodal evidence to response realization. Besides, we develop a global reflection and refinement module, in which a global reflection agent performs step-wise auditing over intermediate states and the generated response, eliminating existing emotional biases and empathy errors, and triggering targeted regeneration. Overall, such a closed-loop framework enables our model to gradually improve the accuracy of emotion perception and eliminate emotion biases during the iteration process. Experiments on several benchmarks, e.g., IEMOCAP and MELD, demonstrate that our model has superior empathic response generation capabilities compared to state-of-the-art methods.
248. ❌ AutoAWG: Adverse Weather Generation with Adaptive Multi-Controls for Automotive Videos
作者: Jiagao Hu, Daiguo Zhou, Danzhen Fu, Fuhao Li, Zepeng Wang, Fei Wang, Wenhua Liao, Jiayi Xie, Haiyang Sun 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18993v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Perception robustness under adverse weather remains a critical challenge for autonomous driving, with the core bottleneck being the scarcity of real-world video data in adverse weather. Existing weather generation approaches struggle to balance visual quality and annotation reusability. We present AutoAWG, a controllable Adverse Weather video Generation framework for Autonomous driving. Our method employs a semantics-guided adaptive fusion of multiple controls to balance strong weather stylization with high-fidelity preservation of safety-critical targets; leverages a vanishing point-anchored temporal synthesis strategy to construct training sequences from static images, thereby reducing reliance on synthetic data; and adopts masked training to enhance long-horizon generation stability. On the nuScenes validation set, AutoAWG significantly outperforms prior state-of-the-art methods: without first-frame conditioning, FID and FVD are relatively reduced by 50.0% and 16.1%; with first-frame conditioning, they are further reduced by 8.7% and 7.2%, respectively. Extensive qualitative and quantitative results demonstrate advantages in style fidelity, temporal consistency, and semantic–structural integrity, underscoring the practical value of AutoAWG for improving downstream perception in autonomous driving. Our code is available at: https://github.com/higherhu/AutoAWG
249. ❌ AdaGScale: Viewpoint-Adaptive Gaussian Scaling in 3D Gaussian Splatting to Reduce Gaussian-Tile Pairs
作者: Joongho Jo, Hyerin Lim, Hanjun Choi, Jongsun Park 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18980v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Reducing the number of Gaussian-tile pairs is one of the most promising approaches to improve 3D Gaussian Splatting (3D-GS) rendering speed on GPUs. However, the importance difference existing among Gaussian-tile pairs has never been considered in the previous works. In this paper, we propose AdaGScale, a novel viewpoint-adaptive Gaussian scaling technique for reducing the number of Gaussian-tile pairs. AdaGScale is based on the observation that the peripheral tiles located far from Gaussian center contribute negligibly to pixel color accumulation. This suggests an opportunity for reducing the number of Gaussian-tile pairs based on color contribution. AdaGScale efficiently estimates the color contribution in the peripheral region of each Gaussian during a preprocessing stage and adaptively scales its size based on the peripheral score. As a result, Gaussians with lower importance intersect with fewer tiles during the intersection test, which improves rendering speed while maintaining image quality. The adjusted size is used only for tile intersection test, and the original size is retained during color accumulation to preserve visual fidelity. Experimental results show that AdaGScale achieves a geometric mean speedup of 13.8x over original 3D-GS on a GPU, with only about 0.5 dB degradation in PSNR on city-scale scenes.
250. ❌ Toward Clinically Acceptable Chest X-ray Report Generation: A Qualitative Retrospective Pilot Study of CXRMate-2
作者: Aaron Nicolson, Elizabeth J. Cooper, Hwan-Jin Yoon, Claire McCafferty, Ramya Krishnan, Michelle Craigie, Nivene Saad, Jason Dowling, Ian A. Scott, Bevan Koopman 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18967v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Chest X-ray (CXR) radiology report generation (RRG) models have shown rapid progress, yet their clinical utility remains uncertain due to limited evaluation by radiologists. We present CXRMate-2, a state-of-the-art CXR RRG model that integrates structured multimodal conditioning and reinforcement learning with a composite reward for semantic alignment with radiologist reports. Across the MIMIC-CXR, CheXpert Plus, and ReXgradient datasets, CXRMate-2 achieves statistically significant improvements over strong benchmarks, including gains of 11.2% and 24.4% in GREEN and RadGraph-XL, respectively, on MIMIC-CXR relative to MedGemma 1.5 (4B). To directly compare CXRMate-2 against radiologist reporting, we conduct a blinded, randomised qualitative retrospective evaluation. Three consultant radiologists compare generated and radiologist reports across 120 studies from the MIMIC-CXR test set. Generated reports were deemed acceptable (defined as preferred or rated equally to radiologist reports) in 45% of ratings, with no statistically significant difference in preference rates between radiologist reports and acceptable generated reports for seven of the eight analysed findings. Preference for radiologist reports was driven primarily by higher recall, while generated reports were often preferred for readability. Together, these results suggest a credible pathway to clinically acceptable CXR RRG. Improvements in recall, alongside better detection of subtle findings (e.g., pulmonary congestion), are likely sufficient to achieve non-inferiority to radiologist reporting. With these targeted advances, CXR RRG systems may be ready for prospective evaluation in assistive roles within radiologist-led workflows.
251. ❌ AI-Enabled Image-Based Hybrid Vision/Force Control of Tendon-Driven Aerial Continuum Manipulators
作者: Shayan Sepahvand, Farrokh Janabi-Sharifi, Farhad Aghili 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18961v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This paper presents an AI-enabled cascaded hybrid vision/force control framework for tendon-driven aerial continuum manipulators based on constant-strain modeling in $SE(3)$ as a coupled system. The proposed controller is designed to enable autonomous, physical interaction with a static environment while stabilizing the image feature error. The developed strategy combines the cascaded fast fixed-time sliding mode control and a radial basis function neural network to cope with the uncertainties in the image acquired by the eye-in-hand monocular camera and the measurements from the force sensing apparatus. This ensures rapid, online learning of the vision- and force-related uncertainties without requiring offline training. Furthermore, the features are extracted via a state-of-the-art graph neural network architecture employed by a visual servoing framework using line features, rather than relying on heuristic geometric line extractors, to concurrently contribute to tracking the desired normal interaction force during contact and regulating the image feature error. A comparative study benchmarks the proposed controller against established rigid-arm aerial manipulation methods, evaluating robustness across diverse scenarios and feature extraction strategies. The simulation and experimental results showcase the effectiveness of the proposed methodology under various initial conditions and demonstrate robust performance in executing manipulation tasks.
252. ❌ Bridging Foundation Models and ASTM Metallurgical Standards for Automated Grain Size Estimation from Microscopy Images
作者: Abdul Mueez, Shruti Vyas 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18957v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Extracting standardized metallurgical metrics from microscopy images remains challenging due to complex grain morphology and the data demands of supervised segmentation. To bridge foundational computer vision with practical metallurgical evaluation, we propose an automated pipeline for dense instance segmentation and grain size estimation that adapts Cellpose-SAM to microstructures and integrates its topology-aware gradient tracking with an ASTM E112 Jeffries planimetric module. We systematically benchmark this pipeline against a classical convolutional network (U-Net), an adaptive-prompting vision foundation model (MatSAM) and a contemporary vision-language model (Qwen2.5-VL-7B). Our evaluations reveal that while the out-of-the-box vision-language model struggles with the localized spatial reasoning required for dense microscopic counting and MatSAM suffers from over-segmentation despite its domain-specific prompt generation, our adapted pipeline successfully maintains topological separation. Furthermore, experiments across progressively reduced training splits demonstrate exceptional few-shot scalability; utilizing only two training samples, the proposed system predicts the ASTM grain size number (G) with a mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) as low as 1.50%, while robustness testing across varying target grain counts empirically validates the ASTM 50-grain sampling minimum. These results highlight the efficacy of application-level foundation model integration for highly accurate, automated materials characterization. Our project repository is available at https://github.com/mueez-overflow/ASTM-Grain-Size-Estimator.
253. ❌ Localization-Guided Foreground Augmentation in Autonomous Driving
作者: Jiawei Yong, Deyuan Qu, Qi Chen, Kentaro Oguchi, Shintaro Fukushima 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18940v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Autonomous driving systems often degrade under adverse visibility conditions-such as rain, nighttime, or snow-where online scene geometry (e.g., lane dividers, road boundaries, and pedestrian crossings) becomes sparse or fragmented. While high-definition (HD) maps can provide missing structural context, they are costly to construct and maintain at scale. We propose Localization-Guided Foreground Augmentation (LG-FA), a lightweight and plug-and-play inference module that enhances foreground perception by enriching geometric context online. LG-FA: (i) incrementally constructs a sparse global vector layer from per-frame Bird’s-Eye View (BEV) predictions; (ii) estimates ego pose via class-constrained geometric alignment, jointly improving localization and completing missing local topology; and (iii) reprojects the augmented foreground into a unified global frame to improve per-frame predictions. Experiments on challenging nuScenes sequences demonstrate that LG-FA improves the geometric completeness and temporal stability of BEV representations, reduces localization error, and produces globally consistent lane and topology reconstructions. The module can be seamlessly integrated into existing BEV-based perception systems without backbone modification. By providing a reliable geometric context prior, LG-FA enhances temporal consistency and supplies stable structural support for downstream modules such as tracking and decision-making.
254. ❌ A Proxy Consistency Loss for Grounded Fusion of Earth Observation and Location Encoders
作者: Zhongying Wang, Kevin Lane, Levi Cai, Morteza Karimzadeh, Esther Rolf 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18881v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Supervised learning with Earth observation inputs is often limited by the sparsity of high-quality labeled or in-situ measured data to use as training labels. With the abundance of geographic data products, in many cases there are variables correlated with - but different from - the variable of interest that can be leveraged. We integrate such proxy variables within a geographic prior via a trainable location encoder and introduce a proxy consistency loss (PCL) formulation to imbue proxy data into the location encoder. The first key insight behind our approach is to use the location encoder as an agile and flexible way to learn from abundantly available proxy data which can be sampled independently of training label availability. Our second key insight is that we will need to regularize the location encoder appropriately to achieve performance and robustness with limited labeled data. Our experiments on air quality prediction and poverty mapping show that integrating proxy data implicitly through the location encoder outperforms using both as input to an observation encoder and fusion strategies that use frozen, pretrained location embeddings as a geographic prior. Superior performance for in-sample prediction shows that the PCL can incorporate rich information from the proxies, and superior out-of-sample prediction shows that the learned latent embeddings help generalize to areas without training labels.
255. ❌ Hierarchically Robust Zero-shot Vision-language Models
作者: Junhao Dong, Yifei Zhang, Hao Zhu, Yew-Soon Ong, Piotr Koniusz 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18867v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) can perform zero-shot classification but are susceptible to adversarial attacks. While robust fine-tuning improves their robustness, existing approaches align fixed text embeddings with an image embedding, sacrificing natural performance and robustness. A robustness degradation also occurs when a model faces adversarial attacks targeting superclasses (parent classes, e.g., mammal) in addition to their base (leaf) classes (e.g., cat). Thus, to enhance adversarial robustness and leverage the inherent hierarchical properties of class space, we propose a novel adversarial fine-tuning framework based on hierarchical embeddings and several levels of adversarially robust alignment of image-text modalities. Additional mechanisms place visual embeddings at the desired depth of hierarchy, and we provide a theoretical connection between the depth of embedding in the hierarchy and the maximum viable margin size. Our model naturally realizes several margin sizes, boosting generalization of adversaries for robustification. As various trees with different parent labels can share the same leaf labels, we also consider aligning over multiple trees to boost semantic variety. Experiments across several datasets are performed.
256. ❌ HMR-Net: Hierarchical Modular Routing for Cross-Domain Object Detection in Aerial Images
作者: Pourya Shamsolmoali, Masoumeh Zareapoor, Michael Felsberg, Nick Pears, Yue Lu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18866v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Despite advances in object detection, aerial imagery remains a challenging domain, as models often fail to generalize across variations in spatial resolution, scene composition, and semantic label coverage. Differences in geographic context, sensor characteristics, and object distributions across datasets limit the capacity of conventional models to learn consistent and transferable representations. Shared methods trained on such data tend to impose a unified representation across fundamentally different domains, resulting in poor performance on region-specific content and less flexibility when dealing with novel object categories. To address this, we propose a novel modular learning framework that enables structured specialization in aerial detection. Our method introduces a hierarchical routing mechanism with two levels of modularity: a global expert assignment layer that uses latent geographic embeddings to route datasets to specialized processing modules, and a local scene decomposition mechanism that allocates image subregions to region-specific sub-modules. This allows our method to specialize across datasets and within complex scenes. Additionally, the framework contains a conditional expert module that uses external semantic information (e.g., category names or textual descriptions) to enable detection of novel object categories during inference, without the need for retraining or fine-tuning. By moving beyond monolithic representations, our method offers an adaptive framework for remote sensing object detection. Comprehensive evaluations on four datasets highlight improvements in multi-dataset generalization, regional specialization, and open-category detection.
257. ❌ Task Switching Without Forgetting via Proximal Decoupling
作者: Pourya Shamsolmoali, Masoumeh Zareapoor, Eric Granger, William A. P. Smith, Yue Lu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18857v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
In continual learning, the primary challenge is to learn new information without forgetting old knowledge. A common solution addresses this trade-off through regularization, penalizing changes to parameters critical for previous tasks. In most cases, this regularization term is directly added to the training loss and optimized with standard gradient descent, which blends learning and retention signals into a single update and does not explicitly separate essential parameters from redundant ones. As task sequences grow, this coupling can over-constrain the model, limiting forward transfer and leading to inefficient use of capacity. We propose a different approach that separates task learning from stability enforcement via operator splitting. The learning step focuses on minimizing the current task loss, while a proximal stability step applies a sparse regularizer to prune unnecessary parameters and preserve task-relevant ones. This turns the stability-plasticity into a negotiated update between two complementary operators, rather than a conflicting gradient. We provide theoretical justification for the splitting method on the continual-learning objective, and demonstrate that our proposed solver achieves state-of-the-art results on standard benchmarks, improving both stability and adaptability without the need for replay buffers, Bayesian sampling, or meta-learning components.
258. ❌ ConvVitMamba: Efficient Multiscale Convolution, Transformer, and Mamba-Based Sequence modelling for Hyperspectral Image Classification
作者: Mohammed Q. Alkhatib 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18856v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Hyperspectral image (HSI) classification remains challenging due to high spectral dimensionality, redundancy, and limited labeled data. Although convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and Vision Transformers (ViTs) achieve strong performance by exploiting spectral-spatial information and long-range dependencies, they often incur high computational cost and large model size, limiting practical use. To address these limitations, a unified hybrid framework, termed ConvVitMamba, is proposed for efficient HSI classification. The architecture integrates three components: a multiscale convolutional feature extractor to capture local spectral, spatial, and joint patterns; a Vision Transformer based tokenization and encoding stage to model global contextual relationships; and a lightweight Mamba inspired gated sequence mixing module for efficient content-aware refinement without quadratic self-attention. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is used as preprocessing to reduce redundancy and improve efficiency. Experiments on four benchmark datasets, including Houston and three UAV borne QUH datasets (Pingan, Qingyun, and Tangdaowan), demonstrate that ConvVitMamba consistently outperforms CNN, Transformer, and Mamba based methods while maintaining a favorable balance between accuracy, model size, and inference efficiency. Ablation studies confirm the complementary contributions of all components. The results indicate that the proposed framework provides an effective and efficient solution for HSI classification in diverse scenarios. The source code is publicly available at https://github.com/mqalkhatib/ConvVitMamba
259. ❌ DDF2Pol: A Dual-Domain Feature Fusion Network for PolSAR Image Classification
作者: Mohammed Q. Alkhatib 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18853v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This paper presents DDF2Pol, a lightweight dual-domain convolutional neural network for PolSAR image classification. The proposed architecture integrates two parallel feature extraction streams, one real-valued and one complex-valued, designed to capture complementary spatial and polarimetric information from PolSAR data. To further refine the extracted features, a depth-wise convolution layer is employed for spatial enhancement, followed by a coordinate attention mechanism to focus on the most informative regions. Experimental evaluations conducted on two benchmark datasets, Flevoland and San Francisco, demonstrate that DDF2Pol achieves superior classification performance while maintaining low model complexity. Specifically, it attains an Overall Accuracy (OA) of 98.16% on the Flevoland dataset and 96.12% on the San Francisco dataset, outperforming several state-of-the-art real- and complex-valued models. With only 91,371 parameters, DDF2Pol offers a practical and efficient solution for accurate PolSAR image analysis, even when training data is limited. The source code is publicly available at https://github.com/mqalkhatib/DDF2Pol
260. ❌ Multi-Domain Learning with Global Expert Mapping
作者: Pourya Shamsolmoali, Masoumeh Zareapoor, Huiyu Zhou, Oscar Mendez, Dacheng Tao, Xuelong Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18842v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Human perception generalizes well across different domains, but most vision models struggle beyond their training data. This gap motivates multi-dataset learning, where a single model is trained on diverse datasets to improve robustness under domain shifts. However, unified training remains challenging due to inconsistencies in data distributions and label semantics. Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models provide a scalable solution by routing inputs to specialized subnetworks (experts). Yet, existing MoEs often fail to specialize effectively, as their load-balancing mechanisms enforce uniform input distribution across experts. This fairness conflicts with domain-aware routing, causing experts to learn redundant representations, and reducing performance especially on rare or out-of-distribution domains. We propose GEM (Global Expert Mapping), a planner-compiler framework that replaces the learned router with a global scheduler. Our planner, based on linear programming relaxation, computes a fractional assignment of datasets to experts, while the compiler applies hierarchical rounding to convert this soft plan into a deterministic, capacity-aware mapping. Unlike prior MoEs, GEM avoids balancing loss, resolves the conflict between fairness and specialization, and produces interpretable routing. Experiments show that GEM-DINO achieves state-of-the-art performance on the UODB benchmark, with notable gains on underrepresented datasets and solves task interference in few-shot adaptation scenarios.
261. ❌ Feasibility of Indoor Frame-Wise Lidar Semantic Segmentation via Distillation from Visual Foundation Model
作者: Haiyang Wu, Juan J. Gonzales Torres, George Vosselman, Ville Lehtola 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18831v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Frame-wise semantic segmentation of indoor lidar scans is a fundamental step toward higher-level 3D scene understanding and mapping applications. However, acquiring frame-wise ground truth for training deep learning models is costly and time-consuming. This challenge is largely addressed, for imagery, by Visual Foundation Models (VFMs) which segment image frames. The same VFMs may be used to train a lidar scan frame segmentation model via a 2D-to-3D distillation pipeline. The success of such distillation has been shown for autonomous driving scenes, but not yet for indoor scenes. Here, we study the feasibility of repeating this success for indoor scenes, in a frame-wise distillation manner by coupling each lidar scan with a VFM-processed camera image. The evaluation is done using indoor SLAM datasets, where pseudo-labels are used for downstream evaluation. Also, a small manually annotated lidar dataset is provided for validation, as there are no other lidar frame-wise indoor datasets with semantics. Results show that the distilled model achieves up to 56% mIoU under pseudo-label evaluation and around 36% mIoU with real-label, demonstrating the feasibility of cross-modal distillation for indoor lidar semantic segmentation without manual annotations.
262. ❌ Phase Transitions in the Fluctuations of Functionals of Random Neural Networks
作者: Simmaco Di Lillo, Leonardo Maini, Domenico Marinucci 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19738v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We establish central and non-central limit theorems for sequences of functionals of the Gaussian output of an infinitely-wide random neural network on the d-dimensional sphere . We show that the asymptotic behaviour of these functionals as the depth of the network increases depends crucially on the fixed points of the covariance function, resulting in three distinct limiting regimes: convergence to the same functional of a limiting Gaussian field, convergence to a Gaussian distribution, convergence to a distribution in the Qth Wiener chaos. Our proofs exploit tools that are now classical (Hermite expansions, Diagram Formula, Stein-Malliavin techniques), but also ideas which have never been used in similar contexts: in particular, the asymptotic behaviour is determined by the fixed-point structure of the iterative operator associated with the covariance, whose nature and stability governs the different limiting regimes.
263. ❌ Safe Continual Reinforcement Learning in Non-stationary Environments
作者: Austin Coursey, Abel Diaz-Gonzalez, Marcos Quinones-Grueiro, Gautam Biswas 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19737v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Reinforcement learning (RL) offers a compelling data-driven paradigm for synthesizing controllers for complex systems when accurate physical models are unavailable; however, most existing control-oriented RL methods assume stationarity and, therefore, struggle in real-world non-stationary deployments where system dynamics and operating conditions can change unexpectedly. Moreover, RL controllers acting in physical environments must satisfy safety constraints throughout their learning and execution phases, rendering transient violations during adaptation unacceptable. Although continual RL and safe RL have each addressed non-stationarity and safety, respectively, their intersection remains comparatively unexplored, motivating the study of safe continual RL algorithms that can adapt over the system’s lifetime while preserving safety. In this work, we systematically investigate safe continual reinforcement learning by introducing three benchmark environments that capture safety-critical continual adaptation and by evaluating representative approaches from safe RL, continual RL, and their combinations. Our empirical results reveal a fundamental tension between maintaining safety constraints and preventing catastrophic forgetting under non-stationary dynamics, with existing methods generally failing to achieve both objectives simultaneously. To address this shortcoming, we examine regularization-based strategies that partially mitigate this trade-off and characterize their benefits and limitations. Finally, we outline key open challenges and research directions toward developing safe, resilient learning-based controllers capable of sustained autonomous operation in changing environments.
264. ❌ FB-NLL: A Feature-Based Approach to Tackle Noisy Labels in Personalized Federated Learning
作者: Abdulmoneam Ali, Ahmed Arafa 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19729v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Personalized Federated Learning (PFL) aims to learn multiple task-specific models rather than a single global model across heterogeneous data distributions. Existing PFL approaches typically rely on iterative optimization-such as model update trajectories-to cluster users that need to accomplish the same tasks together. However, these learning-dynamics-based methods are inherently vulnerable to low-quality data and noisy labels, as corrupted updates distort clustering decisions and degrade personalization performance. To tackle this, we propose FB-NLL, a feature-centric framework that decouples user clustering from iterative training dynamics. By exploiting the intrinsic heterogeneity of local feature spaces, FB-NLL characterizes each user through the spectral structure of the covariances of their feature representations and leverages subspace similarity to identify task-consistent user groupings. This geometry-aware clustering is label-agnostic and is performed in a one-shot manner prior to training, significantly reducing communication overhead and computational costs compared to iterative baselines. Complementing this, we introduce a feature-consistency-based detection and correction strategy to address noisy labels within clusters. By leveraging directional alignment in the learned feature space and assigning labels based on class-specific feature subspaces, our method mitigates corrupted supervision without requiring estimation of stochastic noise transition matrices. In addition, FB-NLL is model-independent and integrates seamlessly with existing noise-robust training techniques. Extensive experiments across diverse datasets and noise regimes demonstrate that our framework consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in terms of average accuracy and performance stability.
265. ❌ On two ways to use determinantal point processes for Monte Carlo integration
作者: Guillaume Gautier, Rémi Bardenet, Michal Valko 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19698v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The standard Monte Carlo estimator $\widehat{I}_N^{\mathrm{MC}}$ of $\int fdω$ relies on independent samples from $ω$ and has variance of order $1/N$. Replacing the samples with a determinantal point process (DPP), a repulsive distribution, makes the estimator consistent, with variance rates that depend on how the DPP is adapted to $f$ and $ω$. We examine two existing DPP-based estimators: one by Bardenet & Hardy (2020) with a rate of $\mathcal{O}(N^{-(1+1/d)})$ for smooth $f$, but relying on a fixed DPP. The other, by Ermakov & Zolotukhin (1960), is unbiased with rate of order $1/N$, like Monte Carlo, but its DPP is tailored to $f$. We revisit these estimators, generalize them to continuous settings, and provide sampling algorithms.
266. ❌ Ultrametric OGP - parametric RDT \emph{symmetric} binary perceptron connection
作者: Mihailo Stojnic 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19712v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
In [97,99,100], an fl-RDT framework is introduced to characterize \emph{statistical computational gaps} (SCGs). Studying \emph{symmetric binary perceptrons} (SBPs), [100] obtained an \emph{algorithmic} threshold estimate $α_a\approx α_c^{(7)}\approx 1.6093$ at the 7th lifting level (for $κ=1$ margin), closely approaching $1.58$ local entropy (LE) prediction [18]. In this paper, we further connect parametric RDT to overlap gap properties (OGPs), another key geometric feature of the solution space. Specifically, for any positive integer $s$, we consider $s$-level ultrametric OGPs ($ult_s$-OGPs) and rigorously upper-bound the associated constraint densities $α_{ult_s}$. To achieve this, we develop an analytical union-bounding program consisting of combinatorial and probabilistic components. By casting the combinatorial part as a convex problem and the probabilistic part as a nested integration, we conduct numerical evaluations and obtain that the tightest bounds at the first two levels, $\barα_{ult_1} \approx 1.6578$ and $\barα_{ult_2} \approx 1.6219$, closely approach the 3rd and 4th lifting level parametric RDT estimates, $α_c^{(3)} \approx 1.6576$ and $α_c^{(4)} \approx 1.6218$. We also observe excellent agreement across other key parameters, including overlap values and the relative sizes of ultrametric clusters. Based on these observations, we propose several conjectures linking $ult$-OGP and parametric RDT. Specifically, we conjecture that algorithmic threshold $α_a=\lim_{s\rightarrow\infty} α_{ult_s} = \lim_{s\rightarrow\infty} \barα{ult_s} = \lim_{r\rightarrow\infty} α_{c}^{(r)}$, and $α_{ult_s} \leq α_{c}^{(s+2)}$ (with possible equality for some (maybe even all) $s$). Finally, we discuss the potential existence of a full isomorphism connecting all key parameters of $ult$-OGP and parametric RDT.
267. ❌ Planning in entropy-regularized Markov decision processes and games
作者: Jean-Bastien Grill, Omar Darwiche Domingues, Pierre Ménard, Rémi Munos, Michal Valko 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19695v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We propose SmoothCruiser, a new planning algorithm for estimating the value function in entropy-regularized Markov decision processes and two-player games, given a generative model of the environment. SmoothCruiser makes use of the smoothness of the Bellman operator promoted by the regularization to achieve problem-independent sample complexity of order O~(1/epsilon^4) for a desired accuracy epsilon, whereas for non-regularized settings there are no known algorithms with guaranteed polynomial sample complexity in the worst case.
268. ❌ Budgeted Online Influence Maximization
作者: Pierre Perrault, Jennifer Healey, Zheng Wen, Michal Valko 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19672v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We introduce a new budgeted framework for online influence maximization, considering the total cost of an advertising campaign instead of the common cardinality constraint on a chosen influencer set. Our approach better models the real-world setting where the cost of influencers varies and advertisers want to find the best value for their overall social advertising budget. We propose an algorithm assuming an independent cascade diffusion model and edge level semi-bandit feedback, and provide both theoretical and experimental results. Our analysis is also valid for the cardinality constraint setting and improves the state of the art regret bound in this case.
269. ❌ PREF-XAI: Preference-Based Personalized Rule Explanations of Black-Box Machine Learning Models
作者: Salvatore Greco, Jacek Karolczak, Roman Słowiński, Jerzy Stefanowski 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19684v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) has predominantly focused on generating model-centric explanations that approximate the behavior of black-box models. However, such explanations often overlook a fundamental aspect of interpretability: different users require different explanations depending on their goals, preferences, and cognitive constraints. Although recent work has explored user-centric and personalized explanations, most existing approaches rely on heuristic adaptations or implicit user modeling, lacking a principled framework for representing and learning individual preferences. In this paper, we consider Preference-Based Explainable Artificial Intelligence (PREF-XAI), a novel perspective that reframes explanation as a preference-driven decision problem. Within PREF-XAI, explanations are not treated as fixed outputs, but as alternatives to be evaluated and selected according to user-specific criteria. In the PREF-XAI perspective, here we propose a methodology that combines rule-based explanations with formal preference learning. User preferences are elicited through a ranking of a small set of candidate explanations and modeled via an additive utility function inferred using robust ordinal regression. Experimental results on real-world datasets show that PREF-XAI can accurately reconstruct user preferences from limited feedback, identify highly relevant explanations, and discover novel explanatory rules not initially considered by the user. Beyond the proposed methodology, this work establishes a connection between XAI and preference learning, opening new directions for interactive and adaptive explanation systems.
270. ❌ HardNet++: Nonlinear Constraint Enforcement in Neural Networks
作者: Andrea Goertzen, Kaveh Alim, Navid Azizan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19669v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Enforcing constraint satisfaction in neural network outputs is critical for safety, reliability, and physical fidelity in many control and decision-making applications. While soft-constrained methods penalize constraint violations during training, they do not guarantee constraint adherence during inference. Other approaches guarantee constraint satisfaction via specific parameterizations or a projection layer, but are tailored to specific forms (e.g., linear constraints), limiting their utility in other general problem settings. Many real-world problems of interest are nonlinear, motivating the development of methods that can enforce general nonlinear constraints. To this end, we introduce HardNet++, a constraint-enforcement method that simultaneously satisfies linear and nonlinear equality and inequality constraints. Our approach iteratively adjusts the network output via damped local linearizations. Each iteration is differentiable, admitting an end-to-end training framework, where the constraint satisfaction layer is active during training. We show that under certain regularity conditions, this procedure can enforce nonlinear constraint satisfaction to arbitrary tolerance. Finally, we demonstrate tight constraint adherence without loss of optimality in a learning-for-optimization context, where we apply this method to a model predictive control problem with nonlinear state constraints.
271. ❌ Disentangling Damage from Operational Variability: A Label-Free Self-Supervised Representation Learning Framework for Output-Only Structural Damage Identification
作者: Xudong Jian, Charikleia Stoura, Simon Scandella, Eleni Chatzi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19658v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Damage identification is a core task in structural health monitoring. In practice, however, its reliability is often compromised by confounding non-damage effects, such as variations in excitation and environmental conditions, which can induce changes comparable to or larger than those caused by structural damage. To address this challenge, this study proposes a self-supervised label-free disentangled representation learning framework for robust vibration-based structural damage identification. The proposed framework employs an autoencoder with two latent representations to learn directly from raw vibration acceleration signals. A self-supervised invariance regularization, implemented via Variance-Invariance-Covariance Regularization (VICReg), is imposed on one latent representation using baseline data where structural damage is assumed constant but operational and environmental conditions vary. In addition, a frequency-domain constraint is introduced to enforce agreement between the power spectral density reconstructed from the latent representation and that computed from the corresponding input time series. Together, these mechanisms promote disentanglement, enabling the learned representation to be sensitive to damage-related characteristics while remaining invariant to nuisance variability. The framework is trained in a fully end-to-end and label-free manner, requiring no prior information on damage, excitation, or environmental conditions, making it well-suited for real-world applications. Its effectiveness is validated on two distinct real-world vibration datasets, including a bridge and a gearbox. The results demonstrate robustness to operational variability, strong generalization capability, and good performance in both damage detection and quantification.
272. ❌ From Top-1 to Top-K: A Reproducibility Study and Benchmarking of Counterfactual Explanations for Recommender Systems
作者: Quang-Huy Nguyen, Thanh-Hai Nguyen, Khac-Manh Thai, Duc-Hoang Pham, Huy-Son Nguyen, Cam-Van Thi Nguyen, Masoud Mansoury, Duc-Trong Le, Hoang-Quynh Le 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19663v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Counterfactual explanations (CEs) provide an intuitive way to understand recommender systems by identifying minimal modifications to user-item interactions that alter recommendation outcomes. Existing CE methods for recommender systems, however, have been evaluated under heterogeneous protocols, using different datasets, recommenders, metrics, and even explanation formats, which hampers reproducibility and fair comparison. Our paper systematically reproduces, re-implement, and re-evaluate eleven state-of-the-art CE methods for recommender systems, covering both native explainers (e.g., LIME-RS, SHAP, PRINCE, ACCENT, LXR, GREASE) and specific graph-based explainers originally proposed for GNNs. Here, a unified benchmarking framework is proposed to assess explainers along three dimensions: explanation format (implicit vs. explicit), evaluation level (item-level vs. list-level), and perturbation scope (user interaction vectors vs. user-item interaction graphs). Our evaluation protocol includes effectiveness, sparsity, and computational complexity metrics, and extends existing item-level assessments to top-K list-level explanations. Through extensive experiments on three real-world datasets and six representative recommender models, we analyze how well previously reported strengths of CE methods generalize across diverse setups. We observe that the trade-off between effectiveness and sparsity depends strongly on the specific method and evaluation setting, particularly under the explicit format; in addition, explainer performance remains largely consistent across item level and list level evaluations, and several graph-based explainers exhibit notable scalability limitations on large recommender graphs. Our results refine and challenge earlier conclusions about the robustness and practicality of CE generation methods in recommender systems: https://github.com/L2R-UET/CFExpRec.
273. ❌ An Efficient Black-Box Reduction from Online Learning to Multicalibration, and a New Route to $Φ$-Regret Minimization
作者: Gabriele Farina, Juan Carlos Perdomo 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19592v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We give a Gordon-Greenwald-Marks (GGM) style black-box reduction from online learning to online multicalibration. Concretely, we show that to achieve high-dimensional multicalibration with respect to a class of functions H, it suffices to combine any no-regret learner over H with an expected variational inequality (EVI) solver. We also prove a converse statement showing that efficient multicalibration implies efficient EVI solving, highlighting how EVIs in multicalibration mirror the role of fixed points in the GGM result for $Φ$-regret. This first set of results resolves the main open question in Garg, Jung, Reingold, and Roth (SODA ‘24), showing that oracle-efficient online multicalibration with $\sqrt{T}$-type guarantees is possible in full generality. Furthermore, our GGM-style reduction unifies the analyses of existing online multicalibration algorithms, enables new algorithms for challenging environments with delayed observations or censored outcomes, and yields the first efficient black-box reduction between online learning and multiclass omniprediction. Our second main result is a fine-grained reduction from high-dimensional online multicalibration to (contextual) $Φ$-regret minimization. Together with our first result, this establishes a new route from external regret to Phi-regret that bypasses sophisticated fixed-point or semi-separation machinery, dramatically simplifies a result of Daskalakis, Farina, Fishelson, Pipis, and Schneider (STOC ‘25) while improving rates, and yields new algorithms that are robust to richer deviation classes, such as those belonging to any reproducing kernel Hilbert space.
274. ❌ Separating Geometry from Probability in the Analysis of Generalization
作者: Maxim Raginsky, Benjamin Recht 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19560v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The goal of machine learning is to find models that minimize prediction error on data that has not yet been seen. Its operational paradigm assumes access to a dataset $S$ and articulates a scheme for evaluating how well a given model performs on an arbitrary sample. The sample can be $S$ (in which case we speak of
in-sample'' performance) or some entirely new $S'$ (in which case we speak ofout-of-sample’’ performance). Traditional analysis of generalization assumes that both in- and out-of-sample data are i.i.d.\ draws from an infinite population. However, these probabilistic assumptions cannot be verified even in principle. This paper presents an alternative view of generalization through the lens of sensitivity analysis of solutions of optimization problems to perturbations in the problem data. Under this framework, generalization bounds are obtained by purely deterministic means and take the form of variational principles that relate in-sample and out-of-sample evaluations through an error term that quantifies how close out-of-sample data are to in-sample data. Statistical assumptions can then be used \textit{ex post} to characterize the situations when this error term is small (either on average or with high probability).
275. ❌ Structure-guided molecular design with contrastive 3D protein-ligand learning
作者: Carles Navarro, Philipp Tholke, Gianni de Fabritiis 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19562v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Structure-based drug discovery faces the dual challenge of accurately capturing 3D protein-ligand interactions while navigating ultra-large chemical spaces to identify synthetically accessible candidates. In this work, we present a unified framework that addresses these challenges by combining contrastive 3D structure encoding with autoregressive molecular generation conditioned on commercial compound spaces. First, we introduce an SE(3)-equivariant transformer that encodes ligand and pocket structures into a shared embedding space via contrastive learning, achieving competitive results in zero-shot virtual screening. Second, we integrate these embeddings into a multimodal Chemical Language Model (MCLM). The model generates target-specific molecules conditioned on either pocket or ligand structures, with a learned dataset token that steers the output toward targeted chemical spaces, yielding candidates with favorable predicted binding properties across diverse targets.
276. ❌ Calibrating Scientific Foundation Models with Inference-Time Stochastic Attention
作者: Akash Yadav, Taiwo A. Adebiyi, Ruda Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19530v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Transformer-based scientific foundation models are increasingly deployed in high-stakes settings, but current architectures give deterministic outputs and provide limited support for calibrated predictive uncertainty. We propose Stochastic Attention, a lightweight inference-time modification that randomizes attention by replacing softmax weights with normalized multinomial samples controlled by a single concentration parameter, and produces predictive ensembles without retraining. To set this parameter, we introduce a calibration objective that matches the stochastic attention output with the target, yielding an efficient univariate post-hoc tuning problem. We evaluate this mechanism on two scientific foundation models for weather and timeseries forecasting along with an additional regression task. Across benchmarks against uncertainty-aware baselines, we find that Stochastic Attention achieves the strongest native calibration and the sharpest prediction intervals at comparable coverage, while requiring only minutes of post-hoc tuning versus days of retraining for competitive baselines.
277. ❌ Evaluating LLM-Generated Obfuscated XSS Payloads for Machine Learning-Based Detection
作者: Divyesh Gabbireddy, Suman Saha 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19526v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Cross-site scripting (XSS) remains a persistent web security vulnerability, especially because obfuscation can change the surface form of a malicious payload while preserving its behavior. These transformations make it difficult for traditional and machine learning-based detection systems to reliably identify attacks. Existing approaches for generating obfuscated payloads often emphasize syntactic diversity, but they do not always ensure that the generated samples remain behaviorally valid. This paper presents a structured pipeline for generating and evaluating obfuscated XSS payloads using large language models (LLMs). The pipeline combines deterministic transformation techniques with LLM-based generation and uses a browser- based runtime evaluation procedure to compare payload behavior in a controlled execution environment. This allows generated samples to be assessed through observable runtime behavior rather than syntactic similarity alone. In the evaluation, an untuned baseline language model achieves a runtime behavior match rate of 0.15, while fine-tuning on behavior-preserving source-target obfuscation pairs improves the match rate to 0.22. Although this represents a measurable improvement, the results show that current LLMs still struggle to generate obfuscations that preserve observed runtime behavior. A downstream classifier evaluation further shows that adding generated payloads does not improve detection performance in this setting, although behavior- filtered generated samples can be incorporated without materially degrading performance. Overall, the study demonstrates both the promise and the limits of applying generative models to adversarial security data generation and emphasizes the importance of runtime behavior checks in improving the quality of generated data for downstream detection systems.
278. ❌ Accelerating Optimization and Machine Learning through Decentralization
作者: Ziqin Chen, Zuang Wang, Yongqiang Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19518v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Decentralized optimization enables multiple devices to learn a global machine learning model while each individual device only has access to its local dataset. By avoiding the need for training data to leave individual users’ devices, it enhances privacy and scalability compared to conventional centralized learning, where all data has to be aggregated to a central server. However, decentralized optimization has traditionally been viewed as a necessary compromise, used only when centralized processing is impractical due to communication constraints or data privacy concerns. In this study, we show that decentralization can paradoxically accelerate convergence, outperforming centralized methods in the number of iterations needed to reach optimal solutions. Through examples in logistic regression and neural network training, we demonstrate that distributing data and computation across multiple agents can lead to faster learning than centralized approaches, even when each iteration is assumed to take the same amount of time, whether performed centrally on the full dataset or decentrally on local subsets. This finding challenges longstanding assumptions and reveals decentralization as a strategic advantage, offering new opportunities for more efficient optimization and machine learning.
279. ❌ ZC-Swish: Stabilizing Deep BN-Free Networks for Edge and Micro-Batch Applications
作者: Suvinava Basak 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19453v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Batch Normalization (BN) is a cornerstone of deep learning, yet it fundamentally breaks down in micro-batch regimes (e.g., 3D medical imaging) and non-IID Federated Learning. Removing BN from deep architectures, however, often leads to catastrophic training failures such as vanishing gradients and dying channels. We identify that standard activation functions, like Swish and ReLU, exacerbate this instability in BN-free networks due to their non-zero-centered nature, which causes compounding activation mean-shifts as network depth increases. In this technical communication, we propose Zero-Centered Swish (ZC-Swish), a drop-in activation function parameterized to dynamically anchor activation means near zero. Through targeted stress-testing on BN-free convolutional networks at depths 8, 16, and 32, we demonstrate that while standard Swish collapses to near-random performance at depth 16 and beyond, ZC-Swish maintains stable layer-wise activation dynamics and achieves the highest test accuracy at depth 16 (51.5%) with seed 42. ZC-Swish thus provides a robust, parameter-efficient solution for stabilizing deep networks in memory-constrained and privacy-preserving applications where traditional normalization is unviable.
280. ❌ Heterogeneity-Aware Personalized Federated Learning for Industrial Predictive Analytics
作者: Yuhan Hu, Xiaolei Fang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19451v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Federated prognostics enable clients (e.g., companies, factories, and production lines) to collaboratively develop a failure time prediction model while keeping each client’s data local and confidential. However, traditional federated models often assume homogeneity in the degradation processes across clients, an assumption that may not hold in many industrial settings. To overcome this, this paper proposes a personalized federated prognostic model designed to accommodate clients with heterogeneous degradation processes, allowing them to build tailored prognostic models. The prognostic model iteratively facilitates the underlying pairwise collaborations between clients with similar degradation patterns, which enhances the performance of personalized federated learning. To estimate parameters jointly using decentralized datasets, we develop a federated parameter estimation algorithm based on proximal gradient descent. The proposed approach addresses the limitations of existing federated prognostic models by simultaneously achieving model personalization, preserving data privacy, and providing comprehensive failure time distributions. The superiority of the proposed model is validated through extensive simulation studies and a case study using the turbofan engine degradation dataset from the NASA repository.
281. ❌ Unsupervised Confidence Calibration for Reasoning LLMs from a Single Generation
作者: Thomas Zollo, Jimmy Wang, Richard Zemel 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19444v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Reasoning language models can solve increasingly complex tasks, but struggle to produce the calibrated confidence estimates necessary for reliable deployment. Existing calibration methods usually depend on labels or repeated sampling at inference time, making them impractical in many settings. We introduce a method for unsupervised confidence calibration of reasoning LLMs when only a single generation is available at inference time. Our approach uses offline sampling on unlabeled data to derive a self-consistency-based proxy target, then distills this signal into a lightweight deployment-time confidence predictor. In a broad evaluation across 5 math and question-answering tasks using 9 reasoning models, our method substantially outperforms baselines, including under distribution shift, and improves downstream performance in selective prediction and simulated downstream decision-making.
282. ❌ CAST: Modeling Semantic-Level Transitions for Complementary-Aware Sequential Recommendation
作者: Qian Zhang, Lech Szymanski, Haibo Zhang, Jeremiah D. Deng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19414v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Sequential Recommendation (SR) aims to predict the next interaction of a user based on their behavior sequence, where complementary relations often provide essential signals for predicting the next item. However, mainstream models relying on sparse co-purchase statistics often mistake spurious correlations (e.g., due to popularity bias) for true complementary relations. Identifying true complementary relations requires capturing the fine-grained item semantics (e.g., specifications) that simple cooccurrence statistics would be unable to model. While recent semantics-based methods utilize discrete semantic codes to represent items, they typically aggregate semantic codes into coarse item representations. This aggregation process blurs specific semantic details required to identify complementarity. To address these critical limitations and effectively leverage semantics for capturing reliable complementary relations, we propose a Complementary-Aware Semantic Transition (CAST) framework that introduces a new modeling paradigm built upon semantic-level transitions. Specifically, a semantic-level transition module is designed to model dynamic transitions directly in the discrete semantic code space, effectively capturing fine-grained semantic dependencies often lost in aggregated item representations. Then, a complementary prior injection module is designed to incorporate LLM-verified complementary priors into the attention mechanism, thereby prioritizing complementary patterns over co-occurrence statistics. Experiments on multiple e-commerce datasets demonstrate that CAST consistently outperforms the state-of-the-art approaches, achieving up to 17.6% Recall and 16.0% NDCG gains with 65x training acceleration. This validates its effectiveness and efficiency in uncovering latent item complementarity beyond statistics. The code will be released upon acceptance.
283. ❌ Optimal Routing for Federated Learning over Dynamic Satellite Networks: Tractable or Not?
作者: Yi Zhao, Di Yuan, Tao Deng, Suzhi Cao, Ying Dong 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19399v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Federated learning (FL) is a key paradigm for distributed model learning across decentralized data sources. Communication in each FL round typically consists of two phases: (i) distributing the global model from a server to clients, and (ii) collecting updated local models from clients to the server for aggregation. This paper focuses on a type of FL where communication between a client and the server is relay-based over dynamic networks, making routing optimization essential. A typical scenario is in-orbit FL, where satellites act as clients and communicate with a server (which can be a satellite, ground station, or aerial platform) via multi-hop inter-satellite links. This paper presents a comprehensive tractability analysis of routing optimization for in-orbit FL under different settings. For global model distribution, these include the number of models, the objective function, and routing schemes (unicast versus multicast, and splittable versus unsplittable flow). For local model collection, the settings consider the number of models, client selection, and flow splittability. For each case, we rigorously prove whether the global optimum is obtainable in polynomial time or the problem is NP-hard. Together, our analysis draws clear boundaries between tractable and intractable regimes for a broad spectrum of routing problems for in-orbit FL. For tractable cases, the derived efficient algorithms are directly applicable in practice. For intractable cases, we provide fundamental insights into their inherent complexity. These contributions fill a critical yet unexplored research gap, laying a foundation for principled routing design, evaluation, and deployment in satellite-based FL or similar distributed learning systems.
284. ❌ Scalable Memristive-Friendly Reservoir Computing for Time Series Classification
作者: Coşku Can Horuz, Andrea Ceni, Claudio Gallicchio, Sebastian Otte 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19343v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Memristive devices present a promising foundation for next-generation information processing by combining memory and computation within a single physical substrate. This unique characteristic enables efficient, fast, and adaptive computing, particularly well suited for deep learning applications. Among recent developments, the memristive-friendly echo state network (MF-ESN) has emerged as a promising approach that combines memristive-inspired dynamics with the training simplicity of reservoir computing, where only the readout layer is learned. Building on this framework, we propose memristive-friendly parallelized reservoirs (MARS), a simplified yet more effective architecture that enables efficient scalable parallel computation and deeper model composition through novel subtractive skip connections. This design yields two key advantages: substantial training speedups of up to 21x over the inherently lightweight echo state network baseline and significantly improved predictive performance. Moreover, MARS demonstrates what is possible with parallel memristive-friendly reservoir computing: on several long sequence benchmarks our compact gradient-free models substantially outperform strong gradient-based sequence models such as LRU, S5, and Mamba, while reducing full training time from minutes or hours down seconds or even only a few hundred milliseconds. Our work positions parallel memristive-friendly computing as a promising route towards scalable neuromorphic learning systems that combine high predictive capability with radically improved computational efficiency, while providing a clear pathway to energy-efficient, low-latency implementations on emerging memristive and in-memory hardware.
285. ❌ FairTree: Subgroup Fairness Auditing of Machine Learning Models with Bias-Variance Decomposition
作者: Rudolf Debelak 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19357v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The evaluation of machine learning models typically relies mainly on performance metrics based on loss functions, which risk to overlook changes in performance in relevant subgroups. Auditing tools such as SliceFinder and SliceLine were proposed to detect such groups, but usually have conceptual disadvantages, such as the inability to directly address continuous covariates. In this paper, we introduce FairTree, a novel algorithm adapted from psychometric invariance testing. Unlike SliceFinder and related algorithms, FairTree directly handles continuous, categorical, and ordinal features without discretization. It further decomposes performance disparities into systematic bias and variance, allowing a categorization of changes in algorithm performance. We propose and evaluate two variations of the algorithm: a permutation-based approach, which is conceptually closer to SliceFinder, and a fluctuation test. Through simulation studies that include a direct comparison with SliceLine, we demonstrate that both approaches have a satisfactory rate of false-positive results, but that the fluctuation approach has relatively higher power. We further illustrate the method on the UCI Adult Census dataset. The proposed algorithms provide a flexible framework for the statistical evaluation of the performance and aspects of fairness of machine learning models in a wide range of applications even in relatively small data.
286. ❌ Improvements to the post-processing of weather forecasts using machine learning and feature selection
作者: Kazuma Iwase, Tomoyuki Takenawa 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19340v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
This study aims to develop and improve machine learning-based post-processing models for precipitation, temperature, and wind speed predictions using the Mesoscale Model (MSM) dataset provided by the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) for 18 locations across Japan, including plains, mountainous regions, and islands. By incorporating meteorological variables from grid points surrounding the target locations as input features and applying feature selection based on correlation analysis, we found that, in our experimental setting, the LightGBM-based models achieved lower RMSE than the specific neural-network baselines tested in this study, including a reproduced CNN baseline, and also generally achieved lower RMSE than both the raw MSM forecasts and the JMA post-processing product, MSM Guidance (MSMG), across many locations and forecast lead times. Because precipitation has a highly skewed distribution with many zero cases, we additionally examined Tweedie-based loss functions and event-weighted training strategies for precipitation forecasting. These improved event-oriented performance relative to the original LightGBM model, especially at higher rainfall thresholds, although the gains were site dependent and overall performance remained slightly below MSMG.
287. ❌ FedSEA: Achieving Benefit of Parallelization in Federated Online Learning
作者: Harekrushna Sahu, Pratik Jawanpuria, Pranay Sharma 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19336v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Online federated learning (OFL) has emerged as a popular framework for decentralized decision-making over continuous data streams without compromising client privacy. However, the adversary model assumed in standard OFL typically precludes any potential benefits of parallelization. Further, it fails to adequately capture the different sources of statistical variation in OFL problems. In this paper, we extend the OFL paradigm by integrating a stochastically extended adversary (SEA). Under this framework, the loss function remains fixed across clients over time. However, the adversary dynamically and independently selects the data distribution for each client at each time. We propose the \algoOFL{} algorithm to solve this problem, which utilizes online stochastic gradient descent at the clients, along with periodic global aggregation via the server. We establish bounds on the global network regret over a time horizon (T) for two classes of functions: (1) for smooth and convex losses, we prove an (\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{T})) bound, and (2) for smooth and strongly convex losses, we prove an (\mathcal{O}(\log T)) bound. Through careful analysis, we quantify the individual impact of both spatial (across clients) and temporal (over time) data heterogeneity on the regret bounds. Consequently, we identify a regime of mild temporal variation (relative to stochastic gradient variance), where the network regret improves with parallelization. Hence, in the SEA setting, our results improve the existing pessimistic worst-case results in online federated learning.
288. ❌ When Active Learning Falls Short: An Empirical Study on Chemical Reaction Extraction
作者: Simin Yu, Sufia Fathima 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19335v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The rapid growth of chemical literature has generated vast amounts of unstructured data, where reaction information is particularly valuable for applications such as reaction predictions and drug design. However, the prohibitive cost of expert annotation has led to a scarcity of training data, severely hindering the performance of automatic reaction extraction. In this work, we conduct a systematic study of active learning for chemical reaction extraction. We integrate six uncertainty- and diversity-based strategies with pretrained transformer-CRF architectures, and evaluate them on product extraction and role labeling task. While several methods approach full-data performance with fewer labeled instances, learning curves are often non-monotonic and task-dependent. Our analysis shows that strong pretraining, structured CRF decoding, and label sparsity limit the stability of conventional active learning strategies. These findings provide practical insights for the effective use of active learning in chemical information extraction.
289. ❌ On the Conditioning Consistency Gap in Conditional Neural Processes
作者: Robin Young 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19312v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Neural processes are meta-learning models that map context sets to predictive distributions. While inspired by stochastic processes, NPs do not generally satisfy the Kolmogorov consistency conditions required to define a valid stochastic process. This inconsistency is widely acknowledged but poorly understood. Practitioners note that NPs work well despite the violation, without quantifying what this means. We address this gap by defining the conditioning consistency gap, a KL divergence measuring how much a conditional neural process’s (CNP) predictions change when a point is added to the context versus conditioned upon. Our main results show that for CNPs with bounded encoders and Lipschitz decoders, the consistency gap is $O(1/n^2)$ in context size $n$, and that this rate is tight. These bounds establish the precise sense in which CNPs approximate valid stochastic processes. The inconsistency is negligible for moderate context sizes but can be significant in the few-shot regime.
290. ❌ Debiased neural operators for estimating functionals
作者: Konstantin Hess, Dennis Frauen, Niki Kilbertus, Stefan Feuerriegel 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19296v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Neural operators are widely used to approximate solution maps of complex physical systems. In many applications, however, the goal is not to recover the full solution trajectory, but to summarize the solution trajectory via a scalar target quantity (e.g., a functional such as time spent in a target range, time above a threshold, accumulated cost, or total energy). In this paper, we introduce DOPE (debiased neural operator): a semiparametric estimator for such target quantities of solution trajectories obtained from neural operators. DOPE is broadly applicable to settings with both partial and irregular observations and can be combined with arbitrary neural operator architectures. We make three main contributions. (1) We show that, in contrast to DOPE, naive plug-in estimation can suffer from first-order bias. (2) To address this, we derive a novel one-step, Neyman-orthogonal estimator that treats the neural operator as a high-dimensional nuisance mapping between function spaces, and removes the leading bias term. For this, DOPE uses a weighting mechanism that simultaneously accounts for irregular observation designs and for how sensitive the target quantity is to perturbations of the underlying trajectory. (3) To learn the weights, we extend automatic debiased machine learning to operator-valued nuisances via Riesz regression. We demonstrate the benefits of DOPE across various numerical experiments.
291. ❌ TEMPO: Scaling Test-time Training for Large Reasoning Models
作者: Qingyang Zhang, Xinke Kong, Haitao Wu, Qinghua Hu, Minghao Wu, Baosong Yang, Yu Cheng, Yun Luo, Ganqu Cui, Changqing Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19295v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Test-time training (TTT) adapts model parameters on unlabeled test instances during inference time, which continuously extends capabilities beyond the reach of offline training. Despite initial gains, existing TTT methods for LRMs plateau quickly and do not benefit from additional test-time compute. Without external calibration, the self-generated reward signal increasingly drifts as the policy model evolves, leading to both performance plateaus and diversity collapse. We propose TEMPO, a TTT framework that interleaves policy refinement on unlabeled questions with periodic critic recalibration on a labeled dataset. By formalizing this alternating procedure through the Expectation-Maximization (EM) algorithm, we reveal that prior methods can be interpreted as incomplete variants that omit the crucial recalibration step. Reintroducing this step tightens the evidence lower bound (ELBO) and enables sustained improvement. Across diverse model families (Qwen3 and OLMO3) and reasoning tasks, TEMPO improves OLMO3-7B on AIME 2024 from 33.0% to 51.1% and Qwen3-14B from 42.3% to 65.8%, while maintaining high diversity.
292. ❌ The Logical Expressiveness of Topological Neural Networks
作者: Amirreza Akbari, Amauri H. Souza, Vikas Garg 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19212v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Graph neural networks (GNNs) are the standard for learning on graphs, yet they have limited expressive power, often expressed in terms of the Weisfeiler-Leman (WL) hierarchy or within the framework of first-order logic. In this context, topological neural networks (TNNs) have recently emerged as a promising alternative for graph representation learning. By incorporating higher-order relational structures into message-passing schemes, TNNs offer higher representational power than traditional GNNs. However, a fundamental question remains open: what is the logical expressiveness of TNNs? Answering this allows us to characterize precisely which binary classifiers TNNs can represent. In this paper, we address this question by analyzing isomorphism tests derived from the underlying mechanisms of general TNNs. We introduce and investigate the power of higher-order variants of WL-based tests for combinatorial complexes, called $k$-CCWL test. In addition, we introduce the topological counting logic (TC$k$), an extension of standard counting logic featuring a novel pairwise counting quantifier $ \exists^{N}(x_i,x_j), \varphi(x_i,x_j), $ which explicitly quantifies pairs $(x_i, x_j)$ satisfying property $\varphi$. We rigorously prove the exact equivalence: $ \text{k-CCWL} \equiv \text{TC}{k{+}2} \equiv \text{Topological }(k{+}2)\text{-pebble game}.$ These results establish a logical expressiveness theory for TNNs.
293. ❌ Auditing LLMs for Algorithmic Fairness in Casenote-Augmented Tabular Prediction
作者: Xiao Qi Lee, Ezinne Nwankwo, Angela Zhou 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19204v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
LLMs are increasingly being considered for prediction tasks in high-stakes social service settings, but their algorithmic fairness properties in this context are poorly understood. In this short technical report, we audit the algorithmic fairness of LLM-based tabular classification on a real housing placement prediction task, augmented with street outreach casenotes from a nonprofit partner. We audit multi-class classification error disparities. We find that a fine-tuned model augmented with casenote summaries can improve accuracy while reducing algorithmic fairness disparities. We experiment with variable importance improvements to zero-shot tabular classification and find mixed results on resulting algorithmic fairness. Overall, given historical inequities in housing placement, it is crucial to audit LLM use. We find that leveraging LLMs to augment tabular classification with casenote summaries can safely leverage additional text information at low implementation burden. The outreach casenotes are fairly short and heavily redacted. Our assessment is that LLM zero-shot classification does not introduce additional textual biases beyond algorithmic biases in tabular classification. Combining fine-tuning and leveraging casenote summaries can improve accuracy and algorithmic fairness.
294. ❌ Deep Image Prior for photoacoustic tomography can mitigate limited-view artifacts
作者: Hanna Pulkkinen, Jenni Poimala, Leonid Kunyansky, Janek Gröhl, Andreas Hauptmann 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19176v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We study the deep image prior (DIP) framework applied to photoacoustic tomography (PAT) as an unsupervised reconstruction approach to mitigate limited-view artifacts and noise commonly encountered in experimental settings. Efficient implementation is achieved by employing recently published fast forward and adjoint algorithms for circular measurement geometries. Initialization via a fast inverse and total variation (TV) regularization are applied to further suppress noise and mitigate overfitting. For comparison, we compute a classical TV reconstruction. Our experiments comprise simulated PAT measurements under limited-view geometries and varying levels of added noise as well as experimental measurements together with using a digital twin for quality assessment. Our findings suggest that DIP framework provides an effective unsupervised strategy for robust PAT reconstruction even in the challenging case of a limited view geometry providing improvement in several quantitative measures over total variation reconstructions.
295. ❌ FOCAL-Attention for Heterogeneous Multi-Label Prediction
作者: Chenghao Zhang, Qingqing Long, Ludi Wang, Wenjuan Cui, Jianjun Yu, Yi Du 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19171v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Heterogeneous graphs have attracted increasing attention for modeling multi-typed entities and relations in complex real-world systems. Multi-label node classification on heterogeneous graphs is challenging due to structural heterogeneity and the need to learn shared representations across multiple labels. Existing methods typically adopt either flexible attention mechanisms or meta-path constrained anchoring, but in heterogeneous multi-label prediction they often suffer from semantic dilution or coverage constraint. Both issues are further amplified under multi-label supervision. We present a theoretical analysis showing that as heterogeneous neighborhoods expand, the attention mass allocated to task-critical (primary) neighborhoods diminishes, and that meta-path constrained aggregation exhibits a dilemma: too few meta-paths intensify coverage constraint, while too many re-introduce dilution. To resolve this coverage-anchoring conflict, we propose FOCAL: Fusion Of Coverage and Anchoring Learning, with two components: coverage-oriented attention (COA) for flexible, unconstrained heterogeneous context aggregation, and anchoring-oriented attention (AOA) that restricts aggregation to meta-path-induced primary semantics. Our theoretical analysis and experimental results further indicates that FOCAL has a better performance than other state-of-the-art methods.
296. ❌ SAW-INT4: System-Aware 4-Bit KV-Cache Quantization for Real-World LLM Serving
作者: Jinda Jia, Jisen Li, Zhongzhu Zhou, Jung Hwan Heo, Jue Wang, Tri Dao, Shuaiwen Leon Song, Ben Athiwaratkun, Chenfeng Xu, Tianyi Zhang, Xiaoxia Wu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19157v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
KV-cache memory is a major bottleneck in real-world LLM serving, where systems must simultaneously support latency-sensitive small-batch requests and high-throughput concurrent workloads. Although many KV-cache compression methods improve offline accuracy or compression ratio, they often violate practical serving constraints such as paged memory layouts, regular memory access, and fused attention execution, limiting their effectiveness in deployment. In this work, we identify the minimal set of 4-bit KV-cache quantization methods that remain viable under these constraints. Our central finding is that a simple design–token-wise INT4 quantization with block-diagonal Hadamard rotation–consistently achieves the best accuracy-efficiency trade-off. Across multiple models and benchmarks, this approach recovers nearly all of the accuracy lost by naive INT4, while more complex methods such as vector quantization and Hessian-aware quantization provide only marginal additional gains once serving compatibility is taken into account. To make this practical, we implement a fused rotation-quantization kernel that integrates directly into paged KV-cache layouts and introduces zero measurable end-to-end overhead, matching plain INT4 throughput across concurrency levels. Our results show that effective KV-cache compression is fundamentally a systems co-design problem: under real serving constraints, lightweight block-diagonal Hadamard rotation is a viable method that delivers near-lossless accuracy without sacrificing serving efficiency.
297. ❌ Analytical Extraction of Conditional Sobol’ Indices via Basis Decomposition of Polynomial Chaos Expansions
作者: Shijie Zhong, Jiangfeng Fu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19165v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
In uncertainty quantification, evaluating sensitivity measures under specific conditions (i.e., conditional Sobol’ indices) is essential for systems with parameterized responses, such as spatial fields or varying operating conditions. Traditional approaches often rely on point-wise modeling, which is computationally expensive and may lack consistency across the parameter space. This paper demonstrates that for a pre-trained global Polynomial Chaos Expansion (PCE) model, the analytical conditional Sobol’ indices are inherently embedded within its basis functions. By leveraging the tensor-product property of PCE bases, we reformulate the global expansion into a set of analytical coefficient fields that depend on the conditioning variables. Based on the preservation of orthogonality under conditional probability measures, we derive closed-form expressions for conditional variances and Sobol’ indices. This framework bypasses the need for repetitive modeling or additional sampling, transforming conditional sensitivity analysis into a purely algebraic post-processing step. Numerical benchmarks indicate that the proposed method ensures physical coherence and offers superior numerical robustness and computational efficiency compared to conventional point-wise approaches.
298. ❌ RL-ABC: Reinforcement Learning for Accelerator Beamline Control
作者: Anwar Ibrahim, Fedor Ratnikov, Maxim Kaledin, Alexey Petrenko, Denis Derkach 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19146v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Particle accelerator beamline optimization is a high-dimensional control problem traditionally requiring significant expert intervention. We present RLABC (Reinforcement Learning for Accelerator Beamline Control), an open-source Python framework that automatically transforms standard Elegant beamline configurations into reinforcement learning environments. RLABC integrates with the widely-used Elegant beam dynamics simulation code via SDDS-based interfaces, enabling researchers to apply modern RL algorithms to beamline optimization with minimal RL-specific development. The main contribution is a general methodology for formulating beamline tuning as a Markov decision process: RLABC automatically preprocesses lattice files to insert diagnostic watch points before each tunable element, constructs a 57-dimensional state representation from beam statistics, covariance information, and aperture constraints, and provides a configurable reward function for transmission optimization. The framework supports multiple RL algorithms through Stable-Baselines3 compatibility and implements stage learning strategies for improved training efficiency. Validation on a test beamline derived from the VEPP-5 injection complex (37 control parameters across 11 quadrupoles and 4 dipoles) demonstrates that the framework successfully enables RL-based optimization, with a Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient agent achieving 70.3% particle transmission – performance matching established methods such as differential evolution. The framework’s stage learning capability allows decomposition of complex optimization problems into manageable subproblems, improving training efficiency. The complete framework, including configuration files and example notebooks, is available as open-source software to facilitate adoption and further research.
299. ❌ LLMs Know They’re Wrong and Agree Anyway: The Shared Sycophancy-Lying Circuit
作者: Manav Pandey 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19117v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
When a language model agrees with a user’s false belief, is it failing to detect the error, or noticing and agreeing anyway? We show the latter. Across twelve open-weight models from five labs, spanning small to frontier scale, the same small set of attention heads carries a “this statement is wrong” signal whether the model is evaluating a claim on its own or being pressured to agree with a user. Silencing these heads flips sycophantic behavior sharply while leaving factual accuracy intact, so the circuit controls deference rather than knowledge. Edge-level path patching confirms that the same head-to-head connections drive sycophancy, factual lying, and instructed lying. Opinion-agreement, where no factual ground truth exists, reuses these head positions but writes into an orthogonal direction, ruling out a simple “truth-direction” reading of the substrate. Alignment training leaves this circuit in place: an RLHF refresh cuts sycophantic behavior roughly tenfold while the shared heads persist or grow, a pattern that replicates on an independent model family and under targeted anti-sycophancy DPO. When these models sycophant, they register that the user is wrong and agree anyway.
300. ❌ Fast estimation of Gaussian mixture components via centering and singular value thresholding
作者: Huan Qing 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19091v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Estimating the number of components is a fundamental challenge in unsupervised learning, particularly when dealing with high-dimensional data with many components or severely imbalanced component sizes. This paper addresses this challenge for classical Gaussian mixture models. The proposed estimator is simple: center the data, compute the singular values of the centered matrix, and count those above a threshold. No iterative fitting, no likelihood calculation, and no prior knowledge of the number of components are required. We prove that, under a mild separation condition on the component centers, the estimator consistently recovers the true number of components. The result holds in high-dimensional settings where the dimension can be much larger than the sample size. It also holds when the number of components grows to the smaller of the dimension and the sample size, even under severe imbalance among component sizes. Computationally, the method is extremely fast: for example, it processes ten million samples in one hundred dimensions within one minute. Extensive experimental studies confirm its accuracy in challenging settings such as high dimensionality, many components, and severe class imbalance.
301. ❌ S2MAM: Semi-supervised Meta Additive Model for Robust Estimation and Variable Selection
作者: Xuelin Zhang, Hong Chen, Yingjie Wang, Tieliang Gong, Bin Gu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19072v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Semi-supervised learning with manifold regularization is a classical framework for jointly learning from both labeled and unlabeled data, where the key requirement is that the support of the unknown marginal distribution has the geometric structure of a Riemannian manifold. Typically, the Laplace-Beltrami operator-based manifold regularization can be approximated empirically by the Laplacian regularization associated with the entire training data and its corresponding graph Laplacian matrix. However, the graph Laplacian matrix depends heavily on the prespecified similarity metric and may lead to inappropriate penalties when dealing with redundant or noisy input variables. To address the above issues, this paper proposes a new \textit{Semi-Supervised Meta Additive Model (S$^2$MAM) based on a bilevel optimization scheme that automatically identifies informative variables, updates the similarity matrix, and simultaneously achieves interpretable predictions. Theoretical guarantees are provided for S$^2$MAM, including the computing convergence and the statistical generalization bound. Experimental assessments across 4 synthetic and 12 real-world datasets, with varying levels and categories of corruption, validate the robustness and interpretability of the proposed approach.
302. ❌ Age-Dependent Heterogeneity in the Association Between Physical Activity and Mental Distress: A Causal Machine Learning Analysis of 3.2 Million U.S. Adults
作者: Yuan Shan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19066v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Physical activity (PA) is widely recognized as protective against mental distress, yet whether this benefit varies systematically across population subgroups remains poorly understood. Using pooled data from ten consecutive annual waves of the U.S. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2015-2024; n = 3,242,218), we investigate heterogeneity in the association between leisure-time PA and frequent mental distress (FMD, >=14 days/month) across age groups. Survey-weighted logistic regression reveals a striking age gradient: the adjusted odds ratio for PA ranges from 0.89 among young adults (18-24) to 0.50 among adults aged 55-64, with the protective association strengthening monotonically with age. Temporal analysis across all ten years shows that the young-adult PA effect has been eroding over the past decade, with the 18-24 OR reaching 1.01 (null) in both 2018 and 2024 – paralleling the deepening youth mental health crisis. Causal Forest via Double Machine Learning independently identifies age as the dominant driver of treatment effect heterogeneity (feature importance = 0.39, 2.5x the next predictor). E-value sensitivity analysis, propensity score overlap checks, placebo tests, and imputation comparisons confirm the robustness of the findings. These results suggest that the well-documented exercise–mental health link may not generalize to the youngest adult population, whose distress appears increasingly driven by stressors that PA alone cannot mitigate.
303. ❌ Intentional Updates for Streaming Reinforcement Learning
作者: Arsalan Sharifnassab, Mohamed Elsayed, Kris De Asis, A. Rupam Mahmood, Richard S. Sutton 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19033v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
In gradient-based learning, a step size chosen in parameter units does not produce a predictable per-step change in function output. This often leads to instability in the streaming setting (i.e., batch size=1), where stochasticity is not averaged out and update magnitudes can momentarily become arbitrarily big or small. Instead, we propose intentional updates: first specify the intended outcome of an update and then solve for the step size that approximately achieves it. This strategy has precedent in online supervised linear regression via Normalized Least Mean Squares algorithm, which selects a step size to yield a specified change in the function output proportional to the current error. We extend this principle to streaming deep reinforcement learning by defining appropriate intended outcomes: Intentional TD aims for a fixed fractional reduction of the TD error, and Intentional Policy Gradient aims for a bounded per-step change in the policy, limiting local KL divergence. We propose practical algorithms combining eligibility traces and diagonal scaling. Empirically, these methods yield state-of-the-art streaming performance, frequently performing on par with batch and replay-buffer approaches.
304. ❌ Learning Posterior Predictive Distributions for Node Classification from Synthetic Graph Priors
作者: Jeongwhan Choi, Jongwoo Kim, Woosung Kang, Noseong Park 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19028v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
One of the most challenging problems in graph machine learning is generalizing across graphs with diverse properties. Graph neural networks (GNNs) face a fundamental limitation: they require separate training for each new graph, preventing universal generalization across diverse graph datasets. A critical challenge facing GNNs lies in their reliance on labeled training data for each individual graph, a requirement that hinders the capacity for universal node classification due to the heterogeneity inherent in graphs – differences in homophily levels, community structures, and feature distributions across datasets. Inspired by the success of large language models (LLMs) that achieve in-context learning through massive-scale pre-training on diverse datasets, we introduce NodePFN. This universal node classification method generalizes to arbitrary graphs without graph-specific training. NodePFN learns posterior predictive distributions (PPDs) by training only on thousands of synthetic graphs generated from carefully designed priors. Our synthetic graph generation covers real-world graphs through the use of random networks with controllable homophily levels and structural causal models for complex feature-label relationships. We develop a dual-branch architecture combining context-query attention mechanisms with local message passing to enable graph-aware in-context learning. Extensive evaluation on 23 benchmarks demonstrates that a single pre-trained NodePFN achieves 71.27 average accuracy. These results validate that universal graph learning patterns can be effectively learned from synthetic priors, establishing a new paradigm for generalization in node classification.
305. ❌ Policy Gradient Primal-Dual Method for Safe Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback
作者: Qiang Liu, Adrienne Kline, Ermin Wei 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19024v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Safe Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (Safe RLHF) has recently achieved empirical success in developing helpful and harmless large language models by decoupling human preferences regarding helpfulness and harmlessness. Existing approaches typically rely on fitting fixed horizon reward models from human feedback and have only been validated empirically. In this paper, we formulate safe RLHF as an infinite horizon discounted Con- strained Markov Decision Process (CMDP), since humans may interact with the model over a continuing sequence of interactions rather than within a single finite episode. We propose two Safe RLHF algorithms that do not require reward model fitting and, in contrast to prior work assuming fixed-length trajectories, support flexible trajectory lengths for training. Both algo- rithms are based on the primal-dual method and achieve global convergence guarantees with polynomial rates in terms of policy gradient iterations, trajectory sample lengths, and human preference queries. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to study infinite horizon discounted CMDP under human feedback and establish global, non-asymptotic convergence.
306. ❌ FG$^2$-GDN: Enhancing Long-Context Gated Delta Networks with Doubly Fine-Grained Control
作者: Pingwei Sun, Yuxuan Hu, Jianchao Tan, Xue Wang, Jiaqi Zhang, Yifan Lu, Yerui Sun, Yuchen Xie, Xunliang Cai 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19021v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Linear attention mechanisms have emerged as promising alternatives to softmax attention, offering linear-time complexity during inference. Recent advances such as Gated DeltaNet (GDN) and Kimi Delta Attention (KDA) have demonstrated that the delta rule, an online gradient descent update, enables superior associative recall compared to simple additive updates. While KDA refined the coarse head-wise decay gate into channel-wise decay, the learning rate $β_t$ in the delta update remains a scalar, limiting the model’s capacity for dimension-specific adaptation. We introduce FG$^2$-GDN, which replaces the scalar $β_t$ with a channel-wise vector analogous to the transition from SGD to per-coordinate adaptive optimizers such as AdaGrad and Adam. We further propose FG$^2$-GDN+, which decouples the scaling for keys and values, enabling independent control of erasure strength and write strength. Experiments on synthetic and real-world benchmarks show that FG$^2$-GDN and its variant improve associative recall and long-context understanding over GDN and KDA, with comparable computational efficiency.
307. ❌ Local Linearity of LLMs Enables Activation Steering via Model-Based Linear Optimal Control
作者: Julian Skifstad, Xinyue Annie Yang, Glen Chou 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19018v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Inference-time LLM alignment methods, particularly activation steering, offer an alternative to fine-tuning by directly modifying activations during generation. Existing methods, however, often rely on non-anticipative interventions that ignore how perturbations propagate through transformer layers and lack online error feedback, resulting in suboptimal, open-loop control. To address this, we show empirically that, despite the nonlinear structure of transformer blocks, layer-wise dynamics across multiple LLM architectures and scales are well-approximated by locally-linear models. Exploiting this property, we model LLM inference as a linear time-varying dynamical system and adapt the classical linear quadratic regulator to compute feedback controllers using layer-wise Jacobians, steering activations toward desired semantic setpoints in closed-loop with minimal computational overhead and no offline training. We also derive theoretical bounds on setpoint tracking error, enabling formal guarantees on steering performance. Using a novel adaptive semantic feature setpoint signal, our method yields robust, fine-grained behavior control across models, scales, and tasks, including state-of-the-art modulation of toxicity, truthfulness, refusal, and arbitrary concepts, surpassing baseline steering methods. Our code is available at: https://github.com/trustworthyrobotics/lqr-activation-steering
308. ❌ FedProxy: Federated Fine-Tuning of LLMs via Proxy SLMs and Heterogeneity-Aware Fusion
作者: Tao Fan, Guoqiang Ma, Yuanfeng Song, Lixin Fan, Kai Chen, Qiang Yang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19015v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Federated fine-tuning of Large Language Models (LLMs) is obstructed by a trilemma of challenges: protecting LLMs intellectual property (IP), ensuring client privacy, and mitigating performance loss on heterogeneous data. Existing methods like Offsite-Tuning (OT) secure the LLMs IP by having clients train only lightweight adapters, yet our analysis reveals they suffer from a fundamental performance bottleneck, leaving a significant gap compared to centralized training. To bridge this gap, we introduce FedProxy, a new federated adaptation framework. FedProxy replaces weak adapters with a unified, powerful Proxy Small Language Model (SLM), compressed from the proprietary LLM, to serve as a high-fidelity surrogate for collaborative fine-tuning. Our framework systematically resolves the trilemma through a three-stage architecture: (i) Efficient Representation via server-guided compression to create a resource-friendly proxy; (ii) Robust Optimization through an interference-mitigating aggregation strategy to handle data heterogeneity; and (iii) Effortless Fusion via a training-free “plug-in” mechanism to integrate learned knowledge back into the LLM. Experiments show FedProxy significantly outperforms OT methods and approaches centralized performance, establishing a new benchmark for secure and high-performance federated LLM adaptation.
309. ❌ Accelerating trajectory optimization with Sobolev-trained diffusion policies
作者: Théotime Le Hellard, Franki Nguimatsia Tiofack, Quentin Le Lidec, Justin Carpentier 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19011v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Trajectory Optimization (TO) solvers exploit known system dynamics to compute locally optimal trajectories through iterative improvements. A downside is that each new problem instance is solved independently; therefore, convergence speed and quality of the solution found depend on the initial trajectory proposed. To improve efficiency, a natural approach is to warm-start TO with initial guesses produced by a learned policy trained on trajectories previously generated by the solver. Diffusion-based policies have recently emerged as expressive imitation learning models, making them promising candidates for this role. Yet, a counterintuitive challenge comes from the local optimality of TO demonstrations: when a policy is rolled out, small non-optimal deviations may push it into situations not represented in the training data, triggering compounding errors over long horizons. In this work, we focus on learning-based warm-starting for gradient-based TO solvers that also provide feedback gains. Exploiting this specificity, we derive a first-order loss for Sobolev learning of diffusion-based policies using both trajectories and feedback gains. Through comprehensive experiments, we demonstrate that the resulting policy avoids compounding errors, and so can learn from very few trajectories to provide initial guesses reducing solving time by $2\times$ to $20 \times$. Incorporating first-order information enables predictions with fewer diffusion steps, reducing inference latency.
310. ❌ Decompose, Structure, and Repair: A Neuro-Symbolic Framework for Autoformalization via Operator Trees
作者: Xiaoyang Liu, Zineng Dong, Yifan Bai, Yantao Li, Yuntian Liu, Tao Luo 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19000v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Statement autoformalization acts as a critical bridge between human mathematics and formal mathematics by translating natural language problems into formal language. While prior works have focused on data synthesis and diverse training paradigms to optimize end-to-end Large Language Models (LLMs), they typically treat formal code as flat sequences, neglecting the hierarchical logic inherent in mathematical statements. In this work, we introduce Decompose, Structure, and Repair (DSR), a neuro-symbolic framework that restructures autoformalization into a modular pipeline. DSR decomposes statements into logical components and maps them to structured operator trees, leveraging this topological blueprint to precisely localize and repair errors via sub-tree refinement. Furthermore, we introduce PRIME, a benchmark of 156 undergraduate and graduate-level theorems selected from canonical textbooks and expertly annotated in Lean 4. Experimental results demonstrate that DSR establishes a new state-of-the-art, consistently outperforming baselines under equivalent computational budgets. The datasets, model, and code will be released to the public soon.
311. ❌ Low-Rank Adaptation for Critic Learning in Off-Policy Reinforcement Learning
作者: Yuan Zhuang, Yuexin Bian, Sihong He, Jie Feng, Qing Su, Songyang Han, Jonathan Petit, Shihao Ji, Yuanyuan Shi, Fei Miao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18978v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Scaling critic capacity is a promising direction for enhancing off-policy reinforcement learning (RL). However, larger critics are prone to overfitting and unstable in replay-buffer-based bootstrap training. This paper leverages Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) as a structural-sparsity regularizer for off-policy critics. Our approach freezes randomly initialized base matrices and solely optimizes low-rank adapters, thereby constraining critic updates to a low-dimensional subspace. Built on top of SimbaV2, we further develop a LoRA formulation, compatible with SimbaV2, that preserves its hyperspherical normalization geometry under frozen-backbone training. We evaluate our method with SAC and FastTD3 on DeepMind Control locomotion and IsaacLab robotics benchmarks. LoRA consistently achieves lower critic loss during training and stronger policy performance. Extensive experiments demonstrate that adaptive low-rank updates provide a simple, scalable, and effective structural regularization for critic learning in off-policy RL.
312. ❌ Ground-Level Near Real-Time Modeling for PM2.5 Pollution Prediction
作者: Zachary R. Fox, Janet O. Agbaje, Dakotah Maguire, Javier E. Santos, Jeremy Logan, Maggie Davis, Rima Habre, Jim VanDerslice, Heidi A. Hanson 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18973v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Air pollution is a worldwide public health threat that can cause or exacerbate many illnesses, including respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, and some cancers. However, epidemiological studies and public health decision-making are stymied by the inability to assess pollution exposure impacts in near real time. To address this, developing accurate digital twins of environmental pollutants will enable timely data-driven analytics - a crucial step in modernizing health policy and decision-making. Although other models predict and analyze fine particulate matter exposure, they often rely on modeled input data sources and data streams that are not regularly updated. Another challenge stems from current models relying on predefined grids. In contrast, our deep-learning approach interpolates surface level PM2.5 concentrations between sparsely distributed US EPA monitoring stations in a grid-free manner. By incorporating additional, readily available datasets - including topographic, meteorological, and land-use data - we improve its ability to predict pollutant concentrations with high spatial and temporal resolution. This enables model querying at any spatial location for rapid predictions without computing over the entire grid. To ensure robustness, we randomize spatial sampling during training to enable our model to perform well in both dense and sparse monitored regions. This model is well suited for near real-time deployment because its lightweight architecture allows for fast updates in response to streaming data. Moreover, model flexibility and scalability allow it to be adapted to various geographical contexts and scales, making it a practical tool for delivering accurate and timely air quality assessments. Its capacity to rapidly evaluate multiple scenarios can be especially valuable for decision-making during public health crises.
313. ❌ Beyond Bellman: High-Order Generator Regression for Continuous-Time Policy Evaluation
作者: Yaowei Zheng, Richong Zhang, Shenxi Wu, Shirui Bian, Haosong Zhang, Li Zeng, Xingjian Ma, Yichi Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18972v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We study finite-horizon continuous-time policy evaluation from discrete closed-loop trajectories under time-inhomogeneous dynamics. The target value surface solves a backward parabolic equation, but the Bellman baseline obtained from one-step recursion is only first-order in the grid width. We estimate the time-dependent generator from multi-step transitions using moment-matching coefficients that cancel lower-order truncation terms, and combine the resulting surrogate with backward regression. The main theory gives an end-to-end decomposition into generator misspecification, projection error, pooling bias, finite-sample error, and start-up error, together with a decision-frequency regime map explaining when higher-order gains should be visible. Across calibration studies, four-scale benchmarks, feature and start-up ablations, and gain-mismatch stress tests, the second-order estimator consistently improves on the Bellman baseline and remains stable in the regime where the theory predicts visible gains. These results position high-order generator regression as an interpretable continuous-time policy-evaluation method with a clear operating region.
314. ❌ Mechanistic Anomaly Detection via Functional Attribution
作者: Hugo Lyons Keenan, Christopher Leckie, Sarah Erfani 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18970v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We can often verify the correctness of neural network outputs using ground truth labels, but we cannot reliably determine whether the output was produced by normal or anomalous internal mechanisms. Mechanistic anomaly detection (MAD) aims to flag these cases, but existing methods either depend on latent space analysis, which is vulnerable to obfuscation, or are specific to particular architectures and modalities. We reframe MAD as a functional attribution problem: asking to what extent samples from a trusted set can explain the model’s output, where attribution failure signals anomalous behavior. We operationalize this using influence functions, measuring functional coupling between test samples and a small reference set via parameter-space sampling. We evaluate across multiple anomaly types and modalities. For backdoors in vision models, our method achieves state-of-the-art detection on BackdoorBench, with an average Defense Effectiveness Rating (DER) of 0.93 across seven attacks and four datasets (next best 0.83). For LLMs, we similarly achieve a significant improvement over baselines for several backdoor types, including on explicitly obfuscated models. Beyond backdoors, our method can detect adversarial and out-of-distribution samples, and distinguishes multiple anomalous mechanisms within a single model. Our results establish functional attribution as an effective, modality-agnostic tool for detecting anomalous behavior in deployed models.
315. ❌ Self-Improving Tabular Language Models via Iterative Group Alignment
作者: Yunbo Long, Tejumade Afonja, Alexandra Brintrup, Mario Fritz 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18966v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
While language models have been adapted for tabular data generation, two fundamental limitations remain: (1) static fine-tuning produces models that cannot learn from their own generated samples and adapt to self-correct, and (2) autoregressive objectives preserve local token coherence but neglect global statistical properties, degrading tabular quality. Reinforcement learning offers a potential solution but requires designing reward functions that balance competing objectives – impractical for tabular data. To fill the gap, we introduce TabGRAA (Tabular Group-Relative Advantage Alignment), the first self-improving framework for tabular data generation via automated feedback. At each iteration, TabGRAA uses an \emph{automated quality signal} – such as a two-sample distinguishability classifier or a distance-based reward – to partition newly generated samples into high- and low-quality groups, then optimizes a group-relative advantage objective that reinforces realistic patterns while penalizing artifacts. The specific signal is a modular choice rather than a fixed component of the framework. This establishes a virtuous feedback cycle, where the quality signal is re-computed against newly \emph{generated synthetic} samples at each round; the language model is only fine-tuned on these self-generated signals, so no additional real record is exposed during alignment, mitigating data-leakage risk beyond the initial supervised fine-tuning. Experiments show TabGRAA outperforms existing methods in fidelity, utility, and privacy, while matching or exceeding diffusion-based synthesizers, advancing tabular synthesis from static statistical replication to dynamic, self-improving generation.
316. ❌ Distillation Traps and Guards: A Calibration Knob for LLM Distillability
作者: Weixiao Zhan, Yongcheng Jing, Leszek Rutkowski, Dacheng Tao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18963v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Knowledge distillation (KD) transfers capabilities from large language models (LLMs) to smaller students, yet it can fail unpredictably and also underpins model leakage risks. Our analysis revealed several distillation traps: tail noise, off-policy instability, and, most fundamentally, the teacher-student gap, that distort training signals. These traps manifest as overconfident hallucinations, self-correction collapse, and local decoding degradation, causing distillation to fail. Motivated by these findings, we propose a post-hoc calibration method that, to the best of our knowledge, for the first time enables control over a teacher’s distillability via reinforcement fine-tuning (RFT). Our objective combines task utility, KL anchor, and across-tokenizer calibration reward. This makes distillability a practical safety lever for foundation models, connecting robust teacher-student transfer with deployment-aware model protection. Experiments across math, knowledge QA, and instruction-following tasks show that students distilled from distillable calibrated teachers outperform SFT and KD baselines, while undistillable calibrated teachers retain their task performance but cause distilled students to collapse, offering a practical knob for both better KD and model IP protection.
317. ❌ TabEmb: Joint Semantic-Structure Embedding for Table Annotation
作者: Ehsan Hoseinzade, Ke Wang, Anandharaju Durai Raju 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18939v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Table annotation is crucial for making web and enterprise tables usable in downstream NLP applications. Unlike textual data where learning semantically rich token or sentence embeddings often suffice, tables are structured combinations of columns wherein useful representations must jointly capture column’s semantics and the inter-column relationships. Existing models learn by linearizing the 2D table into a 1D token sequence and encoding it with pretrained language models (PLMs) such as BERT. However, this leads to limited semantic quality and weaker generalization to unseen or rare values compared to modern LLMs, and degraded structural modeling due to 2D-to-1D flattening and context-length constraints. We propose TabEmb, which directly targets these limitations by decoupling semantic encoding from structural modeling. An LLM first produces semantically rich embeddings for each column, and a graph-based module over columns then injects relationships into the embeddings, yielding joint semantic-tructural representations for table annotation. Experiments show that TabEmb consistently outperforms strong baselines on different table annotation tasks. Source code and datasets are available at https://github.com/hoseinzadeehsan/TabEmb
318. ❌ FlowForge: A Staged Local Rollout Engine for Flow-Field Prediction
作者: Xiaowen Zhang, Ziming Zhou, Fengnian Zhao, David L. S. Hung 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18953v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Deep learning surrogates for CFD flow-field prediction often rely on large, complex models, which can be slow and fragile when data are noisy or incomplete. We introduce FlowForge, a staged local rollout engine that predicts future flow fields by compiling a locality-preserving update schedule and executing it with a shared lightweight local predictor. Rather than producing the next frame in a single global pass, FlowForge rewrites spatial sites stage by stage so that each update conditions only on bounded local context exposed by earlier stages. This compile-execute design aligns inference with short-range physical dependence, keeps latency predictable, and limits error amplification from global mixing. Across PDEBench, CFDBench, and BubbleML, FlowForge matches or improves upon strong baselines in pointwise accuracy, delivers consistently better robustness to noise and missing observations, and maintains stable multi-step rollout behavior while reducing per-step latency.
319. ❌ Fine-Tuning Small Reasoning Models for Quantum Field Theory
作者: Nathaniel S. Woodward, Zhiqi Gao, Yurii Kvasiuk, Kendrick M. Smith, Frederic Sala, Moritz Münchmeyer 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18936v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Despite the growing application of Large Language Models (LLMs) to theoretical physics, there is little academic exploration into how domain-specific physics reasoning ability develops while training these models. To investigate this, we perform the first academic fine-tuning study of small (7B-parameter) reasoning models dedicated specifically to theoretical physics. Because open-source verifiable training data required to train such capabilities is scarce, we developed a robust data generation pipeline that can both create synthetic problems and make existing human-authored problems suitable for model training. Selecting Quantum Field Theory (QFT) as our primary domain, we generated over 2,500 synthetic problems alongside a curated collection of human-adapted problems sourced from arXiv and standard pedagogical resources. We conduct both Reinforcement Learning (RL) and Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) experiments, benchmarking performance gains as well as generalization to other physics domains. We perform an extensive analysis of model chains-of-though before and after fine-tuning, to understand how reasoning errors evolve during RL and SFT. Finally, we publicly release our data pipeline, verifiable QFT training data, and $\sim$200M tokens of QFT reasoning traces.
320. ❌ From Particles to Perils: SVGD-Based Hazardous Scenario Generation for Autonomous Driving Systems Testing
作者: Linfeng Liang, Xiao Cheng, Tsong Yueh Chen, Xi Zheng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18918v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Simulation-based testing of autonomous driving systems (ADS) must uncover realistic and diverse failures in dense, heterogeneous traffic. However, existing search-based seeding methods (e.g., genetic algorithms) struggle in high-dimensional spaces, often collapsing to limited modes and missing many failure scenarios. We present PtoP, a framework that combines adaptive random seed generation with Stein Variational Gradient Descent (SVGD) to produce diverse, failure-inducing initial conditions. SVGD balances attraction toward high-risk regions and repulsion among particles, yielding risk-seeking yet well-distributed seeds across multiple failure modes. PtoP is plug-and-play and enhances existing online testing methods (e.g., reinforcement learning–based testers) by providing principled seeds. Evaluation in CARLA on two industry-grade ADS (Apollo, Autoware) and a native end-to-end system shows that PtoP improves safety violation rate (up to 27.68%), scenario diversity (9.6%), and map coverage (16.78%) over baselines.
321. ❌ Collaborative Contextual Bayesian Optimization
作者: Chih-Yu Chang, Qiyuan Chen, Tianhan Gao, David Fenning, Chinedum Okwudire, Neil Dasgupta, Wei Lu, Raed Al Kontar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18912v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Discovering optimal designs through sequential data collection is essential in many real-world applications. While Bayesian Optimization (BO) has achieved remarkable success in this setting, growing attention has recently turned to context-specific optimal design, formalized as Contextual Bayesian Optimization (CBO). Unlike BO, CBO is inherently more challenging as it must approximate an entire mapping from the context space to its corresponding optimal design, requiring simultaneous exploration across contexts and exploitation within each. In many modern applications, such tasks arise across multiple potentially heterogeneous but related clients, where collaboration can significantly improve learning efficiency. We propose CCBO, Collaborative Contextual Bayesian Optimization, a unified framework enabling multiple clients to jointly perform CBO with controllable contexts, supporting both online collaboration and offline initialization from peers’ historical beliefs, with an optional privacy-preserving communication mechanism. We establish sublinear regret guarantees and demonstrate, through extensive simulations and a real-world hot rolling application, that CCBO achieves substantial improvements over existing approaches even under client heterogeneity. The code to reproduce the results can be found at https://github.com/cchihyu/Collaborative-Contextual-Bayesian-Optimization
322. ❌ Gradient-Based Program Synthesis with Neurally Interpreted Languages
作者: Matthew V. Macfarlane, Clément Bonnet, Herke van Hoof, Levi H. S. Lelis 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18907v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
A central challenge in program induction has long been the trade-off between symbolic and neural approaches. Symbolic methods offer compositional generalisation and data efficiency, yet their scalability is constrained by formalisms such as domain-specific languages (DSLs), which are labour-intensive to create and may not transfer to new domains. In contrast, neural networks flexibly learn from data but tend to generalise poorly in compositional and out-of-distribution settings. We bridge this divide with an instance of a Latent Adaptation Network architecture named Neural Language Interpreter (NLI), which learns its own discrete, symbolic-like programming language end-to-end. NLI autonomously discovers a vocabulary of primitive operations and uses a novel differentiable neural executor to interpret variable-length sequences of these primitives. This allows NLI to represent programs that are not bound to a constant number of computation steps, enabling it to solve more complex problems than those seen during training. To make these discrete, compositional program structures amenable to gradient-based optimisation, we employ the Gumbel-Softmax relaxation, enabling the entire model to be trained end-to-end. Crucially, this same differentiability enables powerful test-time adaptation. At inference, NLI’s program inductor provides an initial program guess. This guess is then refined via gradient descent through the neural executor, enabling efficient search for the neural program that best explains the given data. We demonstrate that NLI outperforms in-context learning, test-time training, and continuous latent program networks on tasks that require combinatorial generalisation and rapid adaptation to unseen tasks. Our results establish a new path toward models that combine the compositionality of discrete languages with the gradient-based search and end-to-end learning of neural networks.
323. ❌ AC-SINDy: Compositional Sparse Identification of Nonlinear Dynamics
作者: Peter Racioppo 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18889v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We present AC-SINDy, a compositional extension of the Sparse Identification of Nonlinear Dynamics (SINDy) framework that replaces explicit feature libraries with a structured representation based on arithmetic circuits. Rather than enumerating candidate basis functions, the proposed approach constructs nonlinear features through compositions of linear functions and multiplicative interactions, yielding a compact and scalable parameterization and enabling sparsity to be enforced directly over the computational graph. We also introduce a formulation that separates state estimation from dynamics identification by combining latent state inference with shared dynamics and multi-step supervision, improving robustness to noise while preserving interpretability. Experiments on nonlinear and chaotic systems demonstrate that the method recovers accurate and interpretable governing equations while scaling more favorably than standard SINDy.
324. ❌ Direct RNA sequence design under codon constraints using expressive tensor-based secondary structure models
作者: Mark Fornace, Christina Wuyan Wang, Michael Lindsey 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19718v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Nucleic acid sequence design via codon optimization is a fundamental task with applications across synthetic biology, mRNA therapeutics, and vaccine design. Given a target protein, it is a major open challenge to navigate the combinatorially large design space of codon sequences mapping to its amino acid sequence. Computational approaches generally seek to optimize simple objectives based on the codon sequence, possibly together with more complicated contributions based on secondary structure analysis. In this work, we demonstrate a direct and efficient algorithm to sample sequences from a suitable Boltzmann distribution defined in terms of the codon sequence and a fully detailed secondary structure free energy model, as well as related algorithms for exact computation of statistical quantities such as free energies, base pairing probabilities, and base and codon marginals. These algorithms draw upon a recently developed tensor-based formulation of secondary structure thermodynamics and demonstrate, for the first time, that global sequence design can be accomplished with respect to a highly accurate free energy model. Moreover, the algorithms can leverage any available CPU and GPU resources in parallel for massive computational speedups.
325. ❌ Information-to-energy trade-offs and the optimal alphabet of polymer replication
作者: Damián G. Hernández 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19563v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
We analyze information transmission in a recently proposed coarse-grained model of polymer replication by framing it as a communication channel between templates and copies. By calculating the mutual information in the steady-state limit of long chains, we recover the accurate-random phase diagram and establish that the information per-monomer depends solely on template specificity within the accurate regime. Crucially, even in the accurate region, small error fractions lead to substantial information loss due to the nonlinear relationship between errors and mutual information. Examining the information-to-energy cost ratio reveals non-monotonic behavior as a function of monomer alphabet size, with an optimum determined primarily by the per-monomer assembly free energy. For DNA’s four-base alphabet, we find that the observed effective assembly energy (at least $14,k_B T$) places the system far from the information-transmission optimum, suggesting that biological replication may prioritize the suppression of spontaneous random assembly over information-to-energy efficiency. We also characterize achievable rate-fidelity trade-offs using Shannon bounds, providing a theoretical framework for evaluating future proofreading mechanisms in ensemble models.
326. ❌ Beyond the Virial Expansion: Microscopic Origins of Partial Molar Volumes in LiCl Solutions
作者: Chun-Ting Lin, Diganta Dasgupta, Tinglu Yang, Cesare Malosso, Giulia Sormani, Colin Egan, Giovanni Bussi, Ali Hassanali, Paul S. Cremer 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19622v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Although electrolyte density measurements have been reported for over a century, employing them to obtain accurate partial molar volume (PMV) profiles as a function of salt concentration has remained elusive. Obtaining such curves requires precise density measurements combined with a proper treatment of the associated virial expansion. In this work, we obtain PMV profiles for aqueous LiCl solutions. The resulting data enable the development of highly accurate force fields for Li$^+$ and Cl$^-$ ions, revealing a clear progression from isolated ions to ion pairs and ultimately to higher-order chain and ring structures. Because ion clustering emerges from complex, nonlocal interactions, it cannot be easily mapped onto specific virial terms. Instead, a direct structural and volumetric interpretation can be achieved by partitioning molecular dynamic (MD) simulation snapshots into three-dimensional polyhedral regions associated with individual salt ions and water molecules. The corresponding ionic and water volumes from this treatment quantitatively reproduce the experimental PMV curve. The results demonstrate that the PMV for salt increases (while that of water decreases) up to 6.7 M. Above this concentration, the direction reverses as three- and four-body interactions become prominent. Complementary multivariate curve resolution (MCR) Raman spectroscopy and density functional theory (DFT) calculations elucidate the molecular-level details of water electrostriction, which also persists up to 6.7 M. Significantly, the PMV data can be correlated with key thermodynamic properties, including the osmotic coefficient and the eutectic point. The procedures established here provide a general framework for modeling electrolyte solutions and enable the development of a new generation of accurate force fields for aqueous ions.
327. ❌ Care Trajectories Are Linked to Mental Health and Mortality in Cancer Patients
作者: Simon D. Lindner, Elisabeth L. Zeilinger, Amelie Fuchs, Simone Lubowitzki, Peter Klimek, Alexander Gaiger 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-20 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18431v2
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Treatment of cancer involves heterogeneous, complex care pathways. The relationship between these longitudinal trajectories, baseline mental health, and prognostic outcomes remains poorly understood. We introduce an interpretable time-analysis framework leveraging these temporal dynamics, analyzing care patterns spanning up to 37 years for >8,000 patients. Using Dynamic Time Warping (DTW) and Hierarchical Clustering on sequence data of healthcare encounters, we identified nine distinct, robust trajectory phenotypes. We evaluated their prognostic utility by incorporating them into generalized linear models alongside conventional clinical, demographic, and socioeconomic covariates. The trajectory clusters significantly enhanced mortality prediction and maintained independent predictive significance. Compared to a low-utilization reference group (mortality 31.5%), all eight remaining clusters exhibited substantially higher mortality odds. We uncovered two primary high-risk trajectory patterns: long-term, complex care pathways reflecting chronic disease courses (up to 196 events; mortality OR up to 3.38, 95% CI 2.13-5.37), and shorter but intense trajectories indicating rapid progression (median 78 events; OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.82-2.97). Unexpectedly, the high-utilization complexity clusters were associated with significantly lower baseline anxiety scores, highlighting a divergent relationship between trajectory intensity, mortality risk, and initial psychological burden. These results demonstrate that incorporating temporal healthcare utilization data uncovers robust trajectory phenotypes capturing multidimensional prognostic information. This offers significant explanatory power beyond established static variables for refining risk stratification in precision oncology.
328. ❌ Magnetic coupling between nuclear motion and nuclear spins in molecules
作者: Matthias Diez, Johannes K. Krondorfer, Albert Hirtenfelder, Andreas W. Hauser 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19588v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Among the possible types of magnetic dipole interactions in molecular systems, couplings between nuclear motion and the nuclear spin have probably received the least attention in molecular spectroscopy. Although very small in comparison to effects related to electron spin, this type of hyperfine interaction plays an important role in the NMR spectroscopy of molecular systems. While measurement and prediction of spin-rotation tensors are a common place, vibrationally induced effects still lack a comprehensive description. In this article we develop a generic, theoretical framework that is well embedded in modern electronic structure theory and inspired by the Breit-Pauli Hamiltonian for electronic interactions, distinguishing between nuclear spin-orbit and spin-other-orbit contributions. We show that the interaction of nuclear spins with pseudorotational excitations of highly symmetric molecules may lead to experimentally accessible hyperfine splittings in NMR spectra, triggered by infrared light.
329. ❌ Causality in Liquid Water as a Hallmark of Emergent Glassy Dynamics
作者: Leon Huet, Vittorio Del Tatto, Debarshi Banerjee, Alessandro Laio, Ali A. Hassanali 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19491v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
In molecular liquids such as water, time-delayed influences between microscopic or mesoscopic variables are typically probed using time-correlation functions, which are symmetric under detailed balance and therefore blind to dynamical asymmetries. Here, we characterize waters dynamics using a causal inference metric that captures asymmetric couplings between collective variables. Analyzing equilibrium molecular dynamics simulations at ambient conditions and in the high-density liquid (HDL) regime of supercooled water, we uncover pronounced asymmetries in the couplings between orientational and translational degrees of freedom across multiple time and length scales. At room temperature, rotational modes remain largely decoupled from translations. In contrast, in the supercooled HDL regime, translational motions emerge as the primary drivers of the dynamics, suggesting facilitation-like relaxation mechanisms characteristic of glassy systems. These results reveal a qualitative reorganization of dynamical couplings across thermodynamic conditions, implying that molecular liquids at thermal equilibrium can exhibit an emergent directionality in their fluctuation couplings. As a consequence, our analysis reveals that external perturbations acting on specific degrees of freedom can induce a stronger arrow of time in the causal relations between translational and orientational modes.
330. ❌ Distinct Structural Dynamics of the Semiquinone State Define a Signalling Pathway in Avian Cryptochrome
作者: Monika Kish, Suchitra Pradha, Jessica L. Ramsay, Paloma Munguía Salazar, Jonathan Phillips, Daniel R. Kattnig 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19579v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
The light-dependent magnetic compass of night-migratory songbirds is widely hypothesized to rely on the radical pair mechanism within retinal cryptochrome. However, bridging the mechanistic gap between microsecond quantum spin dynamics and the long-lived, global protein conformational changes required for cellular signalling remains a formidable challenge. Here, we apply redox state-resolved hydrogen/deuterium-exchange mass spectrometry (HDX-MS) to map the conformational landscape of European robin cryptochrome 4a (ErCry4a) across its photocycle. We reveal that photochemical reduction drives robust, allosteric structural transitions across key functional nodes, including the phosphate-binding loop (PBL), protrusion loop (PL), FAD-proximal helix α17, and the C-terminal α22/α23 network. Crucially, we isolate the structural fingerprint of the transient semiquinone, the presumed signalling species. Rather than acting as a linear structural stepping-stone, the semiquinone exhibits a distinct, non-monotonic conformational signature characterized by a transient destabilization of the PBL and PL, contrasting sharply with the global rigidification observed in the fully reduced state. These findings establish the semiquinone as a structurally unique and functionally competent biological entity. Our results provide direct biophysical evidence for a dedicated, high-fidelity structural signalling cascade, detailing how localized quantum-level photochemistry is translated into the precise conformational dynamics required for animal navigation.
331. ❌ Advancing Practical Quantum Embedding Simulations via Operator Commutativity Based State Preparation for Complex Chemical Systems
作者: Dibyendu Mondal, Ashish Kumar Patra, Rahul Maitra 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19470v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Determining the exponentially scaled ground state wavefunction and the associated molecular properties remains one of the central challenges in quantum chemistry. Hybrid quantum-classical algorithms implemented on quantum computers offer a promising route toward addressing this problem. However, despite several successful demonstrations on small molecular systems, accurate simulations of large and chemically realistic molecules remain difficult due to the limited capability of noisy intermediate scale quantum (NISQ) hardware. To bypass the limitations of NISQ devices, while simultaneously retaining the accuracy of the ground state energy estimations, we propose a dynamic ansatz construction strategy based on operator commutativity and energy driven screening within density matrix embedding theory (DMET) framework. The partitioning of the full system allows us to dynamically construct the ansatz over individual embedded subsystems, allowing each embedding problem be solved individually to a desired accuracy. The embedding Hamiltonian is updated in a self-consistent manner with dynamically formulated wavefunction, and their coupled optimization leads to accurate and efficient description of the overall system. To assess the performance of this approach, we apply it to several molecular systems and chemical processes with up to 144 qubits. These simulations require at most 20 qubits at a time and demonstrate improved accuracy and significantly reduced quantum gate requirements compared with conventional ansatze. We further investigate the impact of various fragmentation strategies and demonstrate the adaptability of our approach at each step of the DMET self-consistency cycle that leads to significantly improved accuracy for strongly correlated system.
332. ❌ Towards Application of Nanodiamonds for in-situ Monitoring of Radicals in Liquid Phase Chemical Reactions
作者: Emma Herbst, Sebastian Westrich, Alena Erlenbach, Jonas Gutsche, Maria Wächtler, Elke Neu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19433v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
In many chemical reactions, short-lived radical intermediates play a crucial role, while detecting such short-lived species in-situ remains challenging. The optically readable electronic spin of nitrogen-vacancy (NV) centers in diamond is a nanoscale sensor for such radical species: its longitudinal spin relaxation time (T$_{1}$) reacts to magnetic fluctuations from the unpaired electrons of radical species in its local environment. In this setting, we demonstrate the successful in-situ detection of the nitroxide radical 2,2,6,6-Tetramethylpiperidinyloxyl (TEMPO) using NV center-based T$_1$ relaxometry after depositing nanodiamonds onto the inner wall of a glass cuvette. A significant concentration-dependent shortening of the relaxation time was observed, from $197:μs \pm 21:μs$ without radical to $66:μs \pm 30:μs$ at a concentration of 1 M TEMPO. The detection is sensitive in the nanomolar (nM) range and the determined signal-to-noise ratio is between 1.6 and 3.
333. ❌ An Oracle-Free Quantum Algorithm for Nonadiabatic Quantum Molecular Dynamics
作者: Joshua Courtney 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19319v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Quantum computation is an attractive front for many problems that are intractable for computers today. One such problem is nonadiabatic quantum molecular dynamics, where quantized internal states coupling to parameterized modes result in a Hamiltonian resistant to oracle-based models and spectral decomposition. This dissertation applies diabatic Hamiltonian operators directly to the computational basis as first-quantized split-operator propagators, validated with dynamic observables including absorption and recurrence spectra, scattering cross-sections, population dynamics, and quantum scars. Circuits are derived and specified, with focused circuit optimization in multi-mode and multi-channel extensions, including multivariate potential energy terms and graph theoretic optimization from molecular symmetry. Resource estimation shows circuit depth advantage against QROM-loading architectures on a fault-tolerant scale, and a quantitative comparison against quantum signal processing variants confirms that a Trotter-based architecture retains a scalable T-gate advantage. Expanding beyond electronic states demonstrates that duality between finite basis and discrete variable representations permits congruent structural decompositions into quantum circuits, expanding the use of multi-channel dynamics far beyond chemistry.
334. ❌ Tailoring Attosecond Charge Migration in Native Molecular Ions
作者: Evan Munaro-Langloÿs, Franck Lépine, Victor Despré 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-04-21 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19242v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Attosecond chemistry involves developing strategies to manipulate electronic coherent waves in molecules, which can influence the outcome of photoinduced reactions. While recent progress in this field calls for investigations of increasingly complex isolated or embedded systems, theoretical predictions on attosecond charge migration have remained limited to native neutral species. Since molecules in nature often carry a native charge, there is potential biological and chemical interest in determining whether attosecond charge migration is affected by an additional charge. In this study, we employ high-level correlated methods to study purely electronic dynamics induced by hole-mixing in molecular ions. Our results, obtained for a series of neutral, protonated and deprotonated molecules, reveal that the likelihood of observing attosecond electron dynamics can either be degraded or improved by the presence of an initial charge, and that the existence of the dynamics is correlated with the strength of electron correlation. These findings will stimulate further experimental and theoretical investigations into this unexplored field of attosecond dynamics in molecular ions.
Token 消耗统计
- 总计: 1,442,160 tokens(输入 1,442,160 / 输出 0)