📊 ArXiv 研究报告 (2026-05-09)
生成时间: 2026-05-09 08:52:11 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: 339 篇
- 及格论文: 0 篇 (0.0%)
📋 所有论文列表
1. ❌ BAMI: Training-Free Bias Mitigation in GUI Grounding
作者: Borui Zhang, Bo Zhang, Bo Wang, Wenzhao Zheng, Yuhao Cheng, Liang Tang, Yiqiang Yan, Jie Zhou, Jiwen Lu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06664v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
GUI grounding is a critical capability for enabling GUI agents to execute tasks such as clicking and dragging. However, in complex scenarios like the ScreenSpot-Pro benchmark, existing models often suffer from suboptimal performance. Utilizing the proposed \textbf{Masked Prediction Distribution (MPD)} attribution method, we identify that the primary sources of errors are twofold: high image resolution (leading to precision bias) and intricate interface elements (resulting in ambiguity bias). To address these challenges, we introduce \textbf{Bias-Aware Manipulation Inference (BAMI)}, which incorporates two key manipulations, coarse-to-fine focus and candidate selection, to effectively mitigate these biases. Our extensive experimental results demonstrate that BAMI significantly enhances the accuracy of various GUI grounding models in a training-free setting. For instance, applying our method to the TianXi-Action-7B model boosts its accuracy on the ScreenSpot-Pro benchmark from 51.9% to 57.8%. Furthermore, ablation studies confirm the robustness of the BAMI approach across diverse parameter configurations, highlighting its stability and effectiveness. Code is available at https://github.com/Neur-IO/BAMI.
2. ❌ UniPool: A Globally Shared Expert Pool for Mixture-of-Experts
作者: Minbin Huang, Han Shi, Chuanyang Zheng, Yimeng Wu, Guoxuan Chen, Xintong Yu, Yichun Yin, Hong Cheng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06665v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architectures allocate expert capacity through a rigid per-layer rule: each transformer layer owns a separate expert set. This convention couples depth scaling with linear expert-parameter growth and assumes that every layer needs isolated expert capacity. However, recent analyses and our routing probe challenge this allocation rule: replacing a deeper layer’s learned top-k router with uniform random routing drops downstream accuracy by only 1.0-1.6 points across multiple production MoE models. Motivated by this redundancy, we propose UniPool, an MoE architecture that treats expert capacity as a global architectural budget by replacing per-layer expert ownership with a single shared pool accessed by independent per-layer routers. To enable stable and balanced training under sharing, we introduce a pool-level auxiliary loss that balances expert utilization across the entire pool, and adopt NormRouter to provide sparse and scale-stable routing into the shared expert pool. Across five LLaMA-architecture model scales (182M, 469M, 650M, 830M, and 978M parameters) trained on 30B tokens from the Pile, UniPool consistently improves validation loss and perplexity over the matched vanilla MoE baselines. Across these scales, UniPool reduces validation loss by up to 0.0386 relative to vanilla MoE. Beyond raw loss improvement, our results identify pool size as an explicit depth-scaling hyperparameter: reduced-pool UniPool variants using only 41.6%-66.7% of the vanilla expert-parameter budget match or outperform layer-wise MoE at the tested scales. This shows that, under a shared-pool design, expert parameters need not grow linearly with depth; they can grow sublinearly while remaining more efficient and effective than vanilla MoE. Further analysis shows that UniPool’s benefits compose with finer-grained expert decomposition.
3. ❌ ActCam: Zero-Shot Joint Camera and 3D Motion Control for Video Generation
作者: Omar El Khalifi, Thomas Rossi, Oscar Fossey, Thibault Fouque, Ulysse Mizrahi, Philip Torr, Ivan Laptev, Fabio Pizzati, Baptiste Bellot-Gurlet 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06667v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 artistic applications, video generation requires fine-grained control over both performance and cinematography, i.e., the actor’s motion and the camera trajectory. We present ActCam, a zero-shot method for video generation that jointly transfers character motion from a driving video into a new scene and enables per-frame control of intrinsic and extrinsic camera parameters. ActCam builds on any pretrained image-to-video diffusion model that accepts conditioning in terms of scene depth and character pose. Given a source video with a moving character and a target camera motion, ActCam generates pose and depth conditions that remain geometrically consistent across frames. We then run a single sampling process with a two-phase conditioning schedule: early denoising steps condition on both pose and sparse depth to enforce scene structure, after which depth is dropped and pose-only guidance refines high-frequency details without over-constraining the generation. We evaluate ActCam on multiple benchmarks spanning diverse character motions and challenging viewpoint changes. We find that, compared to pose-only control and other pose and camera methods, ActCam improves camera adherence and motion fidelity, and is preferred in human evaluations, especially under large viewpoint changes. Our results highlight that careful camera-consistent conditioning and staged guidance can enable strong joint camera and motion control without training. Project page: https://elkhomar.github.io/actcam/.
4. ❌ Verifier-Backed Hard Problem Generation for Mathematical Reasoning
作者: Yuhang Lai, Jiazhan Feng, Yee Whye Teh, Ning Miao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06660v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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) demonstrate strong capabilities for solving scientific and mathematical problems, yet they struggle to produce valid, challenging, and novel problems - an essential component for advancing LLM training and enabling autonomous scientific research. Existing problem generation approaches either depend on expensive human expert involvement or adopt naive self-play paradigms, which frequently yield invalid problems due to reward hacking. This work introduces VHG, a verifier-enhanced hard problem generation framework built upon three-party self-play. By integrating an independent verifier into the conventional setter-solver duality, our design constrains the setter’s reward to be jointly determined by problem validity (evaluated by the verifier) and difficulty (assessed by the solver). We instantiate two verifier variants: a Hard symbolic verifier and a Soft LLM-based verifier, with evaluations conducted on indefinite integral tasks and general mathematical reasoning tasks. Experimental results show that VHG substantially outperforms all baseline methods by a clear margin.
5. ❌ Optimizer-Model Consistency: Full Finetuning with the Same Optimizer as Pretraining Forgets Less
作者: Yuxing Liu, Jianyu Wang, Tong Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06654v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Optimizers play an important role in both pretraining and finetuning stages when training large language models (LLMs). In this paper, we present an observation that full finetuning with the same optimizer as in pretraining achieves a better learning-forgetting tradeoff, i.e., forgetting less while achieving the same or better performance on the new task, than other optimizers and, possibly surprisingly, LoRA, during the supervised finetuning (SFT) stage. We term this phenomenon optimizer-model consistency. To better understand it, through controlled experiments and theoretical analysis, we show that: 1) optimizers can shape the models by having regularization effects on the activations, leading to different landscapes around the pretrained checkpoints; 2) in response to this regularization effect, the weight update in SFT should follow some specific structures to lower forgetting of the knowledge learned in pretraining, which can be obtained by using the same optimizer. Moreover, we specifically compare Muon and AdamW when they are employed throughout the pretraining and SFT stages and find that Muon performs worse when finetuned for reasoning tasks. With a synthetic language modeling experiment, we demonstrate that this can come from Muon’s strong tendency towards rote memorization, which may hurt pattern acquisition with a small amount of data, as for SFT.
6. ❌ When No Benchmark Exists: Validating Comparative LLM Safety Scoring Without Ground-Truth Labels
作者: Sushant Gautam, Finn Schwall, Annika Willoch Olstad, Fernando Vallecillos Ruiz, Birk Torpmann-Hagen, Sunniva Maria Stordal Bjørklund, Leon Moonen, Klas Pettersen, Michael A. Riegler 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06652v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Many deployments must compare candidate language models for safety before a labeled benchmark exists for the relevant language, sector, or regulatory regime. We formalize this setting as benchmarkless comparative safety scoring and specify the contract under which a scenario-based audit can be interpreted as deployment evidence. Scores are valid only under a fixed scenario pack, rubric, auditor, judge, sampling configuration, and rerun budget. Because no labels are available, we replace ground-truth agreement with an instrumental-validity chain: responsiveness to a controlled safe-versus-abliterated contrast, dominance of target-driven variance over auditor and judge artifacts, and stability across reruns. We instantiate the chain in SimpleAudit, a local-first scoring instrument, and validate it on a Norwegian safety pack. Safe and abliterated targets separate with AUROC values between 0.89 and 1.00, target identity is the dominant variance component ($η^2 \approx 0.52$), and severity profiles stabilize by ten reruns. Applying the same chain to Petri shows that it admits both tools. The substantial differences arise upstream of the chain, in claim-contract enforcement and deployment fit. A Norwegian public-sector procurement case comparing Borealis and Gemma 3 demonstrates the resulting evidence in practice: the safer model depends on scenario category and risk measure. Consequently, scores, matched deltas, critical rates, uncertainty, and the auditor and judge used must be reported together rather than collapsed into a single ranking.
7. ❌ AI Co-Mathematician: Accelerating Mathematicians with Agentic AI
作者: Daniel Zheng, Ingrid von Glehn, Yori Zwols, Iuliya Beloshapka, Lars Buesing, Daniel M. Roy, Martin Wattenberg, Bogdan Georgiev, Tatiana Schmidt, Andrew Cowie, Fernanda Viegas, Dimitri Kanevsky, Vineet Kahlon, Hartmut Maennel, Sophia Alj, George Holland, Alex Davies, Pushmeet Kohli 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06651v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 AI co-mathematician, a workbench for mathematicians to interactively leverage AI agents to pursue open-ended research. The AI co-mathematician is optimized to provide holistic support for the exploratory and iterative reality of mathematical workflows, including ideation, literature search, computational exploration, theorem proving and theory building. By providing an asynchronous, stateful workspace that manages uncertainty, refines user intent, tracks failed hypotheses, and outputs native mathematical artifacts, the system mirrors human collaborative workflows. In early tests, the AI co-mathematician helped researchers solve open problems, identify new research directions, and uncover overlooked literature references. Besides demonstrating a highly interactive paradigm for AI-assisted mathematical discovery, the AI co-mathematician also achieves state of the art results on hard problem-solving benchmarks, including scoring 48% on FrontierMath Tier 4, a new high score among all AI systems evaluated.
8. ❌ Superintelligent Retrieval Agent: The Next Frontier of Information Retrieval
作者: Zeyu Yang, Qi Ma, Jason Chen, Anshumali Shrivastava 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06647v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Retrieval-augmented agents are increasingly the interface to large organizational knowledge bases, yet most still treat retrieval as a black box: they issue exploratory queries, inspect returned snippets, and iteratively reformulate until useful evidence emerges. This approach resembles how a newcomer searches an unfamiliar database rather than how an expert navigates it with strong priors about terminology and likely evidence, and results in unnecessary retrieval rounds, increased latency, and poor recall. We introduce \textit{SuperIntelligent Retrieval Agent} (SIRA), which defines \emph{superintelligence} in retrieval as the ability to compress multi-round exploratory search into a single corpus-discriminative retrieval action. SIRA does not merely ask what terms are relevant to the query; it asks which terms are likely to separate the desired evidence from corpus-level confusers. On the corpus side, an LLM enriches each document offline with missing search vocabulary; on the query side, it predicts evidence vocabulary omitted by the query; and document-frequency statistics as a tool call to filter proposed terms that are absent, overly common, or unlikely to create retrieval margin. The final retrieval step is a single weighted BM25 call combining the original query with the validated expansion. Across ten BEIR benchmarks and downstream question-answering tasks, SIRA achieves the significantly superior performance outperforming dense retrievers and state-of-the-art multi-round agentic baselines, demonstrating that one well-formed lexical query, guided by LLM cognition and lightweight corpus statistics, can exceed substantially more expensive multi-round search while remaining interpretable, training-free, and efficient.
9. ❌ Are We Making Progress in Multimodal Domain Generalization? A Comprehensive Benchmark Study
作者: Hao Dong, Hongzhao Li, Shupan Li, Muhammad Haris Khan, Eleni Chatzi, Olga Fink 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06643v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 popularity of Multimodal Domain Generalization (MMDG) for enhancing model robustness, it remains unclear whether reported performance gains reflect genuine algorithmic progress or are artifacts of inconsistent evaluation protocols. Current research is fragmented, with studies varying significantly across datasets, modality configurations, and experimental settings. Furthermore, existing benchmarks focus predominantly on action recognition, often neglecting critical real-world challenges such as input corruptions, missing modalities, and model trustworthiness. This lack of standardization obscures a reliable assessment of the field’s advancement. To address this issue, we introduce MMDG-Bench, the first unified and comprehensive benchmark for MMDG, which standardizes evaluation across six datasets spanning three diverse tasks: action recognition, mechanical fault diagnosis, and sentiment analysis. MMDG-Bench encompasses six modality combinations, nine representative methods, and multiple evaluation settings. Beyond standard accuracy, it systematically assesses corruption robustness, missing-modality generalization, misclassification detection, and out-of-distribution detection. With 7, 402 neural networks trained in total across 95 unique cross-domain tasks, MMDG-Bench yields five key findings: (1) under fair comparisons, recent specialized MMDG methods offer only marginal improvements over ERM baseline; (2) no single method consistently outperforms others across datasets or modality combinations; (3) a substantial gap to upper-bound performance persists, indicating that MMDG remains far from solved; (4) trimodal fusion does not consistently outperform the strongest bimodal configurations; and (5) all evaluated methods exhibit significant degradation under corruption and missing-modality scenarios, with some methods further compromising model trustworthiness.
10. ❌ StraTA: Incentivizing Agentic Reinforcement Learning with Strategic Trajectory Abstraction
作者: Xiangyuan Xue, Yifan Zhou, Zidong Wang, Shengji Tang, Philip Torr, Wanli Ouyang, Lei Bai, Zhenfei Yin 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06642v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 interactive agents, but optimizing them for long-horizon decision making remains difficult because current methods are largely purely reactive, which weakens both exploration and credit assignment over extended trajectories. In this work, we present Strategic Trajectory Abstraction (StraTA), a simple framework that introduces an explicit trajectory-level strategy into agentic reinforcement learning (RL). StraTA samples a compact strategy from the initial task state, conditions subsequent actions on that strategy, and trains strategy generation and action execution jointly with a hierarchical GRPO-style rollout design, further enhanced by diverse strategy rollout and critical self-judgment. Experiments on ALFWorld, WebShop, and SciWorld show that StraTA consistently improves both sample efficiency and final performance over strong baselines. StraTA reaches success rates of 93.1% on ALFWorld and 84.2% on WebShop. On SciWorld, StraTA attains a 63.5% overall score, outperforming frontier closed-source models.
11. ❌ GlazyBench: A Benchmark for Ceramic Glaze Property Prediction and Image Generation
作者: Ziyu Zhai, Siyou Li, Juexi Shao, Juntao Yu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06641v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 ceramic glazes is a costly, time-consuming process of trial and error due to complex chemistry, placing a significant burden on independent artists. While recent advances in multimodal AI offer a modern solution, the field lacks the large-scale datasets required to train these models. We propose GlazyBench, the first dataset for AI-assisted glaze design. Comprising 23,148 real glaze formulations, GlazyBench supports two primary tasks: predicting post-firing surface properties, such as color and transparency, from raw materials, and generating accurate visual representations of the glaze based on these properties. We establish comprehensive baselines for property prediction using traditional machine learning and large language models, alongside image generation benchmarks using deep generative and large multimodal models. Our experiments demonstrate promising yet challenging results. GlazyBench pioneers a new research direction in AI-assisted material design, providing a standardized benchmark for systematic evaluation.
12. ❌ Concept-Based Abductive and Contrastive Explanations for Behaviors of Vision Models
作者: Ronaldo Canizales, Divya Gopinath, Corina Păsăreanu, Ravi Mangal 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06640v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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-based explanations offer a promising approach for explaining the predictions of deep neural networks in terms of high-level, human-understandable concepts. However, existing methods either do not establish a causal connection between the concepts and model predictions or are limited in expressivity and only able to infer causal explanations involving single concepts. At the same time, the parallel line of work on formal abductive and contrastive explanations computes the minimal set of input features causally relevant for model outcomes but only considers low-level features such as pixels. Merging these two threads, in this work, we propose the notion of concept-based abductive and contrastive explanations that capture the minimal sets of high-level concepts causally relevant for model outcomes. We then present a family of algorithms that enumerate all minimal explanations while using concept erasure procedures to establish causal relationships. By appropriately aggregating such explanations, we are not only able to understand model predictions on individual images but also on collections of images where the model exhibits a user-specified, common behavior. We evaluate our approach on multiple models, datasets, and behaviors, and demonstrate its effectiveness in computing helpful, user-friendly explanations.
13. ❌ Recursive Agent Optimization
作者: Apurva Gandhi, Satyaki Chakraborty, Xiangjun Wang, Aviral Kumar, Graham Neubig 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06639v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 Recursive Agent Optimization (RAO), a reinforcement learning approach for training recursive agents: agents that can spawn and delegate sub-tasks to new instantiations of themselves recursively. Recursive agents implement an inference-time scaling algorithm that naturally allows agents to scale to longer contexts and generalize to more difficult problems via divide-and-conquer. RAO provides a method to train models to best take advantage of such recursive inference, teaching agents when and how to delegate and communicate. We find that recursive agents trained in this way enjoy better training efficiency, can scale to tasks that go beyond the model’s context window, generalize to tasks much harder than the ones the agent was trained on, and can enjoy reduced wall-clock time compared to single-agent systems.
14. ❌ Can RL Teach Long-Horizon Reasoning to LLMs? Expressiveness Is Key
作者: Tianle Wang, Zhaoyang Wang, Guangchen Lan, Xinpeng Wei, Sipeng Zhang, Guanwen Qiu, Abulhair Saparov 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06638v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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) has been applied to improve large language model (LLM) reasoning, yet the systematic study of how training scales with task difficulty has been hampered by the lack of controlled, scalable environments. We introduce ScaleLogic, a synthetic logical reasoning framework that offers independent control over two axes of difficulty: the depth of the required proof planning (i.e., the horizon) and the expressiveness of the underlying logic. Our proposed framework supports a wide range of logics: from simple implication-only logic (“if-then”) towards more expressive first-order reasoning with conjunction (“and”), disjunction (“or”), negation (“not”), and universal quantification (“for all”). Using this framework, we show that the RL training compute $T$ follows a power law with respect to reasoning depth $D$ ($T \propto D^γ$, $R^{2} > 0.99$), and that the scaling exponent $γ$ increases monotonically with logical expressiveness, from $1.04$ to $2.60$. On downstream mathematics and general reasoning benchmarks, more expressive training settings yield both larger performance gains (up to $+10.66$ points) and more compute-efficient transfer compared to less expressive settings, demonstrating that what a model is trained on, not just how much it is trained, shapes downstream transfer. We further show that the power-law relationship holds across multiple RL methods, and curriculum-based training substantially improves scaling efficiency.
15. ❌ MASPO: Joint Prompt Optimization for LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems
作者: Zhexuan Wang, Xuebo Liu, Li Wang, Zifei Shan, Yutong Wang, Zhenxi Song, Min Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06623v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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)-based Multi-agent systems (MAS) have shown promise in tackling complex collaborative tasks, where agents are typically orchestrated via role-specific prompts. While the quality of these prompts is pivotal, jointly optimizing them across interacting agents remains a non-trivial challenge, primarily due to the misalignment between local agent objectives and holistic system goals. To address this, we introduce MASPO, a novel framework designed to automatically and iteratively refine prompts across the entire system. A core innovation of MASPO is its joint evaluation mechanism, which assesses prompts not merely by their local validity, but by their capacity to facilitate downstream success for successor agents. This effectively bridges the gap between local interactions and global outcomes without relying on ground-truth labels. Furthermore, MASPO employs a data-driven evolutionary beam search to efficiently navigate the high-dimensional prompt space. Extensive empirical evaluations across 6 diverse tasks demonstrate that MASPO consistently outperforms state-of-the-art prompt optimization methods, achieving an average accuracy improvement of 2.9. We release our code at https://github.com/wangzx1219/MASPO.
16. ❌ When and Why SignSGD Outperforms SGD: A Theoretical Study Based on $\ell_1$-norm Lower Bounds
作者: Hongyi Tao, Dingzhi Yu, Lijun Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06615v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Sign-based optimization algorithms, such as SignSGD and Muon, have garnered significant attention for their remarkable performance in training large foundation models. Despite this empirical success, we still lack a theoretical understanding of when and why these sign-based methods outperform vanilla SGD. The core obstacle is that under standard smoothness and finite variance conditions, SGD is known to be minimax optimal for finding stationary points measured by $\ell_2$-norms, thereby fundamentally precluding any complexity gains for sign-based methods in standard settings. To overcome this barrier, we analyze sign-based optimizers leveraging $\ell_1$-norm stationarity, $\ell_\infty$-smoothness, and a separable noise model, which can better capture the coordinate-wise nature of signed updates. Under this distinct problem geometry, we derive matched upper and lower bounds for SignSGD and explicitly characterize the problem class in which SignSGD provably dominates SGD. Specifically, we compare the \emph{upper bound of SignSGD} with the \emph{lower bound of SGD}, illustrating that SignSGD effectively reduces the complexity by a factor of $d$ under \emph{sparse noise}, where $d$ is the problem dimension. Furthermore, we elevate this framework to the matrix domain, providing an equivalent optimal lower bound for the Muon optimizer, proving that extending the sign operator to matrices preserves this optimal scaling with dimensionality. Finally, we bridge our theoretical bounds to practice, demonstrating that the theoretical superiority of SignSGD accurately predicts its faster convergence during the pretraining of a 124M parameter GPT-2 model.
17. ❌ SkillOS: Learning Skill Curation for Self-Evolving Agents
作者: Siru Ouyang, Jun Yan, Yanfei Chen, Rujun Han, Zifeng Wang, Bhavana Dalvi Mishra, Rui Meng, Chun-Liang Li, Yizhu Jiao, Kaiwen Zha, Maohao Shen, Vishy Tirumalashetty, George Lee, Jiawei Han, Tomas Pfister, Chen-Yu Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06614v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 agents are increasingly deployed to handle streaming tasks, yet they often remain one-off problem solvers that fail to learn from past interactions. Reusable skills distilled from experience provide a natural substrate for self-evolution, where high-quality skill curation serves as the key bottleneck. Existing approaches either rely on manual skill curation, prescribe heuristic skill operations, or train for short-horizon skill operations. However, they still struggle to learn complex long-term curation policies from indirect and delayed feedback. To tackle this challenge, we propose SkillOS, an experience-driven RL training recipe for learning skill curation in self-evolving agents. SkillOS pairs a frozen agent executor that retrieves and applies skills with a trainable skill curator that updates an external SkillRepo from accumulated experience. To provide learning signals for curation, we design composite rewards and train on grouped task streams based on skill-relevant task dependencies, where earlier trajectories update the SkillRepo, and later related tasks evaluate these updates. Across multi-turn agentic tasks and single-turn reasoning tasks, SkillOS consistently outperforms memory-free and strong memory-based baselines in both effectiveness and efficiency, with the learned skill curator generalizing across different executor backbones and task domains. Further analyses show that the learned curator produces more targeted skill use, while the skills in SkillRepo evolve into more richly structured Markdown files that encode higher-level meta-skills over time.
18. ❌ The Structural Origin of Attention Sink: Variance Discrepancy, Super Neurons, and Dimension Disparity
作者: Siquan Li, Kaiqi Jiang, Jiacheng Sun, Tianyang Hu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06611v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 prevalence of the attention sink phenomenon in Large Language Models (LLMs), where initial tokens disproportionately monopolize attention scores, its structural origins remain elusive. This work provides a \textit{mechanistic explanation} for this phenomenon. First, we trace its root to the value aggregation process inherent in self-attention, which induces a systematic variance discrepancy. We further demonstrate that this discrepancy is drastically amplified by the activation of super neurons within Feed-Forward Network (FFN) layers. Specifically, the channel-sparse down-projections trigger a dimension disparity of the first-token representation, necessitating the formation of attention sinks as a structural anchor. Then, we validate this causal chain through two controlled interventions: (i) isolating the aggregation effect via attention mask modifications and (ii) amplifying the variance of targeted token representations. Both interventions can replicate attention sinks at arbitrary positions. Our mechanistic understanding offers a foundation for the systematic control of sink formation. Finally, as a proof of concept, we propose \textit{head-wise RMSNorm}, an architectural modification that stabilizes value aggregation outputs during pre-training. Our experiments demonstrate that restoring statistical parity across positions significantly accelerates convergence.
19. ❌ AI CFD Scientist: Toward Open-Ended Computational Fluid Dynamics Discovery with Physics-Aware AI Agents
作者: Nithin Somasekharan, Rabi Pathak, Manushri Dhanakoti, Tingwen Zhang, Ling Yue, Andy Zhu, Shaowu Pan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06607v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 LLM-based agents have closed substantial portions of the scientific discovery loop in software-only machine-learning research, in chemistry, and in biology. Extending the same loop to high-fidelity physical simulators is harder, because solver completion does not imply physical validity and many failure modes appear only in field-level imagery rather than in solver logs. We present AI CFD Scientist, an open-source AI scientist for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) that, to our knowledge, is the first to span literature-grounded ideation, validated execution, vision-based physics verification, source-code modification, and figure-grounded writing within a single inspectable workflow. Three coupled pathways cover parameter sweeps within a fixed solver, case-local C++ library compilation for new physical models, and open-ended hypothesis search against a reference comparator, all running on OpenFOAM through Foam-Agent. At the center of the framework is a vision-language physics-verification gate that inspects rendered flow fields before any result is accepted, rerun, or written into a manuscript. On five tasks under a shared GPT-5.5 backbone, AI CFD Scientist autonomously discovers a Spalart-Allmaras runtime correction that reduces lower-wall Cf RMSE against DNS by 7.89% on the periodic hill at Reh=5600; under matched LLM cost, two strong general AI-scientist baselines (ARIS, DeepScientist) execute partial CFD workflows but lack the domain-specific validity gates needed to convert runs into defensible scientific claims; and a controlled planted-failure ablation shows that the vision-language gate detects 14 of 16 silent failures missed by solver-level checks. Code, prompts, and run artifacts are released at https://github.com/csml-rpi/cfd-scientist.
20. ❌ UniSD: Towards a Unified Self-Distillation Framework for Large Language Models
作者: Yiqiao Jin, Yiyang Wang, Lucheng Fu, Yijia Xiao, Yinyi Luo, Haoxin Liu, B. Aditya Prakash, Josiah Hester, Jindong Wang, Srijan Kumar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06597v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Self-distillation (SD) offers a promising path for adapting large language models (LLMs) without relying on stronger external teachers. However, SD in autoregressive LLMs remains challenging because self-generated trajectories are free-form, correctness is task-dependent, and plausible rationales can still provide unstable or unreliable supervision. Existing methods mainly examine isolated design choices, leaving their effectiveness, roles, and interactions unclear. In this paper, we propose UniSD, a unified framework to systematically study self-distillation. UniSD integrates complementary mechanisms that address supervision reliability, representation alignment, and training stability, including multi-teacher agreement, EMA teacher stabilization, token-level contrastive learning, feature matching, and divergence clipping. Across six benchmarks and six models from three model families, UniSD reveals when self-distillation improves over static imitation, which components drive the gains, and how these components interact across tasks. Guided by these insights, we construct UniSDfull, an integrated pipeline that combines complementary components and achieves the strongest overall performance, improving over the base model by +5.4 points and the strongest baseline by +2.8 points. Extensive evaluation highlights self-distillation as a practical and steerable approach for efficient LLM adaptation without stronger external teachers.
21. ❌ Patch2Vuln: Agentic Reconstruction of Vulnerabilities from Linux Distribution Binary Patches
作者: Isaac David, Arthur Gervais 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06601v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Security updates create a short but important window in which defenders and attackers can compare vulnerable and patched software. Yet in many operational settings, the most accessible artifacts are binary packages rather than source patches or advisory text. This paper asks whether a language-model agent, restricted to local binary-derived evidence, can reconstruct the security meaning of Linux distribution updates. Patch2Vuln is a local, resumable pipeline that extracts old/new ELF pairs, diffs them with Ghidra and Ghidriff, ranks changed functions, builds candidate dossiers, and asks an offline agent to produce a preliminary audit, bounded validation plan, and final audit. We evaluate Patch2Vuln on 25 Ubuntu
.debpackage pairs: 20 security-update pairs and five negative controls, all manually adjudicated against private source-patch and binary-function ground truth. The agent localizes a verified security-relevant patch function in 10 of 20 security pairs and assigns an accepted final root-cause class in 11 of 20. Oracle diagnostics show that six security pairs fail before model reasoning because the binary differ or ranker omits the right function, with one additional context-export miss. A separate bounded validation pass produces two target-level minimized behavioral old/new differentials, both for tcpdump, but no crash, timeout, sanitizer finding, or memory-corruption proof; all five negative controls are classified as unknown and produce no validation differentials. These results support agentic vulnerability reconstruction from binary patches as a useful research target while showing that binary-diff coverage and local behavioral validation remain the limiting components.
22. ❌ Cross-Modal Navigation with Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning
作者: Shuo Liu, Xinzichen Li, Christopher Amato 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06595v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 embodied navigation relies on complementary sensory cues. However, high-quality and well-aligned multi-modal data is often difficult to obtain in practice. Training a monolithic model is also challenging as rich multi-modal inputs induce complex representations and substantially enlarge the policy space. Cross-modal collaboration among lightweight modality-specialized agents offers a scalable paradigm. It enables flexible deployment and parallel execution, while preserving the strength of each modality. In this paper, we propose \textbf{CRONA}, a Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) framework for \textbf{Cro}ss-Modal \textbf{Na}vigation. CRONA improves collaboration by leveraging control-relevant auxiliary beliefs and a centralized multi-modal critic with global state. Experiments on visual-acoustic navigation tasks show that multi-agent methods significantly improve performance and efficiency over single-agent baselines. We find that homogeneous collaboration with limited modalities is sufficient for short-range navigation under salient cues; heterogeneous collaboration among agents with complementary modalities is generally efficient and effective; and navigation in large, complex environments requires both richer multi-modal perception and increased model capacity.
23. ❌ DINORANKCLIP: DINOv3 Distillation and Injection for Vision-Language Pretraining with High-Order Ranking Consistency
作者: Shuyang Jiang, Nan Yu, Yiming Zhang, Zenghui Ding, Zhenyu Wu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06592v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Contrastive language-image pretraining (CLIP) suffers from two structural weaknesses: the symmetric InfoNCE loss discards the relative ordering among unmatched in-batch pairs, and global pooling collapses the visual representation into a semantic bottleneck that is poorly sensitive to fine-grained local structure. RANKCLIP partially addresses the first issue with a list-wise Plackett-Luce ranking-consistency loss, but its model is strictly first-order and inherits the second weakness untouched. We propose DINORANKCLIP, a pretraining framework that addresses both jointly. Our principal contribution is injecting a frozen DINOv3 teacher into the contrastive trunk through a dual-branch lightweight student and a multi-scale fusion module with channel-spatial attention, a self-attention refiner, and a conflict-aware gate that preserves the cross-modal alignment up to first order. Complementarily, we introduce a high-order Plackett-Luce ranking model in which the per-position utility is augmented with attention-parameterised pairwise and tuple-wise transition terms; the family contains CLIP and RANKCLIP as nested zero-order and first-order special cases, and the optimal order on every benchmark is $R^*=3$. The full empirical study – order sweep, Fine-grained Probe on five datasets, four-node Modality-Gap analysis, six-variant Fusion ablation – fits in 72 hours on a single eight-GPU H100 node and trains entirely on Conceptual Captions 3M. DINORANKCLIP consistently outperforms CLIP, CyCLIP, ALIP, and RANKCLIP under matched compute, with the largest relative gains on the fine-grained and out-of-distribution evaluations that most directly stress local structural reasoning.
24. ❌ Towards Metric-Faithful Neural Graph Matching
作者: Jyotirmaya Shivottam, Subhankar Mishra 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06588v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 Edit Distance (GED) is a fundamental, albeit NP-hard, metric for structural graph similarity. Recent neural graph matching architectures approximate GED by first encoding graphs with a Graph Neural Network (GNN) and then applying either a graph-level regression head or a matching-based alignment module. Despite substantial architectural progress, the role of encoder geometry in neural GED estimation remains poorly understood. In this paper, we develop a theoretical framework that connects encoder geometry to GED estimation quality for two broad classes of neural GED estimators: graph similarity predictors and alignment-based methods. On fixed graph collections, where the doubly-stochastic metric $d_{\mathrm{DS}}$ is comparable to GED, we show that graph-level bi-Lipschitz encoders yield controlled GED surrogates and improved ranking stability; for matching-based estimators, node-level bi-Lipschitz geometry propagates to encoder-induced alignment costs and the resulting optimized alignment objective. We instantiate this perspective using FSW-GNN, a bi-Lipschitz WL-equivalent encoder, as a drop-in replacement in representative neural GED architectures. Across representative baselines and benchmark datasets, the resulting geometry-aware variants significantly improve GED prediction and ranking metrics. A faithfulness case study of untrained encoders, together with ablations and transfer experiments, supports the view that these gains arise from improved representation geometry, positioning encoder geometry as a useful design principle for neural graph matching.
25. ❌ NeuroAgent: LLM Agents for Multimodal Neuroimaging Analysis and Research
作者: Lujia Zhong, Yihao Xia, Jianwei Zhang, Shuo huang, Jiaxin Yue, Mingyang Xia, Yonggang Shi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06584v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 neuroimaging analysis often involves complex, modality-specific preprocessing workflows that require careful configuration, quality control, and coordination across heterogeneous toolchains. Beyond preprocessing, downstream statistical analysis and disease classification commonly require task-specific code, evaluation protocols, and data-format conventions, creating additional barriers between raw acquisitions and reproducible scientific analysis. We present NeuroAgent, an LLM-driven agentic framework that automates key preprocessing and analysis steps for heterogeneous neuroimaging data, including sMRI, fMRI, dMRI, and PET, and supports interactive downstream analysis through natural-language queries. NeuroAgent employs a hierarchical multi-agent architecture with a feedback-driven Generate-Execute-Validate engine: agents autonomously generate executable preprocessing code, detect and recover from runtime errors, and validate output integrity. We evaluate the system on 1,470 subjects pooled across all ADNI phases (CN=1,000, AD=470), where all subjects have sMRI and tabular data, with subsets also having Tau-PET (n=469), fMRI (n=278), and DTI ($n=620$). Pipeline ablation studies across multiple LLM backends show that capable models reach up to 100% intent-parsing accuracy, with the strongest backend (Qwen3.5-27B) reaching 84.8% end-to-end preprocessing step correctness. Automated recovery limits manual intervention to edge cases where human review is required via the Human-In-The-Loop interface. For Alzheimer’s Disease classification using automatically preprocessed multimodal data, our agent ensemble achieves an AUC of 0.9518 with four modalities, outperforming all single-modality baselines. These results show that NeuroAgent can reduce the manual effort required for neuroimaging preprocessing and enable end-to-end automated analysis pipelines for neuroimaging research.
26. ❌ Improved techniques for fine-tuning flow models via adjoint matching: a deterministic control pipeline
作者: Zhengyi Guo, Jiayuan Sheng, David D. Yao, Wenpin Tang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06583v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 deterministic adjoint matching framework that formulates human preference alignment for flow-based generative models as an optimal control problem over velocity fields. One can directly regress the control toward a value-gradient-induced target under the current policy, leading to a simple and stable training objective. Building on this perspective, we introduce a truncated adjoint scheme that focuses computation on the terminal portion of the trajectory, where reward-relevant signals concentrate, which yields substantial computational savings while preserving alignment quality. We further generalize the framework beyond standard KL-based regularization, allowing more flexible trade-offs between alignment strength and distributional preservation. Experiments on SiT-XL/2 and FLUX.2-Klein-4B demonstrate consistent gains across multiple alignment metrics, along with substantially improved diversity and mode preservation.
27. ❌ Directional Consistency as a Complementary Optimization Signal: The GONO Framework
作者: Victor Daniel Gera 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06575v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 identify and formalize an underexplored phenomenon in deep learning optimization: directional alignment and loss convergence can be decoupled. An optimizer can exhibit near-perfect directional consistency (cc_t -> 1, measured via consecutive gradient cosine similarity) while the loss remains high or decreases slowly. This observation reveals that existing optimizers such as Adam, SGD, and RMSprop lack explicit mechanisms to exploit temporal consistency in gradient directions, relying instead on magnitude-based signals that fail to distinguish plateaus, saddle points, and genuine convergence. Motivated by this, we introduce GONO (Gradient-Oriented Norm-Adaptive Optimizer), which adapts Adam’s momentum coefficient beta_1 based on cc_t: amplifying momentum under directional consistency and suppressing it during oscillation. We prove GONO matches Adam’s O(1/sqrt(T)) convergence rate and reduces exactly to Adam when the signal is uninformative. Empirically, cc_t achieves oscillation detection with F1=1.00 (vs. 0.45 for gradient norm), and GONO remains competitive with AdamW on MNIST (98.15%), CIFAR-10 (43.14%), and ResNet-18 (75.44%), establishing directional alignment as a theoretically grounded, practically actionable optimization signal. Code: https://github.com/victordaniel/gono-optimizer
28. ❌ Coordination Matters: Evaluation of Cooperative Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning
作者: Maria Ana Cardei, Matthew Landers, Afsaneh Doryab 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06557v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Cooperative multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) benchmarks commonly emphasize aggregate outcomes such as return, success rate, or completion time. While essential, these metrics often fail to reveal how agents coordinate, particularly in settings where agents, tasks, and joint assignment choices scale combinatorially. We propose a coordination-aware evaluation perspective that supplements return with process-level diagnostics. We instantiate this perspective using STAT, a controlled commitment-constrained spatial task-allocation testbed that systematically varies agents, tasks, and environment size while holding observation access and task rules fixed. We evaluate six representative value-based MARL methods across varying levels of centralization. Our results show that similar return trends can reflect distinct coordination mechanisms, including differences in redundant assignment, assignment diversity, and task-completion efficiency. We find that in commitment-constrained task allocation, performance under scale is shaped not only by nominal action-space size, but also by assignment pressure, sparse decision opportunities, and redundant choices among interdependent agents. Our findings motivate coordination-aware evaluation as a necessary complement to return-based benchmarking for cooperative MARL.
29. ❌ Ex Ante Evaluation of AI-Induced Idea Diversity Collapse
作者: Nafis Saami Azad, Raiyan Abdul Baten 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06540v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Creative AI systems are typically evaluated at the level of individual utility, yet creative outputs are consumed in populations: an idea loses value when many others produce similar ones. This creates an evaluation blind spot, as AI can improve individual outputs while increasing population-level crowding. We introduce a human-relative framework for benchmarking AI-induced human diversity collapse without requiring human-AI interaction data, providing an ex ante protocol to estimate crowding risk from model-only generations and matched unaided human baselines. By modeling ideas as congestible resources, we show that source-level crowding is identifiable from within-distribution comparisons, yielding an excess-crowding coefficient $Δ$ and a human-relative diversity ratio $ρ$. We show that $ρ\ge1$ is the no-excess-crowding parity condition and connect $Δ$ to an adoption game with exposure-dependent redundancy costs. Across short stories, marketing slogans, and alternative-uses tasks, three frontier LLMs fall below parity across crowding kernels. Estimates stabilize with feasible model-only sample sizes. Importantly, generation-protocol variants show that crowding can be reduced through targeted design, making diversity collapse an actionable, development-time evaluation target for population-aware creative AI.
30. ❌ Continuous Latent Diffusion Language Model
作者: Hongcan Guo, Qinyu Zhao, Yian Zhao, Shen Nie, Rui Zhu, Qiushan Guo, Feng Wang, Tao Yang, Hengshuang Zhao, Guoqiang Wei, Yan Zeng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06548v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 success under the autoregressive paradigm, yet high-quality text generation need not be tied to a fixed left-to-right order. Existing alternatives still struggle to jointly achieve generation efficiency, scalable representation learning, and effective global semantic modeling. We propose Cola DLM, a hierarchical latent diffusion language model that frames text generation through hierarchical information decomposition. Cola DLM first learns a stable text-to-latent mapping with a Text VAE, then models a global semantic prior in continuous latent space with a block-causal DiT, and finally generates text through conditional decoding. From a unified Markov-path perspective, its diffusion process performs latent prior transport rather than token-level observation recovery, thereby separating global semantic organization from local textual realization. This design yields a more flexible non-autoregressive inductive bias, supports semantic compression and prior fitting in continuous space, and naturally extends to other continuous modalities. Through experiments spanning 4 research questions, 8 benchmarks, strictly matched ~2B-parameter autoregressive and LLaDA baselines, and scaling curves up to about 2000 EFLOPs, we identify an effective overall configuration of Cola DLM and verify its strong scaling behavior for text generation. Taken together, the results establish hierarchical continuous latent prior modeling as a principled alternative to strictly token-level language modeling, where generation quality and scaling behavior may better reflect model capability than likelihood, while also suggesting a concrete path toward unified modeling across discrete text and continuous modalities.
31. ❌ Sparkle: Realizing Lively Instruction-Guided Video Background Replacement via Decoupled Guidance
作者: Ziyun Zeng, Yiqi Lin, Guoqiang Liang, Mike Zheng Shou 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06535v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 recent years, open-source efforts like Senorita-2M have propelled video editing toward natural language instruction. However, current publicly available datasets predominantly focus on local editing or style transfer, which largely preserve the original scene structure and are easier to scale. In contrast, Background Replacement, a task central to creative applications such as film production and advertising, requires synthesizing entirely new, temporally consistent scenes while maintaining accurate foreground-background interactions, making large-scale data generation significantly more challenging. Consequently, this complex task remains largely underexplored due to a scarcity of high-quality training data. This gap is evident in poorly performing state-of-the-art models, e.g., Kiwi-Edit, because the primary open-source dataset that contains this task, i.e., OpenVE-3M, frequently produces static, unnatural backgrounds. In this paper, we trace this quality degradation to a lack of precise background guidance during data synthesis. Accordingly, we design a scalable pipeline that generates foreground and background guidance in a decoupled manner with strict quality filtering. Building on this pipeline, we introduce Sparkle, a dataset of ~140K video pairs spanning five common background-change themes, alongside Sparkle-Bench, the largest evaluation benchmark tailored for background replacement to date. Experiments demonstrate that our dataset and the model trained on it achieve substantially better performance than all existing baselines on both OpenVE-Bench and Sparkle-Bench. Our proposed dataset, benchmark, and model are fully open-sourced at https://showlab.github.io/Sparkle/.
32. ❌ Market-Alignment Risk in Pricing Agents: Trace Diagnostics and Trace-Prior RL under Hidden Competitor State
作者: Peiying Zhu, Sidi Chang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06529v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Outcome metrics can certify the wrong behavior. We study this failure in a two-hotel revenue-management simulator where Hotel A trains an agent against a fixed rule-based revenue-management competitor, Hotel B. A standard learning agent can obtain near-reference revenue per available room (RevPAR) while failing to learn market-like yield management: it sells too aggressively, undercuts, or collapses to modal price buckets. We diagnose this as a Goodhart-style failure under partial observability. Hotel A cannot observe the competitor’s remaining inventory, booking curve, or pricing rule, so the same Hotel A-visible state maps to multiple plausible Hotel B prices. Deterministic value-based RL and deterministic copying collapse this unresolved uncertainty into shortcut behavior. We introduce a trace-level diagnostic protocol using RevPAR, occupancy, ADR, full price-bucket distributions, L1/JS distances, and seed-level confidence intervals. The verified repair is Trace-Prior RL: learn a distributional market prior from lagged market traces, then train a stochastic pricing policy with a RevPAR reward and a KL penalty to the learned prior. The final policy matches Hotel B’s RevPAR, occupancy, ADR, and price distribution within seed-level uncertainty, while still optimizing Hotel A’s own reward. We argue that the contribution is not a new optimizer and not a hotel-pricing leaderboard, but a reproducible failure-and-repair recipe for agentic systems where scalar rewards are easy to game and the intended behavior is only visible in traces. A key finding is that higher exact action accuracy can worsen aggregate trace alignment when the target is distributional.
33. ❌ SpatialEpiBench: Benchmarking Spatial Information and Epidemic Priors in Forecasting
作者: Ruiqi Lyu, Alistair Turcan, Bryan Wilder 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06530v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 epidemic forecasting is crucial for public health response, resource allocation, and outbreak intervention, but remains difficult with sparse, noisy, and highly non-stationary data. Because epidemics unfold across interacting regions, spatiotemporal methods are natural candidates for improving forecasts. Despite growing interest in spatial information, no standardized benchmark exists, and current evaluations often use simple chronological train-test splits that do not reflect real-time forecasting practice. We address this gap with SpatialEpiBench, a challenging benchmark for spatiotemporal epidemic forecasting in realistic public-health settings. SpatialEpiBench includes 11 epidemic datasets with standardized rolling evaluations and outbreak-specific metrics. We evaluate adjacency-informed forecasting models with widely used epidemic priors that adapt general models to epidemiology, but find that most methods underperform a simple last-value baseline from 1 day to 1 month ahead, even during outbreaks and with these priors. We identify three major failure modes: (1) poor outbreak anticipation, (2) difficulty handling sparsity and noise, and (3) limited utility of common geographic adjacency for epidemiological spatial information. We release benchmark data, code, and instructions at https://github.com/Rachel-Lyu/SpatialEpiBench to support development of operationally useful epidemic forecasting models.
34. ❌ Process Matters more than Output for Distinguishing Humans from Machines
作者: Milena Rmus, Mathew D. Hardy, Thomas L. Griffiths, Mayank Agrawal 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06524v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 human-machine discrimination is becoming increasingly important as large language models and autonomous agents are deployed in online settings. Existing approaches evaluate whether a system can produce behavior or responses indistinguishable from those of a human, following the emphasis on outputs as a criterion for intelligence proposed by Alan Turing. Cognitive science offers an alternative perspective: evaluating the process by which behavior is produced. To test whether cognitive processes can reliably distinguish humans from machines, we introduce CogCAPTCHA30, a battery of 30 cognitive tasks designed to elicit diagnostic process-level features even when task performance is matched. Across the battery, process-level features provide stronger discriminative signal than performance metrics alone, reliably distinguishing humans from agents even under output matching (mean process-feature classifier AUC = 0.88). To evaluate agentic process differences, we compare off-the-shelf frontier agents (Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5, Gemini 2.5 Pro), Centaur (a language model fine-tuned on 10.7M human decisions), and two task-specific fine-tuning approaches applied to Qwen2.5-1.5B-Instruct: action-level supervised fine-tuning (A-SFT) and process-level fine-tuning (P-SFT), which directly optimizes process features. Broad fine-tuning on human decisions improves human-like task processes relative to off-the-shelf agents, while task-specific process-level supervision further improves behavioral mimicry. However, this advantage diminishes under cross-task transfer when supervised process targets do not naturally generalize across tasks. Explicit process-level supervision can improve human behavioral mimicry, but only if appropriate task-specific process representations are available, highlighting process specification as a bottleneck for achieving human-like cognitive processes in machines.
35. ❌ On the Implicit Reward Overfitting and the Low-rank Dynamics in RLVR
作者: Hao Ye, Jisheng Dang, Junfeng Fang, Bimei Wang, Yizhou Zhang, Ning Lv, Wencan Zhang, Hong Peng, Bin Hu, Tat-Seng Chua 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06523v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 extensive research has demonstrated that the enhanced reasoning capabilities acquired by models through Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) are primarily concentrated within the rank-1 components. Predicated on this observation, we employed Periodic Rank-1 Substitution and identified a counterintuitive phenomenon: RLVR may exhibit implicit reward overfitting to the training dataset. Specifically, the model can achieve satisfactory performance on the test set even when its rewards remain relatively low during the training process. Furthermore, we characterize three distinct properties of RL training: (1) The effective rank-1 component in RLVR don’t maintain other model knowledge except mathematical reasoning capability. (2) RLVR fundamentally functions by optimizing a specific singular spectrum. The distribution of singular values of almost all linear layers in RLVR-trained model behaves like heavy-tailed distribution. (3) the left singular vectors associated with rank-1 components demonstrate a stronger alignment tendency during training, which echoes the discovery that RLVR is optimizing sampling efficiency in essence. Taken together, our findings and analysis further reveal how RLVR shapes model parameters and offer potential insights for improving existing RL paradigms or other training paradigms to implement continual learning.
36. ❌ Learning to Cut: Reinforcement Learning for Benders Decomposition
作者: Haochen Cai, Xian Yu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06516v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Benders decomposition (BD) is a widely used solution approach for solving two-stage stochastic programs arising in real-world decision-making under uncertainty. However, it often suffers from slow convergence as the master problem grows with an increasing number of cuts. In this paper, we propose Reinforcement Learning for BD (RLBD), a framework that adaptively selects cuts using a neural network-based stochastic policy. The policy is trained using a policy gradient method via the REINFORCE algorithm. We evaluate the proposed approach on a two-stage stochastic electric vehicle charging station location problem and compare it with vanilla BD and LearnBD, a supervised learning approach that classifies cuts using a support vector machine. Numerical results demonstrate that RLBD achieves substantial improvements in computational efficiency and exhibits strong generalization to problems with similar structures but varying data inputs and decision variable dimensions.
37. ❌ Is One Layer Enough? Understanding Inference Dynamics in Tabular Foundation Models
作者: Amir Rezaei Balef, Mykhailo Koshil, Katharina Eggensperger 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06510v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 tabular foundation models (TFMs) dominate small to medium tabular predictive benchmark tasks, yet their inference mechanisms remain largely unexplored. We present the first large-scale mechanistic study of layerwise dynamics in 6 state-of-the-art tabular in-context learning models. We explore how predictions emerge across depth, identify distinct stages of inference and reveal latent-space dynamics that differ from those of language models. Our findings indicate substantial depthwise redundancy across multiple models, suggesting iterative refinement with overlapping computations during inference stages. Guided by these insights, we design a proof-of-concept, looped single-layer model that uses only 20% of the original model’s parameters while achieving comparable performance. The code is available at https://github.com/amirbalef/is_one_layer_enough.
38. ❌ On the Security of Research Artifacts
作者: Nanda Rani, Christian Rossow 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06508v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Research artifacts are widely shared to support reproducibility, and artifact evaluation (AE) has become common at many leading conferences. However, AE mainly checks whether artifacts work as claimed and can be reproduced. It largely overlooks potential security risks. Since these artifacts are publicly released and reused, they may unintentionally create opportunities for misuse and raise concerns about safe and responsible sharing. We study 509 research artifacts from top-tier security venues and find that many contain insecure code patterns that may introduce potential attack vectors. We propose a taxonomy for context-aware security assessment to enable structured analysis of such risks. We perform static analysis and examine the resulting findings, filtering false positives and identifying real security risks. Our analysis shows that 41.60% of the prevalent findings may pose security concerns under practical usage. To support scalable analysis, we introduce SAFE (Security-Aware Framework for Artifact Evaluation), a first step toward an autonomous framework that analyzes tool-reported findings by considering code semantics, execution context, and practical exploitability. SAFE achieves 84.80% accuracy and 84.63% F1-score in distinguishing security and non-security risks. Overall, our results show that security is also important in AE for promoting safe and responsible research sharing. The source code is available at: https://github.com/nanda-rani/SAFE
39. ❌ PACZero: PAC-Private Fine-Tuning of Language Models via Sign Quantization
作者: Murat Bilgehan Ertan, Xiaochen Zhu, Phuong Ha Nguyen, Marten van Dijk, Srinivas Devadas 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06505v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 PACZero, a family of PAC-private zeroth-order mechanisms for fine-tuning large language models that delivers usable utility at $I(S^*; Y_{1:T})=0$. This privacy regime bounds the membership-inference attack (MIA) posterior success rate at the prior, an MIA-resistance level the DP framework matches only at $\varepsilon=0$ and infinite noise. All DP-ZO comparisons below are matched at the MIA posterior level. The key insight is that PAC Privacy charges mutual information only when the release depends on which candidate subset is the secret. Sign-quantizing subset-aggregated zeroth-order gradients creates frequent unanimity, steps at which every candidate subset agrees on the update direction; at these steps the released sign costs zero conditional mutual information. We propose two variants that span the privacy-utility trade-off: PACZero-MI (budgeted MI via exact calibration on the binary release) and PACZero-ZPL ($I=0$ via a uniform coin flip on disagreement steps). We evaluate on SST-2 and SQuAD with OPT-1.3B and OPT-6.7B in both LoRA and full-parameter tracks. On SST-2 OPT-1.3B full fine-tuning at $I=0$, PACZero-ZPL reaches ${88.99\pm0.91}$, within $2.1$pp of the non-private MeZO baseline ($91.1$ FT). No prior method produces usable utility in the high-privacy regime $\varepsilon<1$, and PACZero-ZPL obtains competitive SST-2 accuracy and nontrivial SQuAD F1 across OPT-1.3B and OPT-6.7B at $I=0$.
40. ❌ Operator-Guided Invariance Learning for Continuous Reinforcement Learning
作者: Zuyuan Zhang, Fei Xu Yu, Tian Lan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06500v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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) with continuous time and state/action spaces is often data-intensive and brittle under nuisance variability and shift, motivating methods that exploit value-preserving structures to stabilize and improve learning. Most existing approaches focus on special cases, such as prescribed symmetries and exact equivariance, without addressing how to discover more general structures that require nonlinear operators to transform and map between continuous state/action systems with isomorphic value functions. We propose \textbf{VPSD-RL} (Value-Preserving Structure Discovery for Reinforcement Learning). It models continuous RL as a controlled diffusion with value-preserving mappings defined through Lie-group actions and associated pullback operators. We show that a value-preserving structure exists exactly when pulling back the value function and pushing forward actions commute with the controlled generator and reward functional. Further, approximate value-preserving structures with rigorous guarantees can be found when the Hamilton–Jacobi–Bellman mismatch is small. This framework discovers exact and approximate value-preserving structures by searching for the associated Lie group operators. VPSD-RL fits differentiable drift, diffusion, and reward models; learns infinitesimal generators via determining-equation residual minimization; exponentiates them with ODE flows to obtain finite transformations; and integrates them into continuous RL through transition augmentation and transformation-consistency regularization. We show that bounded generator/reward mismatch implies quantitative stability of the optimal value function along approximate orbits, with sensitivity governed by the effective horizon, and observe improved data efficiency and robustness on continuous-control benchmarks.
41. ❌ From Token Lists to Graph Motifs: Weisfeiler-Lehman Analysis of Sparse Autoencoder Features
作者: Ruben Fernandez-Boullon, Pablo Magariños-Docampo, Javier Perez-Robles 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06494v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 autoencoders (SAEs) have become central to mechanistic interpretability, decomposing transformer activations into monosemantic features. Yet existing analyses characterise features almost exclusively through top-activating token lists or decoder weight vectors, leaving the higher-order co-occurrence structure shared across features largely unexamined. We introduce a graph-structured representation in which each SAE feature is modelled as a token co-occurrence graph: nodes are the tokens most frequent near strong activations, and edges connect pairs that co-occur within local context windows. A custom WL-style, frequency-binned graph kernel then provides a similarity measure over this structural space. Applied as a proof of concept to features from a large SAE trained on GPT-2 Small and probed with a synthetic mixed-domain corpus, our clustering recovers heuristic motif families (punctuation-heavy patterns, language and script clusters, and code-like templates) that are not recovered by clustering on decoder cosine similarity. A token-histogram baseline achieves higher overall purity, so the contribution of the graph view is complementary rather than dominant: it surfaces structural relationships that token-frequency and decoder-weight views alone do not capture. Cluster assignments are stable across graph-construction hyperparameters and random seeds.
42. ❌ Instrumental Choices: Measuring the Propensity of LLM Agents to Pursue Instrumental Behaviors
作者: Jonas Wiedermann-Möller, Leonard Dung, Maksym Andriushchenko 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06490v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 systems have become increasingly capable of dangerous behaviours in many domains. This raises the question: Do models sometimes choose to violate human instructions in order to perform behaviour that is more useful for certain goals? We introduce a benchmark for measuring model propensity for instrumental convergence (IC) behaviour in terminal-based agents. This is behaviour such as self-preservation that has been hypothesised to play a key role in risks from highly capable AI agents. Our benchmark is realistic and low-stakes which serves to reduce evaluation-awareness and roleplay confounds. The suite contains seven operational tasks, each with an official workflow and a policy-violating shortcut. An eight-variant shared framework varies monitoring, instruction clarity, stakes, permission, instrumental usefulness and blocked honest paths to support inferences regarding the factors driving IC behaviour. We evaluated ten models using deterministic environment-state scorers over 1,680 samples, with trace review employed for audit and adjudication purposes. The final IC rate is 86 out of 1,680 samples (5.1%). IC behaviour is concentrated rather than uniform: two Gemini models account for 66.3% of IC cases and three tasks account for 84.9%. Conditions in which IC behaviour is indispensable for task success result in the greatest increase in the adjusted IC rate (+15.7 percentage points), whereas emphasising that task success is critical or certain framing choices do not produce comparable effects. Our findings indicate that realistic, low-nudge environments elicit IC behaviour rarely but systematically in most tested models. We conclude that it is feasible to robustly measure tendencies for dangerous behaviour in current frontier AI agents.
43. ❌ Litespark Inference on Consumer CPUs: Custom SIMD Kernels for Ternary Neural Networks
作者: Nii Osae Osae Dade, Tony Morri, Moinul Hossain Rahat, Sayandip Pal 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06485v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 transformed artificial intelligence, but their computational requirements remain prohibitive for most users. Standard inference demands expensive datacenter GPUs or cloud API access, leaving over one billion personal computers underutilized for AI workloads. Ternary models offer a path forward: their weights are constrained to {-1, 0, +1}, theoretically eliminating the need for floating-point multiplication. However, existing frameworks fail to exploit this structure, treating ternary models as dense floating-point networks. We address this gap with custom SIMD kernels that replace matrix multiplication with simple addition and subtraction operations, targeting the integer dot product instructions available on modern CPUs. Our implementation, Litespark-Inference, is pip-installable and integrates directly with Hugging-Face, achieving 9.2x faster time-to-first-token, 52x higher throughput, and 14x memory reduction compared to standard PyTorch inference on Apple Silicon, with similar speedups on Intel and AMD processors.
44. ❌ 3D MRI Image Pretraining via Controllable 2D Slice Navigation Task
作者: Yu Wang, Qingchao Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06487v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Self-supervised pretraining has become the mainstream approach for learning MRI representations from unlabeled scans. However, most existing objectives still treat each scan primarily as static aggregations of slices, patches or volumes. We ask whether there exists an intrinsic form of self-supervision signal that is different from reconstructing the masked patches, through transforming the 3D volumes into controllable 2D rendered sequences: by rendering slices at continuous positions, orientations, and scales, a 3D volume can be converted into dense video-action sequences whose controls are the action trajectories. We study this formulation with an action-conditioned pretraining objective, where a tokenizer encodes slice observations and a latent dynamics model predicts the evolution of latent features. Across representative anatomical and spatial downstream tasks, the proposed pretraining is evaluated against standard static-volume baselines, tokenizer-only pretraining, and dynamics variants without aligned actions. These results suggest that controllable MRI slice navigation provides a useful complementary pretraining interface for learning anatomical and spatial representations from large unlabeled MRI collections.
45. ❌ ReasonSTL: Bridging Natural Language and Signal Temporal Logic via Tool-Augmented Process-Rewarded Learning
作者: Bowen Ye, Zhijian Li, Junyue Huang, Junkai Ma, Xiang Yin 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06483v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Signal Temporal Logic (STL) is an expressive formal language for specifying spatio-temporal requirements over real-valued, real-time signals. It has been widely used for the verification and synthesis of autonomous systems and cyber-physical systems. In practice, however, users often express their requirements in natural language rather than in structured STL formulas, making natural-language-to-STL translation a critical yet challenging task. Manual specification requires temporal-logic expertise and cannot scale, while prompting commercial LLM APIs incurs substantial token costs and may expose sensitive system requirements to third-party services, raising privacy concerns for industrial deployment. To address these challenges, we present \textsc{ReasonSTL}, a tool-augmented framework that adapts local open-source language models for natural-language-to-STL generation. \textsc{ReasonSTL} decomposes the translation process into explicit reasoning, deterministic tool calls, and structured formula construction. We further introduce process-rewarded training to supervise both tool-use trajectories and final formulas, together with \textsc{STL-Bench}, a bilingual, computation-aware benchmark grounded in real-world signals. Experiments show that a 4B model trained with \textsc{ReasonSTL} achieves state-of-the-art performance in both automatic metrics and human evaluations, demonstrating that \textsc{ReasonSTL} provides a transparent, low-cost, and privacy-preserving alternative for formal specification drafting.
46. ❌ Patch-Effect Graph Kernels for LLM Interpretability
作者: Ruben Fernandez-Boullon, David N. Olivieri 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06480v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Mechanistic interpretability aims to reverse-engineer transformer computations by identifying causal circuits through activation patching. However, scaling these interventions across diverse prompts and task families produces high-dimensional, unstructured datasets that are difficult to compare systematically. We propose a framework that reframes mechanistic analysis as a graph machine-learning problem by representing activation-patching profiles as patch-effect graphs over model components. We introduce three graph-construction methods: direct-influence via causal mediation, partial-correlation, and co-influence and apply graph kernels to analyze the resulting structures. Evaluating this approach on GPT-2 Small using Indirect Object Identification (IOI) and related tasks, we find that patch-effect graphs preserve discriminative structural signals. Specifically, localized edge-slot features provide higher classification accuracy than global graph-shape descriptors. A screened paired-patching validation suggests that CI and PC selected candidate edges correspond to stronger activation-influence effects than random or low-rank candidates. Crucially, by evaluating these representations against rigorous prompt-only and raw patch-effect controls, we make the evidential scope of the benchmark explicit: graph features compress structured patching signal, while raw tensors and surface cues define strong baselines that any circuit-level claim should address. Ultimately, our framework provides a compression and evaluation pipeline for comparing patching-derived structures under controlled baselines, separating robust slice-discriminative evidence from stronger task-general causal-circuit claims.
47. ❌ Probabilistic Dating of Historical Manuscripts via Evidential Deep Regression on Visual Script Features
作者: Ranjith Chodavarapu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06475v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 probabilistic approach for dating historical manuscript pages from visual features alone. Instead of aggregating centuries into classes as is standard in the previous literature, we pose dating as an evidential deep regression problem over a continuous year axis, allowing our neural network to output a full predictive distribution with decomposed aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty in a single forward pass. Our architecture combines an EfficientNet-B2 backbone with a Normal-Inverse-Gamma (NIG) output head trained with a joint negative-log-likelihood and evidence-regularization objective. On the DIVA-HisDB benchmark (150 pages, 3 medieval codices, 151,936 patches), our model scores a test MAE of 5.4 years, well below the 50-year century-label supervision granularity, with 93% of patches within 5 years and 97% within 10 years. Our approach achieves \textbf{PICP=92.6%}, the best calibration among all compared methods, in a single forward pass, outperforming MC Dropout (PICP=88.2%, 50 passes) and Deep Ensembles (PICP=79.7%, 5 models) at $5\times$ lower inference cost. Uncertainty decomposition shows aleatoric uncertainty is a strong predictor of dating error (Spearman $ρ=0.729$), and a selective prediction about the most certain 20% of patches can provide \textbf{0.5 years MAE}. We show that predicted uncertainty increases as image degradation worsens, spatial decomposition maps explain which script regions cause aleatoric uncertainty, and page-level aggregation reduces MAE to 4.5 years with $ρ=0.905$ between uncertainty and page-level error.
48. ❌ Q-MMR: Off-Policy Evaluation via Recursive Reweighting and Moment Matching
作者: Xiang Li, Nan Jiang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06474v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 novel theoretical framework, Q-MMR, for off-policy evaluation in finite-horizon MDPs. Q-MMR learns a set of scalar weights, one for each data point, such that the reweighted rewards approximate the expected return under the target policy. The weights are learned inductively in a top-down manner via a moment matching objective against a value-function discriminator class. Notably, and perhaps surprisingly, a data-dependent finite-sample guarantee for general function approximation can be established under only the realizability of $Q^π$, with a dimension-free bound – that is, the error does not depend on the statistical complexity of the function class. We also establish connections to several existing methods, such as importance sampling and linear FQE. Further theoretical analyses shed new light on the nature of coverage, a concept of fundamental importance to offline RL.
49. ❌ Beyond Task Success: Measuring Workflow Fidelity in LLM-Based Agentic Payment Systems
作者: Donghao Huang, Joon Kiat Chua, Zhaoxia Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06457v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 are increasingly deployed for payment workflows, yet prevailing metrics, Task Success Rate (TSR) and Agent Handoff F1-Score (HF1), capture only final outcomes or unordered routing decisions. We introduce the Agentic Success Rate (ASR), a trajectory-fidelity metric that compares observed and expected agent execution sequences at the transition level, decomposing performance into Transition Recall and Transition Precision. Applied to the Hierarchical Multi-Agent System for Payments (HMASP) across 18 LLMs and 90,000 task instances, ASR reveals that 10 of 18 models systematically skip a confirmation checkpoint during payment checkout, a deviation invisible to both TSR and HF1, while 8 models enforce the checkpoint perfectly. Notably, GPT-4.1 exhibits hidden workflow shortcuts despite achieving perfect TSR and HF1, while GPT-5.2 achieves perfect ASR. Prompt refinements and deterministic routing guards guided by ASR diagnostics yield substantial TSR improvements, with gains up to +93.8 percentage points for previously struggling models, demonstrating that trajectory-level evaluation is essential in regulated domains.
50. ❌ PrefixGuard: From LLM-Agent Traces to Online Failure-Warning Monitors
作者: Xinmiao Huang, Jinwei Hu, Rajarshi Roy, Changshun Wu, Yi Dong, Xiaowei Huang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06455v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 now execute long, tool-using tasks where final outcome checks can arrive too late for intervention. Online warning requires lightweight prefix monitors over heterogeneous traces, but hand-authored event schemas are brittle and deployment-time LLM judging is costly. We introduce PrefixGuard, a trace-to-monitor framework with an offline StepView induction step followed by supervised monitor training. StepView induces deterministic typed-step adapters from raw trace samples, and the monitor learns an event abstraction and prefix-risk scorer from terminal outcomes. Across WebArena, $τ^2$-Bench, SkillsBench, and TerminalBench, the strongest PrefixGuard monitors reach 0.900/0.710/0.533/0.557 AUPRC. Using the strongest backend within each representation, they improve over raw-text controls by an average of +0.137 AUPRC. LLM judges remain substantially weaker under the same prefix-warning protocol. We also derive an observability ceiling on score-based area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) that separates monitor error from failures lacking evidence in the observed prefix. For finite-state audit, post-hoc deterministic finite automaton (DFA) extraction remains compact on WebArena and $τ^2$-Bench (29 and 20 states) but expands to 151 and 187 states on SkillsBench and TerminalBench. Finally, first-alert diagnostics show that strong ranking does not imply deployment utility: WebArena ranks well yet fails to support low-false-alarm alerts, whereas $τ^2$-Bench and TerminalBench retain more actionable early alerts. Together, these results position PrefixGuard as a practical monitor-synthesis recipe with explicit diagnostics for when prefix warnings translate into actionable interventions.
51. ❌ ORTHOBO: Orthogonal Bayesian Hyperparameter Optimization
作者: Maresa Schröder, Pascal Janetzky, Michael Klar, Stefan Feuerriegel 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06454v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Bayesian optimization is widely used for hyperparameter optimization when model evaluations are expensive; however, noisy acquisition estimates can lead to unstable decisions. We identify acquisition estimation noise as a failure mode that was previously overlooked: even when the surrogate model and acquisition target are correctly specified, finite-sample Monte Carlo error can perturb acquisition values. This can, in turn, flip candidate rankings and lead to suboptimal BO decisions. As a remedy, we aim at variance reduction and propose an orthogonal acquisition estimator that subtracts an optimally weighted score-function control variate, which yields an acquisition residual orthogonal to posterior score directions and which thus reduces Monte Carlo variance. We further introduce OrthoBO: a Bayesian optimization framework that combines our orthogonal acquisition estimator with ensemble surrogates and an outer log transformation. We show theoretically that our estimator preserves the target, leads to variance reduction, and improves pairwise ranking stability. We further verify the theoretical properties of OrthoBO through numerical experiments where our framework reduces acquisition estimation variance, stabilizes candidate rankings, and achieves strong performance. We also demonstrate the downstream utility of OrthoBO in hyperparameter optimization for neural network training and fine-tuning.
52. ❌ Constraint Decay: The Fragility of LLM Agents in Backend Code Generation
作者: Francesco Dente, Dario Satriani, Paolo Papotti 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06445v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 demonstrate strong performance in autonomous code generation under loose specifications. However, production-grade software requires strict adherence to structural constraints, such as architectural patterns, databases, and object-relational mappings. Existing benchmarks often overlook these non-functional requirements, rewarding functionally correct but structurally arbitrary solutions. We present a systematic study evaluating how well agents handle structural constraints in multi-file backend generation. By fixing a unified API contract across 80 greenfield generation tasks and 20 feature-implementation tasks spanning eight web frameworks, we isolate the effect of structural complexity using a dual evaluation with end-to-end behavioral tests and static verifiers. Our findings reveal a phenomenon of constraint decay: as structural requirements accumulate, agent performance exhibits a substantial decline. Capable configurations lose 30 points on average in assertion pass rates from baseline to fully specified tasks, while some weaker configurations approach zero. Framework sensitivity analysis exposes significant performance disparities: agents succeed in minimal, explicit frameworks (e.g., Flask) but perform substantially worse on average in convention-heavy environments (e.g., FastAPI, Django). Finally, error analysis identifies data-layer defects (e.g., incorrect query composition and ORM runtime violations) as the leading root causes. This work highlights that jointly satisfying functional and structural requirements remains a key open challenge for coding agents.
53. ❌ SCRuB: Social Concept Reasoning under Rubric-Based Evaluation
作者: Jamelle Watson-Daniels, Himaghna Bhattacharjee, Skyler Wang, Brandon Handoko, Antonio Li, Anaelia Ovalle, Mahesh Pasupuleti, Candace Ross, Vidya Sarma, Arjun Subramonian, Karen Ullrich, Will van der Vaart, Yijing Xin, Maximilian Nickel 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06444v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 many studies of Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning capabilities emphasize mathematical or technical tasks, few address reasoning about social concepts: the abstract ideas shaping social norms, culture, and institutions. This understudied capability is essential for modern models acting as social agents, yet no systematic evaluation methodology targets it. We introduce SCRuB (Social Concept Reasoning under Rubric-Based Evaluation), a framework designed for this setting of task indeterminacy. Our goal is to measure the degree to which a model reasons about social concepts with the depth and critical rigor of a human expert. SCRuB proceeds in three phases: prompt construction from established sources, response generation by experts and models, and comparative evaluation using a five-dimensional critical thinking rubric. To enable generalization of the pipeline, we introduce a Panel of Disciplinary Perspectives ensemble validated against independent expert judges. We release SCRuBEval (n=4,711 evaluation prompts) and SCRuBAnnotations (300 expert-authored responses and 150 expert comparative judgments from 45 PhD-level scholars). Our results show that frontier models consistently outperform human experts across all five rubric dimensions. Across 1,170 pairwise comparisons, expert judges ranked a model response first in 80.8% of judgments and preferred model responses overall 74.4% of the time. Ultimately, this study provides the first expert-grounded demonstration of evaluation saturation for social concept reasoning: the single-turn exam-style format has reached its ceiling for models and humans alike.
54. ❌ COVID-19 Infodemic. Understanding content features in detecting fake news using a machine learning approach
作者: Vimala Balakrishnan, Lee Zing Hii, Eric Laporte 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06435v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 content features, particularly textual and linguistic for fake news detection is under-researched, despite empirical evidence showing the features could contribute to differentiating real and fake news. To this end, this study investigates a selection of content features such as word bigrams, part of speech distribution etc. to improve fake news detection. We performed a series of experiments on a new dataset gathered during the COVID-19 pandemic and using Decision Tree, K-Nearest Neighbor, Logistic Regression, Support Vector Machine and Random Forest. Random Forest yielded the best results, followed closely by Support Vector Machine, across all setups. In general, both the textual and linguistic features were found to improve fake news detection when used separately, however, combining them into a single model did not improve the detection significantly. Differences were also noted between the use of bigrams and part of speech tags. The study shows that textual and linguistic features can be used successfully in detecting fake news using the traditional machine learning approach as opposed to deep learning.
55. ❌ Knowledge Graphs, the Missing Link in Agentic AI-based Formal Verification
作者: Vaisakh Naduvodi Viswambharan, Keerthan Kopparam Radhakrishna, Deepak Narayan Gadde, Aman Kumar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06434v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 Language Models (LLMs) have enabled workflows that generate SystemVerilog Assertions (SVAs) from natural-language specifications, with the potential to accelerate Formal Verification (FV). However, high-quality assertion synthesis remains challenging because specifications are often ambiguous or incomplete and critical micro-architectural details reside in the Register Transfer Level (RTL). Many existing approaches treat the specification and RTL as loosely structured text, which weakens specification-to-RTL grounding and leads to semantic mismatches and frequent syntax failures during formal parsing and elaboration. This work addresses these limitations with a verification-centric Knowledge Graph (KG) constructed from structured Intermediate Representations (IRs) extracted from the specification, RTL, and formal-tool feedback, including syntax diagnostics, Counterexamples (CEXs), and coverage reports. The KG links requirements, design hierarchy, signals, assumptions, and properties to provide traceable, design-grounded context for generation. A multi-agent workflow queries and updates this KG to generate SVAs and to drive three refinement loops: syntax repair guided by tool diagnostics, CEX-guided correction using trace links, and coverage-directed property augmentation. Evaluation across seven benchmark designs indicates that KG-based context retrieval improves specification-to-RTL grounding and consistently produces compilable SVAs with low syntax-repair overhead. The approach achieves formal coverage ranging from 78.5% to 99.4%, though convergence exhibits design dependence with complex temporal and arithmetic reasoning remaining challenging for current LLM capabilities.
56. ❌ E = T*H/(O+B): A Dimensionless Control Parameter for Mixture-of-Experts Ecology
作者: Qingjun Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06415v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 E = T*H/(O+B), a dimensionless control parameter that predicts whether Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models will develop a healthy expert ecology or collapse into dead experts. E combines four hyperparameters – routing temperature T, routing entropy weight H, oracle weight O, and balance weight B – into a single quantity. Through 12 controlled experiments (8 vision, 4 language) totaling over 11,000 training epochs, we establish that E >= 0.5 alone is sufficient to guarantee zero dead experts, removing the necessity for handcrafted load-balancing auxiliary losses. We validate this cross-modally on CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, TinyImageNet-200, WikiText-2, and WikiText-103. Six additional findings emerge: (1) dead experts can resuscitate – triggered by balance loss driving router re-exploration; (2) ortho toxicity is dataset-dependent, not universal; (3) task complexity shifts the critical E threshold; (4) model overfitting is decoupled from expert ecological health; (5) three-tier MoE spontaneously collapses into a two-tier functional structure; (6) ecological structure is temperature-invariant across a 50x range. We propose that E serves as a unified diagnostic for MoE training, analogous to the Reynolds number in fluid dynamics.
57. ❌ WavCube: Unifying Speech Representation for Understanding and Generation via Semantic-Acoustic Joint Modeling
作者: Guanrou Yang, Tian Tan, Qian Chen, Zhikang Niu, Yakun Song, Ziyang Ma, Yushen Chen, Zeyu Xie, Tianrui Wang, Yifan Yang, Wenxi Chen, Qi Chen, Wenrui Liu, Shan Yang, Xie Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06407v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Integrating speech understanding and generation is a pivotal step toward building unified speech models. However, the different representations required for these two tasks currently pose significant compatibility challenges. Typically, semantics-oriented features are learned from self-supervised learning (SSL), and acoustic-oriented features from reconstruction. Such fragmented representations hinder the realization of truly unified speech systems. We present WavCube, a compact continuous latent derived from an SSL speech encoder that simultaneously supports speech understanding, reconstruction, and generation. WavCube employs a two-stage training scheme. Stage 1 trains a semantic bottleneck to filter off-manifold redundancy that makes raw SSL features intractable for diffusion. Stage 2 injects fine-grained acoustic details via end-to-end reconstruction, while a semantic anchoring loss ensures the representation remains grounded within its original semantic manifold. Comprehensive experiments show that WavCube closely approaches WavLM performance on SUPERB despite an 8x dimensional compression, attains reconstruction quality on par with existing acoustic representations, delivers state-of-the-art zero-shot TTS performance with markedly faster training convergence, and excels in speech enhancement, separation, and voice conversion tasks on the SUPERB-SG benchmark. Systematic ablations reveal that WavCube’s two-stage recipe resolves two intrinsic flaws of SSL features for generative modeling, paving the way for future unified speech systems. Codes and checkpoints are available at https://github.com/yanghaha0908/WavCube.
58. ❌ Consistent Geometric Deep Learning via Hilbert Bundles and Cellular Sheaves
作者: Kartik Tandon, Julian Gould, Tanishq Bhatia, Francesca Dominici, Alejandro Ribeiro, Claudio Battiloro 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06395v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 deep learning architectures increasingly contend with sophisticated signals that are natively infinite-dimensional, such as time series, probability distributions, or operators, and are defined over irregular domains. Yet, a unified learning theory for these settings has been lacking. To start addressing this gap, we introduce a novel convolutional learning framework for possibly infinite-dimensional signals supported on a manifold. Namely, we use the connection Laplacian associated with a Hilbert bundle as a convolutional operator, and we derive filters and neural networks, dubbed as \textit{HilbNets}. We make HilbNets and, more generally, the convolution operation, implementable via a two-stage sampling procedure. First, we show that sampling the manifold induces a Hilbert Cellular Sheaf, a generalized graph structure with Hilbert feature spaces and edge-wise coupling rules, and we prove that its sheaf Laplacian converges in probability to the underlying connection Laplacian as the sampling density increases. Notably, this result is a generalization to the infinite-dimensional bundle setting of the Belkin & Niyogi \cite{BELKIN20081289} convergence result for the graph Laplacian to the manifold Laplacian, a theoretical cornerstone of geometric learning methods. Second, we discretize the signals and prove that the discretized (implementable) HilbNets converge to the underlying continuous architectures and are transferable across different samplings of the same bundle, providing consistency for learning. Finally, we validate our framework on synthetic and real-world tasks. Overall, our results broaden the scope of geometric learning as a whole by lifting classical Laplacian-based frameworks to settings where the signal at each point lives in its own Hilbert space.
59. ❌ Automated alignment is harder than you think
作者: Aleksandr Bowkis, Marie Davidsen Buhl, Jacob Pfau, Geoffrey Irving 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06390v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 leading proposal for aligning artificial superintelligence (ASI) is to use AI agents to automate an increasing fraction of alignment research as capabilities improve. We argue that, even when research agents are not scheming to deliberately sabotage alignment work, this plan could produce compelling but catastrophically misleading safety assessments resulting in the unintentional deployment of misaligned AI. This could happen because alignment research involves many hard-to-supervise fuzzy tasks (tasks without clear evaluation criteria, for which human judgement is systematically flawed). Consequently, research outputs will contain systematic, undetected errors, and even correct outputs could be incorrectly aggregated into overconfident safety assessments. This problem is likely to be worse for automated alignment research than for human-generated alignment research for several reasons: 1) optimisation pressure means agent-generated mistakes are concentrated among those that human reviewers are least likely to catch; 2) agents are likely to produce errors that do not resemble human mistakes; 3) AI-generated alignment solutions may involve arguments humans cannot evaluate; and 4) shared weights, data and training processes may make AI outputs more correlated than human equivalents. Therefore, agents must be trained to reliably perform hard-to-supervise fuzzy tasks. Generalisation and scalable oversight are the leading candidates for achieving this but both face novel challenges in the context of automated alignment.
60. ❌ Asymmetric On-Policy Distillation: Bridging Exploitation and Imitation at the Token Level
作者: Nan Jia, Haojin Yang, Xing Ma, Jiesong Lian, Shuailiang Zhang, Weipeng Zhang, Ke Zeng, Xunliang Cai, Zequn Sun 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06387v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
On-policy distillation (OPD) trains a student on its own trajectories with token-level teacher feedback and often outperforms off-policy distillation and standard reinforcement learning. However, we find that its standard advantage weighted policy gradient suffers from three structural weaknesses, including high variance updates, vanishing gradients in zero-advantage regions, and exploration bottlenecks when corrective signals are insufficient.We therefore propose Asymmetric On-Policy Distillation (AOPD), which replaces ineffective negative reinforcement with localized divergence minimization in non-positive advantage regions while preserving positive reinforcement learning. Experiments on mathematical reasoning benchmarks show that AOPD consistently outperforms standard OPD, with average gains of 4.09 / 8.34 under strong / weak initialization, respectively. AOPD also maintains higher policy entropy during training and better capability retention during sequential tool-use adaptation.
61. ❌ MinMax Recurrent Neural Cascades
作者: Alessandro Ronca 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06384v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 show that the MinMax algebra provides a form of recurrence that is expressively powerful, efficiently implementable, and most importantly it is not affected by vanishing or exploding gradient. We call MinMax Recurrent Neural Cascades (RNCs) the models obtained by cascading several layers of neurons that employ such recurrence. We show that MinMax RNCs enjoy many favourable theoretical properties. First, their formal expressivity includes all regular languages, arguably the maximal expressivity for a finite-memory system. Second, they can be evaluated in parallel with a runtime that is logarithmic in the input length given enough processors; and they can also be evaluated sequentially. Third, their state and activations are bounded uniformly for all input lengths. Fourth, at almost all points, their loss gradient exists and it is bounded. Fifth, they do not exhibit a vanishing state gradient: the gradient of a state w.r.t. a past state can have constant value one regardless of the time distance between the two states. Finally, we find empirical evidence that the favourable theoretical properties of MinMax RNCs are matched by their practical capabilities: they are able to perfectly solve a number of synthetic tasks, showing superior performance compared to the considered state-of-the-art recurrent neural networks; also, we train a MinMax RNC of 127M parameters on next-token prediction, and the obtained model shows competitive performance for its size, providing evidence of the potential of MinMax RNCs on real-world tasks.
62. ❌ Rethinking Vacuity for OOD Detection in Evidential Deep Learning
作者: Claire McNamara 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06382v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Vacuity, or Uncertainty Mass (UM), is commonly used as a metric to evaluate Out-of-Distribution (OOD) detection in Evidential Deep Learning (EDL). It generally involves dividing the number of classes ($K$) by the total strength of belief ($S$) of the model’s predictions, where $S$ is derived from summing the Dirichlet parameters. As such, UM is sensitive to the cardinality of $K$. In particular, it is unlikely in practice that there is a linear relationship between $K$ and $S$ as $K$ and $S$ increase due to the nature of EDL (suppressing incorrectly assigned evidence). As a result, when comparing In Distribution (ID) and OOD results, it is important that $K_{\mathrm{ID}}$ and $K_{\mathrm{OOD}}$ are equal; something that is not always ensured in practice. We provide an empirical demonstration of how results for AUROC and AUPR can substantially differ when class cardinality between ID and OOD differs by 1, with AUROC differing by as much as 0.318 and AUPR by 0.613 for standard EDL, and AUROC by 0.360 and AUPR by 0.683 for IB-EDL. More concretely, our findings isolate an evaluation artefact: when K differs between ID and OOD, AUROC/AUPR can be artificially inflated without any change in model predictions. We further discuss the evaluation of EDL over causal language models using Multiple-Choice Question-Answer (MCQA) datasets and argue for clearer definitions of ID and OOD in this context. Our primary contribution is an empirical and theoretical demonstration that vacuity-based OOD detection in EDL-fine-tuned LLMs is highly sensitive to uncontrolled differences in evaluated class cardinality.
63. ❌ Continuous-Time Distribution Matching for Few-Step Diffusion Distillation
作者: Tao Liu, Hao Yan, Mengting Chen, Taihang Hu, Zhengrong Yue, Zihao Pan, Jinsong Lan, Xiaoyong Zhu, Ming-Ming Cheng, Bo Zheng, Yaxing Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06376v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Step distillation has become a leading technique for accelerating diffusion models, among which Distribution Matching Distillation (DMD) and Consistency Distillation are two representative paradigms. While consistency methods enforce self-consistency along the full PF-ODE trajectory to steer it toward the clean data manifold, vanilla DMD relies on sparse supervision at a few predefined discrete timesteps. This restricted discrete-time formulation and mode-seeking nature of the reverse KL divergence tends to exhibit visual artifacts and over-smoothed outputs, often necessitating complex auxiliary modules – such as GANs or reward models – to restore visual fidelity. In this work, we introduce Continuous-Time Distribution Matching (CDM), migrating the DMD framework from discrete anchoring to continuous optimization for the first time. CDM achieves this through two continuous-time designs. First, we replace the fixed discrete schedule with a dynamic continuous schedule of random length, so that distribution matching is enforced at arbitrary points along sampling trajectories rather than only at a few fixed anchors. Second, we propose a continuous-time alignment objective that performs active off-trajectory matching on latents extrapolated via the student’s velocity field, improving generalization and preserving fine visual details. Extensive experiments on different architectures, including SD3-Medium and Longcat-Image, demonstrate that CDM provides highly competitive visual fidelity for few-step image generation without relying on complex auxiliary objectives. Code is available at https://github.com/byliutao/cdm.
64. ❌ Debiased Multimodal Personality Understanding through Dual Causal Intervention
作者: Yangfu Zhu, Zitong Han, Nianwen Ning, Yuting Wei, Yuandong Wang, Hang Feng, Zhenzhou Shao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06371v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Multimodalpersonalityunderstandingplaysacriticalroleinhuman centered artificial intelligence. Previous work mainly focus on learn-ing rich multimodal representations for video personality under standing. However, they often suffer from potential harm caused by subject bias (e.g., observable age and unobservable mental states), as subjects originate from diverse demographic backgrounds. Learn ing such spurious associations between multimodal features and traits may lead to unfair personality understanding. In this work, weconstruct aStructural Causal Model (SCM)toanalyze theimpact of these biases from a causal perspective, and propose a novel Dual Causal Adjustment Network (DCAN) to mitigate the interference of subject attributes on personality understanding. Specifically, we design a Back-door Adjustment Causal Learning (BACL) module to block spurious correlations from observable demographic factors via a prototype-based confounder dictionary, and subsequently ap ply a Front-door Adjustment Causal Learning (FACL) module to ad dress latent and unobservable biases throughalearnedmediatordic tionary intervention, thereby achieving causal disentanglement of representations for deconfounded reasoning. Importantly, we con struct a Demographic-annotated Multimodal Student Personality (DMSP) dataset to support the analysis and discussion of fairness related factors. Extensive experiments on the benchmark dataset CFI-V2 and our DMSPdataset demonstrate that DCAN consistently improves prediction accuracy, reaching 92.11% and 92.90%, respec tively. Meanwhile, the improvementsinthefairnessmetricsofequal opportunity and demographic parity are 6.57% and 7.97% on CFI-V2, and 15.38% and 20.06% on the DMSP dataset. Our code and DMSP dataset are available at https://github.com/Sabrina-han/DCAN
65. ❌ eXplaining to Learn (eX2L): Regularization Using Contrastive Visual Explanation Pairs for Distribution Shifts
作者: Paulo Mario P. Medina, Jose Marie Antonio Miñoza, Sebastian C. Ibañez 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06368v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 extensive research into mitigating distribution shifts, many existing algorithms yield inconsistent performance, often failing to outperform baseline Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) across diverse scenarios. Furthermore, high algorithmic complexity frequently limits interpretability and offers only an indirect means of addressing spurious correlations. We propose eXplaining to Learn (eX2L): an interpretable, explanation-based framework that decorrelates confounding features from a classifier’s latent representations during training. eX2L achieves this by penalizing the similarity between Grad-CAM activation maps generated by a primary label classifier and those from a concurrently trained confounder classifier. On the rigorous Spawrious Many-to-Many Hard Challenge benchmark, eX2L achieves an average accuracy (AA) of 82.24% +/- 3.87% and a worst-group accuracy (WGA) of 66.31% +/- 8.73%, outperforming the current state-of-the-art (SOTA) by 5.49% and 10.90%, respectively. Beyond its competitive performance, eX2L demonstrates that functional domain invariance can be achieved by explicitly decoupling label and nuisance attributes at the group level.
66. ❌ From Agent Loops to Deterministic Graphs: Execution Lineage for Reproducible AI-Native Work
作者: Josh Rosen, Seth Rosen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06365v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 systems are increasingly deployed as agentic workflows that interleave reasoning, tool use, memory, and iterative refinement. These systems are effective at producing answers, but they often rely on implicit conversational state, making it difficult to preserve stable work products, isolate irrelevant updates, or propagate changes through intermediate artifacts. We introduce execution lineage: an execution model in which AI-native work is represented as a directed acyclic graph (DAG) of artifact-producing computations with explicit dependencies, stable intermediate boundaries, and identity-based replay. The goal is not to make the model a better one-shot writer, but to make evolving AI-generated work maintainable under change. We compare execution-lineage replay against loop-centric update baselines on two controlled policy-memo update tasks. In an unrelated-branch update, DAG replay preserved the final memo exactly in all runs, with zero churn and zero unrelated-branch contamination, while loop baselines regenerated the memo and frequently imported unrelated context. In an intermediate-artifact edit, all systems reflected the new constraint in the final memo, but only DAG replay achieved perfect upstream preservation, downstream propagation, unaffected-artifact preservation, and cross-artifact consistency. These results show that final answer quality and maintained-state quality are distinct. Strong loop baselines can remain competitive at producing polished final outputs when the task is a bounded synthesis/update problem and all current sources fit in context, but immediate task success can mask partial state inconsistency that may compound over future revisions. Execution lineage provides stronger guarantees about what should change, what should remain stable, and how work evolves across revisions.
67. ❌ Flow Matching with Arbitrary Auxiliary Paths
作者: Xin Peng, Ang Gao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06364v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 generative modeling framework, \textbf{Flow Matching with Arbitrary Auxiliary Paths (AuxPath-FM)}, which generalizes conditional flow matching by incorporating an auxiliary variable drawn from an arbitrary distribution into the probability path. Unlike prior methods that restrict auxiliary components to Gaussian noise, AuxPath-FM allows the variable $η$ to follow any distribution, producing trajectories of the form $X_t = a(t)X_1 + b(t)X_0 + c(t)η$. We theoretically demonstrate that this construction preserves the continuity equation and maintains a training objective consistent with the marginal formulation. This flexibility enables the design of diverse probability paths using various priors, including Gaussian, Uniform, Laplace, and discrete Rademacher distributions, each offering unique geometric properties for generative flows. Furthermore, our framework allows for specialized tasks such as label-guided generation by encoding structured semantic information into the auxiliary distribution. Overall, AuxPath-FM provides a principled and general foundation for probability path design, offering both theoretical generality and practical flexibility for diverse generative modeling tasks.
68. ❌ Memory Efficient Full-gradient Attacks (MEFA) Framework for Adversarial Defense Evaluations
作者: Yuan Du, Mitchel Hill, HanQin Cai 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06357v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 work studies the robust evaluation of iterative stochastic purification defenses under white-box adversarial attacks. Our key technical insight is that gradient checkpointing makes exact end-to-end gradient computation through long purification trajectories practical by trading additional recomputation for substantially lower memory usage. This enables full-gradient adaptive attacks against diffusion- and Langevin-based purification defenses, where prior evaluations often resort to approximate backpropagation due to memory constraints. These approximations can weaken the attack signal and risk overestimating robustness. In parallel, stochasticity in iterative purification is frequently under-controlled, even though different purification trajectories can substantially change reported robustness metrics. Building on this insight, we introduce a memory-efficient full-gradient evaluation framework for stochastic purification defenses. The framework combines checkpointed backpropagation with evaluation protocols that control stochastic variability, thereby reducing memory bottlenecks while preserving exact gradients. We evaluate diffusion-based purification and Langevin sampling with Energy-Based Models (EBMs), demonstrating that full-gradient attacks uncover vulnerabilities missed by approximate-gradient evaluations. Our framework yields stronger state-of-the-art $\ell_{\infty}$ and $\ell_{2}$ white-box attacks and further supports probing out-of-distribution robustness. Overall, our results show that exact-gradient evaluation is essential for reliable benchmarking of iterative stochastic defenses.
69. ❌ Topological Signatures of Grokking
作者: Yifan Tang, Qiquan Wang, Inés García-Redondo, Anthea Monod 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06352v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 grokking phenomenon through the lens of topology. Using persistent homology on point clouds derived from the embedding matrices of a range of models trained on modular arithmetic with varying primes, we identify a clear and consistent topological signature of grokking: a sharp increase in both the maximum and total persistence of first homology ($H_1$). Persistence diagrams reveal the emergence of a dominant long-lived topological feature together with increasingly structured secondary features, reflecting the underlying cyclic structure of the task. Compared to existing spectral and geometric diagnostics – specifically, Fourier analysis and local intrinsic dimension – persistent homology provides a unified geometric and topological characterization of representation learning, capturing both local and global multi-scale structure. Ablations across data regimes and control settings show that these topological transitions are tied to generalization rather than memorization. Our results suggest that persistent homology offers a principled and interpretable framework for analyzing how neural networks internalize latent structure during training.
70. ❌ Is Escalation Worth It? A Decision-Theoretic Characterization of LLM Cascades
作者: Dylan Bouchard 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06350v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Model cascades, in which a cheap LLM defers to an expensive one on low-confidence queries, are widely used to navigate the cost-quality tradeoff at deployment. Existing approaches largely treat the deferral threshold as an empirical hyperparameter, with limited guidance on the geometry of the resulting cost-quality frontier over a model pool. We develop a decision-theoretic framework grounded in constrained optimization and duality. For a two-model cascade, we establish piecewise concavity of the cost-quality frontier on decreasing-benefit regions of the confidence support, with reciprocal shadow prices linking the budget- and quality-constrained formulations. Given a pool of $k$ models, we characterize the frontier achievable by deterministic two-model threshold cascades as the pointwise envelope over $\binom{k}{2}$ pairwise cascades, with switching points where the optimal pair changes. For $k$-model cascades, we derive first-order conditions in which a single shadow price equalizes marginal quality-per-cost across stage boundaries. We validate the framework on five benchmarks (MATH, MMLU, TriviaQA, SimpleQA, LiveCodeBench) across eight models from five providers. Within the deterministic threshold-cascade class, full fixed chains underperform the pairwise envelope, and optimized subsequence cascades do not deliver practically meaningful held-out gains over it. A lightweight pre-generation router exceeds the best cascade policy on four of five datasets, mainly because it avoids the cheap model’s generation cost on queries sent directly to a larger model rather than because of a stronger routing signal. These results suggest that cascade performance is limited primarily by structural cost, since cascades pay the cheap model before any escalation decision, rather than by a shortage of intermediate stages.
71. ❌ Human-AI Co-Evolution and Epistemic Collapse: A Dynamical Systems Perspective
作者: Xuening Wu, Yanlan Kang, Qianya Xu, Kexuan Xie, Jiaqi Mi, Honggang Wang, Yubin Liu, Zeping Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06347v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 reshaping how knowledge is produced, with increasing reliance on AI systems for generation, summarization, and reasoning. While prior work has studied cognitive offloading in humans and model collapse in recursive training, these effects are typically considered in isolation. We propose a unified perspective: humans and language models form a coupled dynamical system linked by a feedback loop of usage, generation, and retraining. We introduce a minimal model with three variables – human cognition, data quality, and model capability – and show that this feedback can give rise to distinct dynamical regimes. Our analysis identifies three regimes: co-evolutionary enhancement, fragile equilibrium, and degenerative convergence. Through a simple simulation, we demonstrate that increasing reliance on AI can induce a transition toward a low-diversity, suboptimal equilibrium. From an information-theoretic perspective, this transition corresponds to an emergent information bottleneck in the human-AI loop, where entropy reduction reflects loss of diversity and support under closed-loop feedback rather than beneficial compression. These results suggest that the trajectory of AI systems is shaped not only by model design, but by the dynamics of human-AI co-evolution.
72. ❌ Prediction and Empowerment: A Theory of Agency through Bridge Interfaces
作者: Richard Csaky 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06346v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 agency under partial observability in deterministic physical or simulated worlds, where apparent randomness arises from uncertainty over initial conditions, fixed law bits, and unrolled exogenous noise. We model sensing and actuation as bridge interfaces split between agent-controlled parameters and environment-controlled channel state, inducing a deterministic POMDP through a prior over latent microstates and many-to-one observation coarsening. Within this framework, we prove a separation between prediction, compression, and empowerment. Perfect prediction can be achieved either by identifying the hidden quotient relevant to the target family or by overwrite control that makes the future target action-determined; high empowerment alone is insufficient. Under refinable interfaces and sufficient memory, action-conditioned observation-compression progress reduces posterior uncertainty about the latent quotient, and when refinement requires steering world-side channel conditions, this creates target-conditioned interface empowerment. A bit-string specialization with a conserved information budget makes the resulting tradeoff explicit: prediction by identification requires internal capacity at least the relevant latent entropy, whereas overwrite control requires terminal action capacity over the controlled quotient. For modern AI agents, the results suggest a design principle rather than a theorem of inevitability: objectives should distinguish hidden-state identification, interface refinement, task-relevant controllability, and mere overwrite or distractor control. Human–AI alignment is partly an interface-design problem, where the relevant bridge is between human intent, agent internal state, external tools, and world-side channel conditions. This is a working draft: feedback and criticism is most welcome.
73. ❌ More Than Can Be Said: A Benchmark and Framework for Pre-Question Scientific Ideation
作者: Jie Yu, Song Qiu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06345v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 research agents have shown strong potential in automating literature search and manuscript refinement, yet most assume a clear and actionable initial input, operating only after a research question has been made explicit. In contrast, human research often begins with tacit friction, a sense of misalignment before a question can be formed. We introduce InciteResearch, a multi-agent framework designed to make a researcher’s implicit understanding explicit, inspectable, and actionable. InciteResearch decomposes the logical chain of Socratic questioning and distributes it across the entire pipeline that: (1) Elicits a structured five-dimensional researcher profile state anchored by specific friction points from vague, even domain-unrelated inputs; (2) Violates hidden assumptions by maximizing the feasibility-novelty product with enforcing a 7-stage causal derivation trace; and (3) check whether the proposed method is a Necessary consequence of the reframed insight. We further introduce TF-Bench, the first benchmark for tacit-to-explicit research assistance that distinguishes domain-related from domain-unrelated inspirations across four scientific modes. On TF-Bench, InciteResearch achieves leapfrogging gains over a prompt-based baseline (novelty/impact from 3.671/3.806 to 4.250/4.397), shifting generated proposals from recombination to architectural insight. Our work demonstrates that AI can serve as an extension of thinking itself, rather than merely automating downstream execution.
74. ❌ Mind the Gap? A Distributional Comparison of Real and Synthetic Priors for Tabular Foundation Models
作者: Alex O. Davies, Telmo de Menezes e Silva Filho, Nirav Ajmeri 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06343v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Tabular foundation models are pre-trained on one of three classes of corpus: curated datasets drawn from benchmark repositories, tables harvested at scale from the web, or synthetic tables sampled from a parametric generative prior. Despite the centrality of pre-training data to model performance, little is known about how these corpora relate to one another in distribution, and the impact this has on downstream performance. In this work we take three canonical, archetypal datasets used to train tabular foundation models; the T4 dataset represents web-scraped corpora, the TabFM dataset curated tables from Kaggle, and the TabICL dataset as the only well-used synthetic prior with publicly available parameters. We characterise each corpus using aggregate features over whole tables, columns and correlations, and compare them using discriminator AUCs and k-NN coverage metrics. We find that the TabICL synthetic prior occupies a narrow region of the space of real tables, that this mismatch cannot be closed by optimising prior hyper-parameters across more than 86 thousand configurations, and that curated and web-scraped corpora are broadly interchangeable on a distributional level in feature space. Surprisingly, the distributional gap between synthetic pre-training data and real tables has a clearly detectable effect on performance under neither feature-based proximity measures or TabICL’s own internal representations, suggesting that coverage of the real-data distribution is not the primary driver of TabICL’s generalisation.
75. ❌ CoupleEvo: Evolving Heuristics for Coupled Optimization Problems Using Large Language Models
作者: Thomas Bömer, Bastian Amberg, Max Disselnmeyer, Anne Meyer 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06341v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Many real-world optimization problems consist of multiple tightly coupled subproblems whose solutions must be coordinated to achieve high overall performance. However, existing large language model driven automated heuristic design approaches are limited to single-problem settings. In this paper, we propose CoupleEvo. CoupleEvo proposes three evolutionary coordination strategies to evolve heuristics for coupled optimization problems: the sequential strategy evolves heuristics for one subproblem after the other; the iterative strategy alternates the evolution of heuristics for different subproblems over successive generations; and the integrated strategy evolves heuristics for all problems simultaneously. The approach is evaluated on two representative coupled optimization problems. Experimental results show that decomposition-based strategies (sequential and iterative) provide more stable convergence and higher solution quality, while the integrated evolution strategy suffers from increased search complexity and variability. These findings highlight the importance of coordinating evolutionary search across interdependent subproblems and demonstrate the potential of LLM-driven heuristic design for complex coupled optimization problems. The code is available: https://github.com/tb-git-kit-research/CoupleEvo.
76. ❌ A Regime Theory of Controller Class Selection for LLM Action Decisions
作者: Zhaoyang Jiang, Zhizhong Fu, Yunsoo Kim, Jiacong Mi, Zicheng Li, Xuanqi Peng, Honghan Wu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06339v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Deployed language and vision-language models must decide, on each input, whether to answer directly, retrieve evidence, defer to a stronger model, or abstain. Contrary to the common monotonicity intuition, greater per-input expressivity is not uniformly beneficial in finite samples: under identical strict cross-validation, different benchmarks prefer different controller classes. This reflects a finite-sample limitation of instance-level uncertainty signals, which can be exhausted at a distribution-dependent scale. We organize controllers into a nested lattice of four classes: fixed actions, partition routers, instance-level controllers, and prior-gated controllers, ordered by complexity. We prove a regime theory that turns three data-estimable bottlenecks into a class choice: how much improvement is possible beyond the best fixed action, whether there are enough samples for instance-level controllers to make reliable decisions, and how much improvement a coarse partition router can recover when instance-level signal is unreliable. The resulting Bernstein-tight threshold has a matching information-theoretic lower bound, and strict nested cross-validation provably selects a near-best class. Across SMS-Spam, HallusionBench, A-OKVQA, and FOLIO, the predicted class matches the empirical winner; the prior-gated controller wins on TextVQA when OCR tokens supply a label-free prediction-time prior. Code is available at https://github.com/Anonymous-Awesome-Submissions/Regime-Theory.
77. ❌ Fine-Tuning Small Language Models for Solution-Oriented Windows Event Log Analysis
作者: Siraaj Akhtar, Saad Khan, Simon Parkinson 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06330v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 shown promise for event log analysis, but their high computational requirements, reliance on cloud infrastructure, and security concerns limit practical deployment. In addition, most existing approaches focus only on the identification of the problem and do not provide actionable remediation. Small language models (SLMs) present a light-weight alternative that can be fine-tuned for a specific purpose and hosted locally. This paper investigates whether SLMs, when fine-tuned for a specific task, can serve as a practical alternative for event log analysis while also generating solutions. We first create a large-scale synthetic Windows event log dataset that contains remediation actions using a high-performing LLM. We then fine-tune multiple SLMs and LLMs using the LoRA parameter-efficient fine-tuning technique and evaluate their performance by comparing with expert assessment. The results show that the dataset accurately reflects real-world scenarios and that fine-tuned SLMs consistently outperform LLMs in identifying issues and providing relevant remediation, while requiring fewer computational resources.
78. ❌ TinyBayes: Closed-Form Bayesian Inference via Jacobi Prior for Real-Time Image Classification on Edge Devices
作者: Shouvik Sardar, Sourish Das 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06333v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Cocoa (Theobroma cacao) is a critical cash crop for millions of smallholder farmers in West Africa, where Cocoa Swollen Shoot Virus Disease (CSSVD) and anthracnose cause devastating yield losses. Automated disease detection from leaf images is essential for early intervention, yet deploying such systems in resource-constrained settings demands models that are small, fast, and require no internet connectivity. Existing edge-deployable plant disease systems rely on end-to-end deep learning without uncertainty quantification, while Bayesian methods for edge devices focus on hardware-level inference architectures rather than agricultural applications. We bridge this gap with TinyBayes, the first framework to combine a closed-form Bayesian classifier with a mobile-grade computer vision pipeline for crop disease detection. Our pipeline uses YOLOv8-Nano (5.9 MB) for lesion localisation, MobileNetV3-Small (3.5 MB) for feature extraction, and the Jacobi prior; a Bayesian method that provides a closed form non-iterative estimators via projection, for the classification. The Jacobi-DMR (Distributed Multinomial Regression) classifier adds only 13.5 KB to the pipeline, bringing the total model size within 9.5 MB, while achieving 78.7% accuracy on the Amini Cocoa Contamination Challenge dataset and enabling end-to-end CPU inference under 150 ms per image. We benchmark against seven classifiers including Random Forest, SVM, Ridge, Lasso, Elastic Net, XGBoost, and Jacobi-GP, and demonstrate that the Jacobi-DMR offers the best trade-off between accuracy, model size, and inference speed for edge deployment. We have proved the asymptotic equivalence and consistency, asymptotic normality and the bias correction of Jacobi-DMR. All data and codes are available here: https://github.com/shouvik-sardar/TinyBayes
79. ❌ Measuring Evaluation-Context Divergence in Open-Weight LLMs: A Paired-Prompt Protocol with Pilot Evidence of Alignment-Pipeline-Specific Heterogeneity
作者: Florian A. D. Burnat, Brittany I. Davidson 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06327v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Safety benchmarks are routinely treated as evidence about how a language model will behave once deployed, but this inference is fragile if behavior depends on whether a prompt looks like an evaluation. We define evaluation-context divergence as an observable within-item change in behavior induced by framing a fixed task as an evaluation, a live deployment interaction, or a neutral request, and present a paired-prompt protocol that measures it in open-weight LLMs while controlling for paraphrase variation, benchmark familiarity, and judge framing-sensitivity. Across five instruction-tuned checkpoints from four open-weight families plus a matched OLMo-3 base/instruct ablation ($20$ paired items, $840$ generations per checkpoint), we find striking heterogeneity. OLMo-3-Instruct alone is eval-cautious – evaluation framing raises refusal vs. neutral by $11.8$pp ($p=0.007$) and reduces harmful compliance vs. deployment by $3.6$pp ($p=0.024$, $0/20$ items inverted) – while Mistral-Small-3.2, Phi-3.5-mini, and Llama-3.1-8B are deployment-cautious}, with marginal eval-vs-deployment refusal effects of $-9$ to $-20$pp. The matched OLMo-3 base also exhibits the deployment-cautious pattern, identifying alignment as the inversion stage; within Llama-3.1, the $70$B model preserves direction with attenuated magnitude, ruling out a simple ``small-model effect that reverses at scale.’’ One caveat: the cross-family heterogeneity is judge-dependent. Re-judging with a different-family safety classifier (Llama-Guard-3-8B) preserves the within-OLMo eval-cautious direction but flattens the cross-family contrast, indicating that the two judges operationalize distinct constructs.
80. ❌ Improving the Efficiency of Language Agent Teams with Adaptive Task Graphs
作者: Elizabeth Mieczkowski, Alexander Ku, Tiwalayo Eisape, Dilip Arumugam, John Matters, Katherine M. Collins, Ilia Sucholutsky, Thomas L. Griffiths 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06320v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 deployed in teams, yet existing coordination approaches often occupy two extremes. Highly structured methods rely on fixed roles, pipelines, or task decompositions assigned a priori. In contrast, fully unstructured teams enable adaptability and exploration but suffer from inefficiencies such as error propagation, inter-agent conflicts, and wasted resources (measured in time, tokens, or file operations). We introduce Language Agent Teams for Task Evolution (LATTE), a framework for coordinating LLM teams inspired by distributed systems, where processors must operate under partial observability and communication constraints. In LATTE, a team of agents collaboratively construct and maintain a shared, evolving coordination graph which encodes sub-task dependencies, individual agent assignment, and the current state of sub-task progress. This protocol maintains consistency while empowering agents to dynamically allocate work, adapt coordination, and discover new tasks. Across multiple collaborative tasks and a variety of base models, we demonstrate how LATTE reduces token usage, wall-clock time, communication, and coordination failures (e.g. file conflicts and redundant outputs) while matching or exceeding the accuracy of standard designs including MetaGPT, decentralized teams, top-down Leader-Worker hierarchies, and static decompositions.
81. ❌ NavOne: One-Step Global Planning for Vision-Language Navigation on Top-Down Maps
作者: Dijia Zhan, Jinyi Li, Chenxi Zheng, Shaoyu Huang, Yong Li, Jie Tang, Xuemiao Xu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06317v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 Vision-Language Navigation (VLN) methods typically adopt an egocentric, step-by-step paradigm, which struggles with error accumulation and limits efficiency. While recent approaches attempt to leverage pre-built environment maps, they often rely on incrementally updating memory graphs or scoring discrete path proposals, which restricts continuous spatial reasoning and creates discrete bottlenecks. We propose Top-Down VLN (TD-VLN), reformulating navigation as a one-step global path planning problem on pre-built top-down maps, supported by our newly constructed R2R-TopDown dataset. To solve this, we introduce NavOne, a unified framework that directly predicts dense path probabilities over multi-modal maps in a single end-to-end forward pass. NavOne features a Top-Down Map Fuser for joint multi-modal map representation, and extends Attention Residuals for spatial-aware depth mixing. Extensive experiments on R2R-TopDown show that NavOne achieves state-of-the-art performance among map-based VLN methods, with a planning-stage speedup of 8x over existing map-based baselines and 80x over egocentric methods, enabling highly efficient global navigation.
82. ❌ Pro-KLShampoo: Projected KL-Shampoo with Whitening Recovered by Orthogonalization
作者: Ruotong Sun, Ermin Wei 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06316v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Optimizers that exploit the matrix structure of gradients are central to modern LLM pre-training, with two distinct frontiers: explicit Kronecker-factored preconditioning – most recently KL-Shampoo, which estimates the preconditioner via KL divergence minimization – and orthogonalization of the gradient momentum, exemplified by Muon and analyzed as steepest descent under the spectral norm. The two routes are typically developed in isolation. We make a structural observation about KL-Shampoo’s Kronecker preconditioners: their eigenvalue spectra exhibit a \emph{spike-and-flat} shape – a few dominant eigenvalues followed by an approximately uniform tail – across layers and training stages, holding exactly under a rank-$ρ$ signal-plus-noise gradient model. We exploit this structure by restricting one of KL-Shampoo’s Kronecker factors to a parametric family aligned with the spike-and-flat shape: full spectral structure on a tracked $r$-dimensional subspace, single shared eigenvalue across the remaining $n-r$ directions. On these directions, we apply orthogonalization. An identity shows that this orthogonalization recovers the algebraic form of full KL-Shampoo’s preconditioner. On four pre-training scales (GPT-2 124M / 350M, LLaMA 134M / 450M), Pro-KLShampoo consistently outperforms KL-Shampoo at every subspace rank we test in validation loss, peak per-GPU memory, and wallclock time to reach each loss level.
83. ❌ Measuring Black-Box Confidence via Reasoning Trajectories: Geometry, Coverage, and Verbalization
作者: Marc Boubnovski Martell, Josefa Lia Stoisser, Kaspar Märtens, Jialin Yu, Robert Kitchen, Philip Torr, Jesper Ferkinghoff-Borg 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06308v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 confidence estimation enables safe deployment of chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning through text-only APIs. Yet the dominant black-box baseline, self-consistency over K samples, is linearly expensive and ignores the geometry of the trace. We propose a black-box trajectory-confidence score: we embed a CoT as a sliding-window trajectory and measure its convergence to external answer anchors with a one-parameter softmax. The method needs no logits, hidden states, or supervised calibrators. Across six (benchmark, reasoner) settings on MedQA-USMLE, GPQA Diamond, and MMLU-Pro with Gemini 3.1 Pro and Claude Sonnet 4.6, fusing this score with coverage and verbalized-confidence channels at K=4 yields Pareto improvements over self-consistency at K=8 in 6/6 settings (median AUC 0.78 vs 0.71, deltaAUC=+0.075). A fixed-pick control (+0.060) and E5 cross-embedder replication rule out answer switching and single-vendor artifacts. Geometry peaks in the penultimate window across benchmarks and reasoners, and inverts at the terminal window on GPQA Diamond. Three unscaffolded regimes separate black-box confidence into a judge-mediated Coverage prior (C), within-trace Geometry (G), and a conditional Verbalization channel (V). Across 18 benchmark x reasoner x proposer settings, C and G provide independent signal in 18/18 and 16/18, while V contributes residual signal in 6/18. Swapping the judge from GPT-5-mini to Claude Sonnet 4.6 leaves G-only AUC unchanged (|delta|<=0.013) and shifts C-only AUC by at most +/-0.02 (kappa=0.82). Fusion beats the best single channel in 17/18 settings (median AUC 0.78, max 0.92).
84. ❌ Addressing Labelled Data Scarcity: Taxonomy-Agnostic Annotation of PII Values in HTTP Traffic using LLMs
作者: Thomas Cory, Axel Küpper 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06305v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 privacy audits of web and mobile applications often analyse outbound HTTP traffic to detect Personally Identifiable Information (PII) leakage. However, existing learning-based detectors typically depend on scarce, manually labelled traffic and are tightly coupled to fixed label taxonomies, limiting transferability across domains and evolving definitions of PII. This paper investigates whether Large Language Models (LLMs) can support taxonomy-agnostic annotation of explicitly transmitted PII values in HTTP message bodies when the taxonomy is provided at runtime. We introduce a multi-stage LLM-based pipeline that combines deterministic pre-processing with label-level classification, targeted instance-level value annotation, and output validation. To enable controlled evaluation and exemplar-based prompting without relying on sensitive real-user captures, we further propose an LLM-based generator for synthetic HTTP traffic with manually validated, taxonomy-derived PII annotations. We evaluate the approach across three taxonomies spanning different PII domains and granularity levels. Results show that the pipeline accurately detects PII types and extracts corresponding values for concrete PII taxonomies. Overall, our findings position LLMs as a promising foundation for flexible, taxonomy-agnostic traffic annotation and for creating labelled data under evolving privacy taxonomies.
85. ❌ Render, Don’t Decode: Weight-Space World Models with Latent Structural Disentanglement
作者: Roussel Desmond Nzoyem, Mauro Comi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06298v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 world models on vast quantities of unlabelled videos is a critical step toward fully autonomous intelligence. However, the prevailing paradigm of encoding raw pixels into opaque latent spaces and relying on heavy decoders for reconstruction leaves these models computationally expensive and uninterpretable. We address this problem by introducing NOVA, a world modelling framework that represents the system state as the weights and biases of an auxiliary coordinate-based implicit neural representation (INR). This structured representation is analytically rendered, which eliminates the decoder bottleneck while conferring compactness, portability, and zero-shot super-resolution. Furthermore, like most latent action models, NOVA can be distilled into a context-dependent video generator via an action-matching objective. Surprisingly, without resorting to auxiliary losses or adversarial objectives, NOVA can disentangle structural scene components such as background, foreground, and inter-frame motion, enabling users to edit either content or dynamics without compromising the other. We validate our framework on several challenging datasets, achieving strong controllable forecasting while operating on a single consumer GPU at $\sim$40M parameters. Ultimately, structured representations like INRs not only enhance our understanding of latent dynamics but also pave the way for immersive and customisable virtual experiences.
86. ❌ Attributions All the Way Down? The Metagame of Interpretability
作者: Hubert Baniecki, Przemyslaw Biecek, Fabian Fumagalli 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06295v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 metagame, a conceptual framework for quantifying second-order interaction effects of model explanations. For any first-order attribution $φ(f)$ explaining a model $f$, we measure the directional influence of feature $j$ on the attribution of feature $i$, denoted as meta-attribution $\varphi_{j \to i}(f)$, by treating the attribution method itself as a cooperative game and computing its Shapley value. Theoretically, we prove that attributions hierarchically decompose into meta-attributions, and establish these as directional extensions of existing interaction indices. Empirically, we demonstrate that the metagame delivers insights across diverse interpretability applications: (i) quantifying token interactions in instruction-tuned language models, (ii) explaining cross-modal similarity in vision-language encoders, and (iii) interpreting text-to-image concepts in multimodal diffusion transformers.
87. ❌ Log-Likelihood, Simpson’s Paradox, and the Detection of Machine-Generated Text
作者: Tom Kempton, Viktor Drobnyi, Maeve Madigan, Stuart Burrell 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06294v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 ability to reliably distinguish human-written text from that generated by large language models is of profound societal importance. The dominant approach to this problem exploits the likelihood hypothesis: that machine-generated text should appear more probable to a detector language model than human-written text. However, we demonstrate that the token-level signal distinguishing human and machine text is non-uniform across the hidden space of the detector model, and naively averaging likelihood-based token scores across regions with fundamentally different statistical structure, as most detectors do, causes a form of Simpson’s paradox: a strong local signal is destroyed by inappropriate aggregation. To correct for this, we introduce a learned local calibration step grounded in Bayesian decision theory. Rather than aggregating raw token scores, we first learn lightweight predictors of the score distributions conditioned on position in hidden space, and aggregate calibrated log-likelihood ratios instead. This single intervention dramatically and consistently improves detection performance across all baseline detectors and all datasets we consider. For example, our calibrated variant of Fast-DetectGPT improves AUROC from $0.63$ to $0.85$ on GPT-5.4 text, and a locally-calibrated DMAP detector we introduce achieves state-of-the-art performance across the board. That said, our central contribution is not a new detector, but a precise diagnosis of a significant cause of under-performance of existing detectors and a principled, modular remedy compatible with any token-averaging pipeline. This will serve as a foundation for the community to build upon, with natural avenues including richer distributional models, improved calibration strategies, and principled ensembling with hidden-space geometry signals via the full Bayes-optimal decision rule.
88. ❌ Data Language Models: A New Foundation Model Class for Tabular Data
作者: Eda Erol, Giuliano Pezzoli, Ozer Cem Kelahmet 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06290v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Every major data modality now has a foundation model that understands it natively: text has language models, images have vision models, audio has audio models. Tabular data, the modality on which many consequential real-world AI decisions are made, does not. Every approach to tabular AI today, from gradient-boosted trees to the latest tabular foundation models, requires a preprocessing pipeline before any model can consume the data. None of them understand tabular data as a modality. We introduce the Data Language Model (DLM), the missing foundation model for tabular data. A DLM understands tables the way a language model understands sentences: natively, without serialization or preprocessing, directly from raw cell values. It is the tabular data layer on which AI models, agents, and vertical AI applications can be built, eliminating the preprocessing pipelines that currently stand between raw data and every AI system that consumes it. We present Schema-1, the first DLM: a 140M parameter model trained on more than 2.3M synthetic and real-world tabular datasets. Schema-1 outperforms gradient-boosted ensembles, AutoML stacks, and the tabular foundation models we evaluate on established row-level prediction benchmarks. On missing value reconstruction it achieves lower reconstruction error than all classical statistical methods and frontier large language models on mean performance across conditions, establishing that structural understanding of a dataset’s own distributional geometry is more useful for imputation than world knowledge encoded in language. It identifies the industry sector of any unseen dataset from raw cell values alone, reliably across any domain, a task no prior tabular model can perform. It is the native tabular understanding layer that has been missing from the AI stack.
89. ❌ Multimodal Deep Generative Model for Semi-Supervised Learning under Class Imbalance
作者: Heegeon Yoon, Heeyoung Kim 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06289v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 modeling class-imbalanced data, it is crucial to address the imbalance, as models trained on such data tend to be biased towards the majority classes. This problem is amplified under partial supervision, where pseudo-labels for unlabeled data are predicted based on imbalanced labeled data, propagating the bias. While recent semi-supervised models address class imbalance, they typically assume single-modal input data. However, with the growing availability of multimodal data, it is essential to leverage complementary modalities. In this article, we propose a multimodal deep generative model for semi-supervised learning under class imbalance. Our approach uses separate encoders for each modality, sharing latent variables across modalities, and simplifies joint posterior computation with a product-of-experts method. To further address class imbalance, we replace typical Gaussian distributions with Student’s t-distributions for the prior, encoder, and decoder, better capturing the heavy-tailed latent distributions in imbalanced data. We derive a new objective function for training the proposed model on both labeled and unlabeled data using $γ$-power divergence. Empirical results on benchmark and real-world datasets demonstrate that our model outperforms baseline methods in generalization, achieving superior classification performance for partially labeled multimodal data with imbalanced class distributions.
90. ❌ A Topological Sorting Criterion for Random Causal Directed Acyclic Graphs
作者: Alexander G. Reisach, Antoine Chambaz, Gilles Blanchard, Sebastian Weichwald 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06288v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Random directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) based on imposing an order on Erdős-Rényi and scale free random graphs are widely used for evaluating causal discovery algorithms. We show that in such DAGs, the set of nodes reachable via open paths, termed relatives, increases monotonically along the causal order. We assess the prevalence of this pattern numerically, and demonstrate that it can be exploited for causal order recovery via sorting by the estimated number of relatives. We note that many simulations in the literature feature settings where this yields an excellent proxy for the causal order, and show that a strict increase of relatives along the causal order leads to a singular Markov equivalence class. We propose sampling time-series DAGs as a possible alternative and discuss implications for causal discovery algorithms and their evaluation on synthetic data.
91. ❌ Correct Code, Vulnerable Dependencies: A Large Scale Measurement Study of LLM-Specified Library Versions
作者: Chengjie Wang, Jingzheng Wu, Xiang Ling, Tianyue Luo, Chen Zhao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06279v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 largely involved in software development workflows, and the code they generate routinely includes third-party library (TPL) imports annotated with specific version identifiers. These version choices can carry security and compatibility risks, yet they have not been systematically studied. We present the first large-scale measurement study of version-level risk in LLM-generated Python code, evaluating 10 LLMs on PinTrace, a curated benchmark of 1,000 Stack Overflow programming tasks. LLMs tend to specify version identifiers when directly prompted at 26.83%-95.18%, while down to 6.45%-59.19% in creating a manifest file directly. Among the specified versions, 36.70%-55.70% of tasks contain at least one known CVE, and 62.75%-74.51% of them carry Critical or High severity ratings. In 72.27%-91.37% of cases, the associated CVEs were publicly disclosed before the model’s knowledge cutoff. The statistics show all models converge on the same small set of risky release versions, indicating a systemic bias rather than isolated model error. Static compatibility rates range from 19.70% to 63.20%, with installation failure as the dominant cause. The dynamic test cases confirm the pattern by 6.49%-48.62% pass rates. Further experiments confirm that these failures are attributable to version selection rather than code quality, and that externally anchored version constraints substantially reduce both vulnerability exposure and compatibility failures. Our findings reveal LLM version selection as a first-class, previously overlooked risk surface in LLM-based development. We disclosed these findings to the community of the evaluated models, and several confirmed the issue. All the code and dataset have been released for open science at https://github.com/dw763j/PinTrace.
92. ❌ Linear Semantic Segmentation for Low-Resource Spoken Dialects
作者: Kirill Chirkunov, Younes Samih, Abed Alhakim Freihat, Hanan Aldarmaki 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06276v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Semantic segmentation is a core component of discourse analysis, yet existing models are primarily developed and evaluated on high-resource written text, limiting their effectiveness on low-resource spoken varieties. In particular, dialectal Arabic exhibits informal syntax, code-switching, and weakly marked discourse structure that challenge standard segmentation approaches. In this paper, we introduce a new multi-genre benchmark (more than 1000 samples) for semantic segmentation in conversational Arabic, focusing on dialectal discourse. The benchmark covers transcribed casual telephone conversations, code-switched podcasts, broadcast news, and expressive dialogue from novels, and was annotated and validated by native Arabic annotators. Using this benchmark, we show that segmentation models performing well on MSA news genres degrade on dialectal transcribed speech. We further propose a segmentation model that targets local semantic coherence and robustness to discourse discontinuities, consistently outperforming strong baselines on dialectal non-news genres. The benchmark and approach generalize to other low-resource spoken languages.
93. ❌ Inference-Time Refinement Closes the Synthetic-Real Gap in Tabular Diffusion
作者: Eugenio Lomurno, Filippo Balzarini, Francesco Benelle, Francesca Pia Panaccione, Matteo Matteucci 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06261v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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-based generators set the current state of the art for synthetic tabular data. These methods approach but rarely exceed real-data utility, and closing this synthetic-real gap has so far been pursued exclusively at training time, via architectural advances, scaling, and retraining of monolithic generators. The inference-time alternative, i.e., refining the outputs of a pre-trained backbone with parameters left untouched, has remained largely unexplored for tabular synthesis. We introduce TARDIS (Tabular generation through Refinement, Distillation, and Inference-time Sampling), an inference-time refinement framework that operates on a frozen pre-trained backbone, configured per dataset by a Tree-structured Parzen Estimator search over score-level guidance during reverse diffusion, with each trial’s objective set by an inner grid search over post-hoc sample selectors and an optional soft-label distillation step. The search space encodes a single mathematical pattern we name Bidirectional Chamfer Refinement (BCR): the symmetric Chamfer functional between synthetic and real samples is minimized both continuously, via a score-level gradient, and discretely, via batch-ranking post-generation. The per-dataset search recovers BCR-aligned configurations on most datasets, evidence for BCR as the dominant refinement pattern. Across 15 binary, multiclass, and regression benchmarks TARDIS achieves a median +8.6% downstream-task improvement over models trained on real data (95% CI [+3.3, +16.4], Wilcoxon p=0.016, 11/15 strict wins) and improves over the TabDiff backbone on all 15 datasets (mean +12.9%, p<10^-4), matching the backbone on manifold fidelity, diversity, and sample-level privacy. Inference-time refinement of a pre-trained tabular diffusion backbone reaches and exceeds real-data utility in 1 to 80 minutes on a single consumer-grade GPU.
94. ❌ The Weight Gram Matrix Captures Sequential Feature Linearization in Deep Networks
作者: Taehun Cha, Daniel Beaglehole, Adityanarayanan Radhakrishnan, Donghun Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06258v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 deep neural networks learn representations remains a central challenge in machine learning theory. In this work, we propose a feature-centric framework for analyzing neural network training by relating weight updates to feature evolution. We introduce a simple identity, the Feature Learning Equation, which identifies the weight Gram matrix as the key object capturing feature dynamics. This enables us to interpret gradient descent as implicitly inducing a hypothetical evolution of features, whose covariance structure - termed the Virtual Covariance - characterizes how representations evolve during training. Building on this perspective, we introduce Target Linearity, a measure quantifying the linear alignment between features and targets. By analyzing the training and layer-wise dynamics, we show that deep networks learn to sequentially transform representations toward target-linear structure. This linearization perspective provides a unified interpretation of several empirical phenomena, including Neural Collapse and linear interpolation in generative models.
95. ❌ Cumulative-Goodness Free-Riding in Forward-Forward Networks: Real, Repairable, but Not Accuracy-Dominant
作者: Amirhossein Yousefiramandi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06240v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Forward-Forward (FF) training allows each layer to learn from a local goodness criterion. In cumulative-goodness variants, however, later layers can inherit a task that earlier layers have already partially separated. We formalize this phenomenon as layer free-riding: under the softplus FF criterion, the class-discrimination gradient reaching block $d$ decays exponentially with the positive margin accumulated by preceding blocks. We then study three local remedies – per-block, hardness-gated, and depth-scaled – that recover current-layer separation measures without relying on backpropagated gradients. On CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100, these remedies dramatically improve layer-separation statistics, with $4\times$–$45\times$ gains in deeper layers, while changing accuracy by less than one percentage point for non-degenerate training procedures. Tiny ImageNet provides a tougher cross-dataset check for our selected block-wise configuration and reveals the same qualitative gap between layer-health diagnostics and final accuracy. Calibration experiments further show that architecture and augmentation choices have a larger effect on final accuracy than the training-rule modifications studied here. Cumulative free-riding is therefore a real and repairable optimization pathology. Nonetheless, for the FF training rules, architectures, and datasets we study, it is not the dominant factor limiting achievable accuracy.
96. ❌ Band Together: Untargeted Adversarial Training with Multimodal Coordination against Evasion-based Promotion Attacks
作者: Guanmeng Xian, Ning Yang, Philip S. Yu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06238v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 recommender systems exploit visual and textual signals to alleviate data sparsity, but this also makes them more vulnerable to evasion-based promotion attacks. Existing defenses are largely limited to single-modal settings and mainly focus on poisoning-based threats, leaving evasion-based threats underexplored. In this work, we first identify a cross-modal gradient mismatch under the multi-user promotion setting, where visual and textual perturbations are optimized in inconsistent directions due to the dominance of distinct user groups. This phenomenon dilutes the attack effectiveness and leads robust training to underestimate worst-case risks. To address this issue, we propose Untargeted Adversarial Training with Multimodal Coordination (UAT-MC). UAT-MC tackles the challenge of unknown targeted items in evasion-based attacks (as opposed to poisoning-based attacks) by treating all items as potential targets, and introduces a gradient alignment mechanism to explicitly correct this mismatch. This design ensures synchronized perturbations across modalities, thereby maximizing adversarial strength for robust training. Extensive experiments demonstrate that UAT-MC significantly improves robustness against promotion attacks while maintaining acceptable recommendation performance under the defense-accuracy trade-off. Code is available at https://github.com/gmXian/UAT-MC.
97. ❌ OBLIQ-Bench: Exposing Overlooked Bottlenecks in Modern Retrievers with Latent and Implicit Queries
作者: Diane Tchuindjo, Devavrat Shah, Omar Khattab 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06235v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Retrieval benchmarks are increasingly saturating, but we argue that efficient search is far from a solved problem. We identify a class of queries we call oblique, which seek documents that instantiate a latent pattern, like finding all tweets that express an implicit stance, chat logs that demonstrate a particular failure mode, or transcripts that match an abstract scenario. We study three mechanisms through which obliqueness may arise and introduce OBLIQ-Bench, a suite of five oblique search problems over real long-tail corpora. OBLIQ-Bench exposes an overlooked asymmetry between retrieval and verification, where reasoning LLMs reliably recognize latent relevance whenever relevant documents are surfaced, but even sophisticated retrieval pipelines fail to surface most relevant documents in the first place. We hope that OBLIQ-Bench will drive research into retrieval architectures that efficiently capture latent patterns and implicit signals in large corpora.
98. ❌ Soft Deterministic Policy Gradient with Gaussian Smoothing
作者: Hyunjun Na, Donghwan Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06228v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Deterministic policy gradient (DPG) is widely utilized for continuous control; however, it inherently relies on the differentiability of the critic with respect to the action during policy updates. This assumption is violated in practical control problems involving sparse or discrete rewards, leading to ill-defined policy gradients and unstable learning. To address these challenges, we propose a principled alternative based on a smoothed Bellman equation formulated via Gaussian smoothing. Specifically, we define a novel action-value function based on a smoothed Bellman equation and derive the soft deterministic policy gradient (Soft-DPG). Our formulation eliminates explicit dependence on critic action-gradients and ensures that the gradient remains well-defined even for non-smooth Q-functions. We instantiate this framework into a deep reinforcement learning algorithm, which we call soft deep deterministic policy gradient (Soft DDPG). Empirical evaluations on standard continuous control benchmarks and their discretized-reward variants show that Soft DDPG remains competitive in dense-reward settings and provides clear gains in most discretized-reward environments, where standard DDPG is more sensitive to irregular critic landscapes.
99. ❌ Safactory: A Scalable Agent Factory for Trustworthy Autonomous Intelligence
作者: Xinquan Chen, Zhenyun Yin, Shan He, Bin Huang, Shanzhe Lei, Pengcheng Shi, Kun Cai, Bei Chen, Bangwei Liu, Zeyu Kang, Chao Huang, Yang Zhang, Wenjie Li, Ruijun Ge, Yajie Wang, Tianshun Fang, Tianyang Xu, Yiwen Cong, Meng Jin, Gaolei Li, Xuansheng Wu, Linhan Liu, Zijing He, An Li, Yan Teng, Xin Tan, ChaoChao Lu, Ji He, Jie Li, Chunfeng Song, Jinya Xu, Fan Song, Shujie Wang, Jianmin Qian, Jie Hou, Xuhong Wang, Yingchun Wang, Hui Wang, Xia Hu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06230v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 models evolve from conversational assistants into autonomous agents, challenges increasingly arise from long-horizon decision making, tool use, and real environment interaction. Existing agenticinfrastructure remain fragmented across evaluation, data management, and agent evolution, making it difficult to discover risks systematically and improve models in a continuous closed loop. In this report, we present \textbf{Safactory}, a scalable agent factory for trustworthy autonomous intelligence. Safactory integrates three tightly coupled platforms: a \textbf{Parallel Simulation Platform} for trajectory generation, a \textbf{Trustworthy Data Platform} for trajectory storage and experience extraction, and an \textbf{Autonomous Evolution Platform} for asynchronous reinforcement learning and on-policy distillation. As far as we know, Safactory is the first framework to propose a unified evolutionary pipeline for next-generation trustworthy autonomous intelligence.
100. ❌ Price of Fairness in Short-Term and Long-Term Algorithmic Selections
作者: Shahin Jabbari, Chen Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06227v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Algorithmic decision-making in high-stakes settings can have profound impacts on individuals and populations. While much prior work studies fairness in static settings, recent results show that enforcing static fairness constraints may exacerbate long-run disparities. Motivated by this tension, we study a stylized sequential selection problem in which a decision-maker repeatedly selects individuals, affecting both immediate utility and the population distribution over time. We introduce notions of group fairness for both the short and long term and theoretically analyze the trade-off between fairness and utility via the Price of Fairness (PoF). We characterize optimal and fair policies in the short term and show that the PoF can be large even when group distributions are nearly identical. In contrast, we show that long-term disparities can vanish under simple investment policies that achieve a low PoF. We also empirically validate these theoretical observations using both synthetic and real datasets.
101. ❌ EMO: Pretraining Mixture of Experts for Emergent Modularity
作者: Ryan Wang, Akshita Bhagia, Sewon Min 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06663v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 are typically deployed as monolithic systems, requiring the full model even when applications need only a narrow subset of capabilities, e.g., code, math, or domain-specific knowledge. Mixture-of-Experts (MoEs) seemingly offer a potential alternative by activating only a subset of experts per input, but in practice, restricting inference to a subset of experts for a given domain leads to severe performance degradation. This limits their practicality in memory-constrained settings, especially as models grow larger and sparser. We introduce EMO, an MoE designed for modularity-the independent use and composition of expert subsets-without requiring human-defined priors. Our key idea is to encourage tokens from similar domains to rely on similar experts. Since tokens within a document often share a domain, EMO restricts them to select experts from a shared pool, while allowing different documents to use different pools. This simple constraint enables coherent expert groupings to emerge during pretraining using document boundaries alone. We pretrain a 1B-active, 14B-total EMO on 1T tokens. As a full model, it matches standard MoE performance. Crucially, it enables selective expert use: retaining only 25% (12.5%) of experts incurs just a 1% (3%) absolute drop, whereas standard MoEs break under the same setting. We further find that expert subsets in EMO specialize at semantic levels (e.g., domains such as math or code), in contrast to the low-level syntactic specialization observed in standard MoEs. Altogether, our results demonstrate a path toward modular, memory-efficient deployment of large, sparse models and open new opportunities for composable architectures.
102. ❌ Beyond Negative Rollouts: Positive-Only Policy Optimization with Implicit Negative Gradients
作者: Mingwei Xu, Hao Fang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06650v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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), due to the deterministic verification, becomes a dominant paradigm for enhancing the reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs). The community witnesses the rapid change from the Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) to Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), in which GRPO reduces the complicated advantage estimation with simple estimation over grouped positive and negative rollouts. However, we note that negative rollouts may admit no gradation of failure severity, and the combinatorial vastness makes penalizing a few sampled negatives unlikely to cover a meaningful reward signal under sparse binary rewards. In this work, we propose Positive-Only Policy Optimization (POPO), a novel RLVR framework in which learning can occur exclusively via online positive rollouts. Specifically, POPO utilizes bounded importance sampling over the positive rollout set. Thus, no disjoint negative rollouts are used for the gradient guidance. We show that implicit negative gradients can emerge naturally through reinforcing the positive probability via rollouts redistribution. Next, POPO stabilizes the policy optimization through two mechanisms. First, it applies a siamese policy network with a momentum-based adaptation law for stabilized policy evolution. Second, we replace the KL-divergence with a bounded similarity penalty term in the siamese representation space. We conduct extensive experiments using publicly available, well-established text-LLM models, e.g., the Qwen family, across all-level mathematical benchmarks. Our experiment demonstrates that POPO achieves performance comparable to, or even superior to GRPO. Notably, we show that POPO can achieve 36.67% in AIME 2025 with Qwen-Math-7B, outperforming GRPO 30.00%. Our ablation and sweep studies further illustrate the necessity and robustness of POPO components.
103. ❌ Cited but Not Verified: Parsing and Evaluating Source Attribution in LLM Deep Research Agents
作者: Hailey Onweller, Elias Lumer, Austin Huber, Pia Ramchandani, Vamse Kumar Subbiah, Corey Feld 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06635v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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) power deep research agents that synthesize information from hundreds of web sources into cited reports, yet these citations cannot be reliably verified. Current approaches either trust models to self-cite accurately, risking bias, or employ retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) that does not validate source accessibility, relevance, or factual consistency. We introduce the first source attribution evaluation framework that uses a reproducible AST parser to extract and evaluate inline citations from LLM-generated Markdown reports at scale. Unlike methods that verify claims in isolation, our framework closes the loop by retrieving the actual cited content, enabling human or model evaluators to judge each citation against its source. Citations are evaluated along three dimensions. (1) Link Works verifies URL accessibility, (2) Relevant Content measures topical alignment, and (3) Fact Check validates factual accuracy against source content. We benchmark 14 closed-source and open-source LLMs across three evaluation dimensions using rubric-based LLM-as-a-judge evaluators calibrated through human review. Our results reveal that even the strongest frontier models maintain link validity above 94% and relevance above 80%, yet achieve only 39-77% factual accuracy, while fewer than half of open-source models successfully generate cited reports in a one-shot setting. Ablation studies on research depth show that Fact Check accuracy drops by approximately 42% on average across two frontier models as tool calls scale from 2 to 150, demonstrating that more retrieval does not produce more accurate citations. These findings reveal a critical disconnect between surface-level citation quality and factual reliability, and our framework provides the evaluation infrastructure to assess the disconnect.
104. ❌ Parser agreement and disagreement in L2 Korean UD: Implications for human-in-the-loop annotation
作者: Hakyung Sung, Gyu-Ho Shin 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06625v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 simplified human-in-the-loop workflow for second language (L2) Korean morphosyntactic annotation by leveraging agreement between two domain-adapted parsers. We first evaluate whether parser agreement can serve as a proxy for annotation correctness by comparing it with independent human judgments. The results show strong correspondence between parser and human judgments, supporting the feasibility of semi-automatic L2-Korean UD annotation. Further analysis demonstrates that parser disagreements cluster in linguistically predictable domains such as grammatical-relation distinctions and clause-boundary ambiguity. While many disagreement cases are tractable for iterative model refinement, others reflect deeper representational challenges inherent in parsing and tagging L2-Korean corpora.
105. ❌ Algospeak, Hiding in the Open: The Trade-off Between Legible Meaning and Detection Avoidance
作者: Jan Fillies, Ronald E. Robertson, Jeffrey Hancock 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06619v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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) increasingly mediate both content generation and moderation, linguistic evasion strategies known as Algospeak have intensified the coevolution between evaders and detectors. This research formalizes the underlying dynamics grounded in a joint action model: when Algospeak increases, detectability and understandability decrease. Further, the concept of Majority Understandable Modulation (MUM) is introduced and defined as the modulation level at which additional evasive alteration increases detector evasion but loses comprehension for the majority of recipients. To empirically probe this trade-off, we introduce a reproducible framework that can be used to create meaning-preserving, Algospeak-style variants, based on an existing taxonomy and with tunable modulation levels. Using COVID-19 disinformation as a first proof-by-example setting, we construct a reference dataset of 700 modulated items, drawn from twenty base sentences across five modulation levels and seven strategies. We then run two linked evaluations with seven different language models: one testing for interpretation through meaning recovery and one for disinformation detection through classification. Curve fitting over modulation levels yields an estimate of the Majority Understandable Modulation threshold and enables sensitivity analyses across strategies and models, see Figure 1. Results reveal the characteristic relationships between understandability and modulation. This study lays the groundwork for understanding the dynamics behind Algospeak and provides the framework, dataset, and experimental setups described.
106. ❌ Automated Clinical Report Generation for Remote Cognitive Remediation: Comparing Knowledge-Engineered Templates and LLMs in Low-Resource Settings
作者: Yongxin Zhou, Fabien Ringeval, François Portet 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06594v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 demand for cognitive remediation therapy, combined with limited speech therapist availability, has accelerated the adoption of remote rehabilitation tools. These systems generate large volumes of interaction data that are difficult for clinicians to review efficiently. This paper investigates automated clinical report generation for avatar-guided, home-based cognitive remediation sessions in a low-resource setting with no reference reports. We present and compare two approaches: (1) a rule-based template system encoding speech therapy domain knowledge as explicit decision rules and validated templates, ensuring clinical reliability and traceability; and (2) a zero-shot LLM-based approach (GPT-4) aimed at more fluent and concise output. Both systems use identical pre-extracted, expert-validated structured variables, enabling a controlled factual comparison. Outputs were evaluated by eight speech therapists and final-year students using a nine-criterion questionnaire. Results reveal a clear trade-off between clinical reliability and linguistic quality. The template-based system scored higher on fluidity, coherence, and results presentation, while GPT-4 produced more concise output. Directional differences are consistent across evaluation dimensions, though no comparison reached statistical significance after correction, reflecting the scale constraints of expert clinical evaluation. Based on evaluator feedback, we derive eight design recommendations for clinical reporting systems in remote rehabilitation settings. More broadly, this work contributes a replicable methodology combining expert elicitation, taxonomy-driven generation, and multi-dimensional human evaluation for clinical NLG in low-resource settings, and illustrates how controlled comparisons can inform the responsible adoption of generative AI in healthcare.
107. ❌ PairAlign: A Framework for Sequence Tokenization via Self-Alignment with Applications to Audio Tokenization
作者: Adhiraj Banerjee, Vipul Arora 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06582v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Many operations on sensory data – comparison, memory, retrieval, and reasoning – are naturally expressed over discrete symbolic structures. In language this interface is given by tokens; in audio, it must be learned. Existing audio tokenizers rely on quantization, clustering, or codec reconstruction, assigning tokens locally, so sequence consistency, compactness, length control, termination, and edit similarity are rarely optimized directly. We introduce PairAlign, a framework for compact audio tokenization through sequence-level self-alignment. PairAlign treats tokenization as conditional sequence generation: an encoder maps speech to a continuous condition, and an autoregressive decoder generates tokens from BOS, learning token identity, order, length, and EOS placement. Given two content-preserving views, each view’s sequence is trained to be likely under the other’s representation, while unrelated examples provide competing sequences. This gives a scalable surrogate for edit-distance preservation while discouraging many-to-one collapse. PairAlign starts from VQ-style tokenization and refines it with EMA-teacher targets, cross-paired teacher forcing, prefix corruption, likelihood contrast, and length control. On 3-second speech, PairAlign learns compact, non-degenerate sequences with broad vocabulary usage and strong cross-view consistency. On TIMIT retrieval, it preserves edit-distance search while reducing archive token count by 55%. A continuous-sweep probe shows lower local overlap than a dense geometric tokenizer, but stronger length control and bounded edit trajectories under 100 ms shifts. PairAlign is a sequence-symbolic predictive learner: like JEPA-style objectives, it predicts an abstract target from another view as a learned variable-length symbolic sequence, not a continuous latent.
108. ❌ Long Context Pre-Training with Lighthouse Attention
作者: Bowen Peng, Subho Ghosh, Jeffrey Quesnelle 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06554v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 causal transformers at extreme sequence lengths is bottlenecked by the quadratic time and memory of scaled dot-product attention (SDPA). In this work, we propose Lighthouse Attention, a training-only symmetrical selection-based hierarchical attention algorithm that wraps around ordinary SDPA and can be easily removed towards the end of the training. Our hierarchical selection is also gradient-free, which exempts us from dealing with a complicated and potentially inefficient backward pass kernel. Our contribution is three-fold: (i) A subquadratic hierarchical pre- and post-processing step that does adaptive compression and decompression of the sequence. (ii) A symmetrical compression strategy that pools queries, keys and values at the same time, while preserving left-to-right causality, which greatly improves parallelism. (iii) A two stage training approach which we pre-train for the majority of the time with Lighthouse Attention and recover a full attention model at the end with a short training. We run preliminary small scale LLM pre-training experiments that show the effectiveness of our method compared to full attention training with all other settings matched, where we achieve a faster total training time and lower final loss after the recovery phase. Full code is available at: https://github.com/ighoshsubho/lighthouse-attention
109. ❌ Efficient Pre-Training with Token Superposition
作者: Bowen Peng, Théo Gigant, Jeffrey Quesnelle 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06546v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Pre-training of Large Language Models is often prohibitively expensive and inefficient at scale, requiring complex and invasive modifications in order to achieve high data throughput. In this work, we present Token-Superposition Training (TST), a simple drop-in method that significantly improves the data throughput per FLOPs during pre-training without modifying the parallelism, optimizer, tokenizer, data, or model architecture. TST is done in two phases: (i) A highly efficient superposition phase where we combine many contiguous tokens into one bag and train using a multi-hot cross-entropy (MCE) objective, and (ii) a recovery phase where we revert back to standard training. We extensively evaluate TST on the scale of 270M and 600M parameters and validate on 3B and a 10B A1B mixture of experts model, demonstrating that it is highly robust in different settings. Ultimately, TST consistently outperforms baseline loss and downstream evaluations, and under equal-loss settings, TST yields up to a 2.5x reduction in total pre-training time at the 10B A1B scale.
110. ❌ STALE: Can LLM Agents Know When Their Memories Are No Longer Valid?
作者: Hanxiang Chao, Yihan Bai, Rui Sheng, Tianle Li, Yushi Sun 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06527v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 expected to maintain coherent, long-term personalized memory, yet current benchmarks primarily measure static fact retrieval, overlooking the ability to revise stored beliefs when new evidence emerges. We identify a critical and underexplored failure mode, Implicit Conflict: a later observation invalidates an earlier memory without explicit negation, requiring contextual inference and commonsense reasoning to detect. To rigorously evaluate this capability, we introduce STALE, a benchmark of 400 expert-validated conflict scenarios (1,200 evaluation queries across three probing dimensions) spanning over 100 everyday topics with contexts up to 150K tokens. We propose a three-dimensional probing framework that tests State Resolution (detecting that a prior belief is outdated), Premise Resistance (rejecting queries that falsely presuppose a stale state), and Implicit Policy Adaptation (proactively applying updated states in downstream behavior). A systematic evaluation of frontier LLMs and specialized memory frameworks reveals a pervasive gap between retrieving updated evidence and acting on it, with even the best evaluated model achieving only 55.2% overall accuracy. Models often accept outdated assumptions embedded in a user’s query, and they struggle to recognize when a change in one aspect of the user’s state should invalidate related memories. To establish an initial baseline for state-aware memory, we further present CUPMem, a prototype that strengthens write-time revision through structured state consolidation and propagation-aware search, suggesting that explicit state adjudication is a promising direction for robust agentic memory.
111. ❌ The Frequency Confound in Language-Model Surprisal and Metaphor Novelty
作者: Omar Momen, Sina Zarrieß 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06506v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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-model (LM) surprisal is widely used as a proxy for contextual predictability and has been reported to correlate with metaphor novelty judgments. However, surprisal is tightly intertwined with lexical frequency. We explore this interaction on metaphor novelty ratings using two different word frequency measures. We analyse surprisal estimates from eight Pythia model sizes and 154 training checkpoints. Across settings, word frequency is a stronger predictor of metaphor novelty than surprisal. Across training stages, the surprisal–novelty association peaks at an early stage and then falls again, mirroring a similarly timed increase in the surprisal–frequency association. These results suggest that the often-reported optimal LM surprisal settings may incorrectly associate contextual predictability with metaphor novelty and processing difficulty, whereas lexical frequency may be the major underlying factor.
112. ❌ Cubit: Token Mixer with Kernel Ridge Regression
作者: Chuanyang Zheng, Jiankai Sun, Yihang Gao, Yuehao Wang, Liangchen Tan, Mac Schwager, Anderson Schneider, Yuriy Nevmyvaka, Xiaodong Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06501v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Since its introduction in 2017, the Transformer has become one of the most widely adopted architectures in modern deep learning. Despite extensive efforts to improve positional encoding, attention mechanisms, and feed-forward networks, the core token-mixing mechanism in Transformers remains attention. In this work, we show that the attention module in Transformers can be interpreted as performing Nadaraya-Watson regression, where it computes similarities between tokens and aggregates the corresponding values accordingly. Motivated by this perspective, we propose Cubit, a potential next-generation architecture that leverages Kernel Ridge Regression (KRR), while the vanilla Transformer relies on Nadaraya-Watson regression. Specifically, Cubit modifies the classical attention computation by incorporating the closed-form solution of KRR, combining value aggregation through kernel similarities with normalization via the inverse of the kernel matrix. To improve the training stability, we further propose the Limited-Range Rescale (LRR), which rescales the value layer within a controlled range. We argue that Cubit, as a KRR-based architecture, provides a stronger mathematical foundation than the vanilla Transformer, whose attention mechanism corresponds to Nadaraya-Watson regression. We validate this claim through comprehensive experiments. The experimental results suggest that Cubit may exhibit stronger long-sequence modeling capability. In particular, its performance gain over the Transformer appears to increase as the training sequence length grows.
113. ❌ Towards Emotion Consistency Analysis of Large Language Models in Emotional Conversational Contexts
作者: Sneha Oram, Ojaswita Bhushan, Pushpak Bhattacharyya 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06476v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 work, we conduct an analysis to examine the consistency of Large Language Models (LLMs) with respect to their own generated responses in an emotionally-driven conversational context. Specifically, the text generated by LLM is framed as a query to the same model, and its responses are subsequently assessed. This is performed with three queries across two dimensions of extreme and moderate emotions. The three queries are, in particular, false claim queries that contain inherently wrong assumptions (false presuppositions) in increasing order of intensity. Two commercial models, Claude-3.5-haiku, GPT4o-mini, and a medium-sized model, Mistral-7B, are considered in the study. Our findings indicate that LLMs exhibit below-average performance and remain vulnerable to false beliefs embedded within queries. This susceptibility is especially pronounced for moderate emotional content. Furthermore, an extended attention-score-based analysis highlights a shift in models’ priority from evaluative to generative. The results raise important considerations for LLMs’ deployment in high-stakes, emotionally sensitive contexts.
114. ❌ Invariant Features in Language Models: Geometric Characterization and Model Attribution
作者: Agnibh Dasgupta, Abdullah Tanvir, Xin Zhong 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06458v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 exhibit strong robustness to paraphrasing, suggesting that semantic information may be encoded through stable internal representations, yet the structure and origin of such invariance remain unclear. We propose a local geometric framework in which semantically equivalent inputs occupy structured regions in latent space, with paraphrastic variation along nuisance directions and semantic identity preserved in invariant subspaces. Building on this view, we make three contributions: (1) a geometric characterization of invariant latent features, (2) a contrastive subspace discovery method that separates semantic-changing from semantic-preserving variation, and (3) an application of invariant representations to zero-shot model attribution. Across models and layers, empirical results support these contributions. Invariant structure emerges in specific depth regions, semantic displacement lies largely outside the nuisance subspace, and representation-level interventions indicate a causal role of invariant components in model outputs. Invariant representations also capture model-specific geometric patterns, enabling accurate attribution. These findings suggest that semantic invariance can be viewed as a local geometric property of latent representations, offering a principled perspective on how language models organize meaning.
115. ❌ From 124 Million Tokens to 1,021 Neologisms: A Large-Scale Pipeline for Automatic Neologism Detection
作者: Diego Rossini, Lonneke van der Plas 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06426v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 scalable, modular pipeline for automatic neologism detection that combines rule-based filtering with LLM classification. The pipeline is grounded in two complementary word-formation frameworks, grammatical and extra-grammatical morphology, which jointly define the scope of what counts as a neologism and inform a four-class classification scheme (neologism, entity, foreign, none). While designed to be modular and transferable at the architectural level, the pipeline is instantiated on 527 million English-language Reddit posts spanning 2005-2024. From this corpus, we extract 124.6 million unique tokens and reduce them by over 99.99% to yield 1,021 neologism candidates, a set small enough for manual expert verification. Multiple LLMs independently classify each candidate via majority vote, with a final verification step, revealing substantial cross-model disagreement and highlighting the challenge of operationalizing neologism detection at scale. Manual annotation of all 1,021 candidates confirms that 599 (58.7%) are genuine lexical innovations. The pipeline code, vocabulary compilation scripts, and the annotated candidate list are available at https://github.com/DiegoRossini/neologism-pipeline.
116. ❌ MiA-Signature: Approximating Global Activation for Long-Context Understanding
作者: Yuqing Li, Jiangnan Li, Mo Yu, Zheng Lin, Weiping Wang, Jie Zhou 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06416v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 growing body of work in cognitive science suggests that reportable conscious access is associated with \emph{global ignition} over distributed memory systems, while such activation is only partially accessible as individuals cannot directly access or enumerate all activated contents. This tension suggests a plausible mechanism that cognition may rely on a compact representation that approximates the global influence of activation on downstream processing. Inspired by this idea, we introduce the concept of \textbf{Mindscape Activation Signature (MiA-Signature)}, a compressed representation of the global activation pattern induced by a query. In LLM systems, this is instantiated via submodular-based selection of high-level concepts that cover the activated context space, optionally refined through lightweight iterative updates using working memory. The resulting MiA-Signature serves as a conditioning signal that approximates the effect of the full activation state while remaining computationally tractable. Integrating MiA-Signatures into both RAG and agentic systems yields consistent performance gains across multiple long-context understanding tasks.
117. ❌ GATHER: Convergence-Centric Hyper-Entity Retrieval for Zero-Shot Cell-Type Annotation
作者: Zhonghui Zhang, Feng Jiang, Shaowei Qin, Jiahao Zhao, Min Yang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06403v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 single-cell cell-type annotation aims to determine a cell’s type from a given set of expressed genes without any training. Existing knowledge-graph-based RAG approaches retrieve evidence by expanding from source entities and relying on iterative LLM reasoning. However, in this setting each query contains tens to hundreds of genes, where no single gene is decisive and the label emerges only from their collective co-occurrence. Such hyper-entity queries fundamentally challenge local, entity-wise exploration strategies, which reason from individual genes, leading to poor scalability and substantial LLM cost. We propose GATHER (Graph-Aware Traversal with Hyper-Entity Retrieval), a convergence-centric retriever tailored to hyper-entity queries. It performs global multi-source graph traversal and identifies topological convergence points – nodes jointly reachable from many input genes. These convergence nodes act as high-information hyper-entities that capture entity synergy. By incorporating node- and path-importance scoring, GATHER selects informative evidence entirely without LLM involvement during retrieval. Instantiated on a self-constructed cell-centric biological knowledge graph (VCKG), GATHER outperforms strong KG-RAG baselines (ToG, ToG-2, RoG, PoG) on two datasets (Immune and Lung), achieving the highest exact-match accuracy (27.45% and 59.64%) with only a single LLM call per sample, compared to 2–61 calls for KG-RAG baselines. Our results demonstrate that convergence nodes compress multi-entity signals into compact, high-information evidence that conveys more per item than multi-hop paths, providing an efficient global alternative to local entity-wise reasoning.
118. ❌ SEQUOR: A Multi-Turn Benchmark for Realistic Constraint Following
作者: Beatriz Canaverde, Duarte M. Alves, José Pombal, Giuseppe Attanasio, André F. T. Martins 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06353v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 a conversation, a helpful assistant must reliably follow user directives, even as they refine, modify, or contradict earlier requests. Yet most instruction-following benchmarks focus on single-turn or short multi-turn scenarios, leaving open how well models handle long-horizon instruction-following tasks. To bridge this gap, we present SEQUOR, an automatic benchmark for evaluating constraint adherence in long multi-turn conversations. SEQUOR consists of simulated persona-driven interactions built with constraints extracted from real-world conversations. Our results show that even when following a single constraint, instruction-following accuracy consistently decreases as the conversation grows longer, with drops exceeding 11%. This decline becomes larger when models have to follow multiple constraints simultaneously, reducing their accuracy by over 40%. In scenarios where constraints are added or replaced at arbitrary points of the conversation, model accuracy decreases by more than 9%. Taken together, our results reveal that current models still struggle to follow user instructions in multi-turn conversations, and provide a way for better measuring instruction-following capabilities in assistants.
119. ❌ Don’t Lose Focus: Activation Steering via Key-Orthogonal Projections
作者: Haoyan Luo, Mateo Espinosa Zarlenga, Mateja Jamnik 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06342v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Activation steering controls LLM behaviour towards target behaviour by intervening in internal representations, yet it often degrades reasoning and retrieval performance. We argue that a primary cause of this trade-off is attention rerouting: steering vectors alter query-key matching, shifting attention away from contextually important tokens toward less informative ones. To address this, we propose Steering via Key-Orthogonal Projections (SKOP), a steering method that constrains harmful attention rerouting without eliminating steering efficacy. SKOP achieves this by preserving attention patterns on a small set of focus tokens the model relies on for reasoning and retrieval, while allowing redistribution among less critical tail tokens. Across multiple steering benchmarks, we show that SKOP achieves the best joint steering-utility trade-off, reducing utility degradation by 5-7x while retaining over 95% of vanilla steering efficacy. Our results further suggest that, in long-context retrieval settings where vanilla steering approaches are ineffective, SKOP can maintain robust performance by avoiding attention rerouting.
120. ❌ MANTRA: Synthesizing SMT-Validated Compliance Benchmarks for Tool-Using LLM Agents
作者: Ashwani Anand, Ivi Chatzi, Ritam Raha, Anne-Kathrin Schmuck 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06334v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Tool-using large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed in settings where their reliable behavior is governed by strict procedural manuals. Ensuring that such agents comply with the rules from these manuals is challenging, as they are typically written for humans in natural language while agent behavior manifests as an execution trace of tool calls. Existing evaluations of LLM agents rely on manually constructed benchmarks or LLM-based judges, which either do not scale or lack reliability for complex, long-horizon manuals. To overcome these limitations, we present MANTRA, a framework for automatically synthesizing machine-checkable compliance benchmarks from natural-language manuals and tool schemas. MANTRA independently generates (i) a symbolic world model capturing procedural dependencies, and (ii) a set of trace-level compliance checks for a given task, and validates their consistency using SMT solving. A structured repair loop resolves inconsistencies, requiring human intervention only as a fallback. %This yields benchmarks that are formally validated. Importantly, MANTRA supports arbitrary domains and long procedural manuals, and provides a tunable notion of task complexity which is utilized to automatically derive challenging tasks accompanying compliance checks. Using MANTRA, we build a new benchmark suite with 285 tasks across 6 domains scaling to 50+ page manuals with minimal human effort. Empirically, we show that the compliance checks are richer with stronger constraint enforcement compared to existing benchmarks. Additionally, the granularity of the checks can be used for debugging the agents’ failure modes. These results demonstrate that combining automated benchmark generation with formally grounded validation methods enables scalable and reliable benchmarking of tool-using agents.
121. ❌ Teaching Thinking Models to Reason with Tools: A Full-Pipeline Recipe for Tool-Integrated Reasoning
作者: Qianjia Cheng, Yuchen Zhang, Zhilin Wang, Yuxin Zuo, Shunkai Zhang, Yuchen Fan, Yu Qiao, Bowen Zhou, Ning Ding, Yu Cheng, Yun Luo, Ganqu Cui 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06326v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Tool-integrated reasoning (TIR) offers a direct way to extend thinking models beyond the limits of text-only reasoning. Paradoxically, we observe that tool-enabled evaluation can degrade reasoning performance even when the strong thinking models make almost no actual tool calls. In this paper, we investigate how to inject natural tool-use behavior into a strong thinking model without sacrificing its no-tool reasoning ability, and present a comprehensive TIR recipe. We highlight that (i) the effectiveness of TIR supervised fine-tuning (SFT) hinges on the learnability of teacher trajectories, which should prioritize problems inherently suited for tool-augmented solutions; (ii) controlling the proportion of tool-use trajectories could mitigate the catastrophic forgetting of text-only reasoning capacity; (iii) optimizing for pass@k and response length instead of training loss could maximize TIR SFT gains while preserving headroom for reinforcement learning (RL) exploration; (iv) a stable RL with verifiable rewards (RLVR) stage, built upon suitable SFT initialization and explicit safeguards against mode collapse, provides a simple yet remarkably effective solution. When applied to Qwen3 thinking models at 4B and 30B scales, our recipe yields models that achieve state-of-the-art performance in a wide range of benchmarks among open-source models, such as 96.7% and 99.2% on AIME 2025 for 4B and 30B, respectively.
122. ❌ Who and What? Using Linguistic Features and Annotator Characteristics to Analyze Annotation Variation
作者: Maximilian Maurer, Maximilian Linde, Gabriella Lapesa 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06318v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 label variation has been established as a central phenomenon in NLP: the perspectives different annotators have on the same item need to be embraced. Data collection practices thus shifted towards increasing the annotator numbers and releasing disaggregated datasets, harmful language being most resourced due to its high subjectivity. While this resulted in rich information about \textit{who} annotated (sociodemographics, attitudes, etc.), the \textit{what} (e.g., linguistic properties of items), and their interplay has received little attention. We present the first large-scale analysis of four reference datasets for harmful language detection, bringing together annotator characteristics, linguistic properties of the items, and their interactions in a statistically informed picture. We find that interactions are crucial, revealing intersectional effects ignored in previous work, and that a strong role is played by lexical cues and annotator attitudes. Effect patterns, however, vary considerably across datasets. This urges caution about generalization and transferability.
123. ❌ MultiLinguahah : A New Unsupervised Multilingual Acoustic Laughter Segmentation Method
作者: Callejas Sofia, Gomez Nahuel, Pelachaud Catherine, Ravenet Brian, Barriere Valentin 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06309v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Laughter is a social non-vocalization that is universal across cultures and languages, and is crucial for human communication, including social bonding and communication signaling. However, detecting laughter in audio is a challenging task, and segmenting is even more difficult. Currently, Machine Learning methods generally rely on costly manual annotation, and their datasets are mostly based on English contexts. Thus, we propose an unsupervised multilingual method that sets up the laughter segmentation task as an anomaly detection of energy-based segmented audio sequences. Our method applies an Isolation Forest on audio representations learned from BYOL-A encoder. We compare our method with several state-of-the-art laughter detection algorithms on four datasets, including stand-up comedy, sitcoms, and general short audio from AudioSet. Our results show that state-of-the-art methods are not optimized for multilingual contexts, while our method outperforms them in non-English settings.
124. ❌ LatentRAG: Latent Reasoning and Retrieval for Efficient Agentic RAG
作者: Yijia Zheng, Marcel Worring 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06285v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Single-step retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) provides an efficient way to incorporate external information for simple question answering tasks but struggles with complex questions. Agentic RAG extends this paradigm by replacing single-step retrieval with a multi-step process, in which the large language model (LLM) acts as a search agent that generates intermediate thoughts and subqueries to iteratively interact with the retrieval system. This iterative process incurs substantial latency due to the autoregressive generation of lengthy thoughts and subqueries. To address this limitation, we propose LatentRAG, a novel framework that shifts both reasoning and retrieval from discrete language space to continuous latent space. Unlike existing explicit methods that generate natural language thoughts or subqueries token-by-token, LatentRAG produces latent tokens for thoughts and subqueries directly from the hidden states in a single forward pass. We align LLMs with dense retrieval models in the latent space, enabling retrieval over latent subquery tokens and supporting end-to-end joint optimization. To improve transparency and encourage semantically meaningful latent representations, we incorporate a parallel latent decoding mechanism that translates latent tokens back into natural language. Extensive experiments on seven benchmark datasets show that LatentRAG achieves performance comparable to explicit agentic RAG methods while reducing inference latency by approximately 90%, substantially narrowing the latency gap with traditional single-step RAG.
125. ❌ Quantifying the Statistical Effect of Rubric Modifications on Human-Autorater Agreement
作者: Jessica Huynh, Alfredo Gomez, Athiya Deviyani, Renee Shelby, Jeffrey P. Bigham, Fernando Diaz 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06283v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Autoraters, also referred to as LLM-as-judges, are increasingly used for evaluation and automated content moderation. However, there is limited statistical analysis of how modifications in a rubric presented to both humans and autoraters affect their score agreement. Rubrics that ask for an overall or \emph{holistic} judgment - for example, rating the
quality'' of an essay - may be inconsistently interpreted due to the complexity or subjectivity of the criteria. Conversely, rubrics can ask for \emph{analytic} judgments, which decompose assessment criteria - for example,quality’’ intofluency'' andorganization’’. While these rubrics can be edited to improve the individual accuracy of both human and automated scoring, this approach may result in disagreement between the two scores, or with the associated holistic judgment. Designing and deploying reliable autoraters requires understanding not just the relationship between human and autorater annotations but how that relationship changes as holistic or analytic judgments are elicited. The results indicate that rubric edits providing representative examples and additional context, and reducing positional bias in the rubric increased human-autorater agreement, while higher rubric complexity and conservative aggregation methods tended to decrease it. The findings from the automatic essay scoring and instruction-following evaluation domains suggest that practitioners should carefully analyze domain- and rubric-specific performance to move towards higher human-autorater agreement.
126. ❌ Rethinking RL for LLM Reasoning: It’s Sparse Policy Selection, Not Capability Learning
作者: Ömer Faruk Akgül, Rajgopal Kannan, Willie Neiswanger, Viktor Prasanna 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06241v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 has become the standard for improving reasoning in large language models, yet evidence increasingly suggests that RL does not teach new strategies; it redistributes probability mass over solutions the base model already contains. In this work, we ask: if RL merely steers the model toward paths it already knows, is the RL optimization loop itself necessary? Through token-level analysis across multiple model families and RL algorithms, we find that RL’s beneficial footprint is a sparse, predictable correction concentrated at high-entropy decision points where the model is uncertain which branch to take. Only 1–3% of token positions are affected, the promoted token always lies within the base model’s top-5 alternatives, and targeted corrections at those few positions causally recover a large fraction of RL’s accuracy gain, while random corrections fail. The base model’s own entropy identifies these positions without any RL-trained model, and the entire correction is low-dimensional, representable in a tiny fraction of model parameters. These findings reframe reasoning improvement as sparse policy selection, not capability acquisition. We translate this insight into ReasonMaxxer, a minimal RL-free method that applies contrastive loss only at entropy-gated decision points, using a few hundred base-model rollouts and no online generation. Across three model families, six scales, and six math reasoning benchmarks, ReasonMaxxer matches or exceeds full RL performance while requiring only tens of problems and minutes of single-GPU training, a reduction in training cost of roughly three orders of magnitude.
127. ❌ YEZE at SemEval-2026 Task 9: Detecting Multilingual, Multicultural and Multievent Online Polarization via Heterogeneous Ensembling
作者: Fengze Guo, Yue Chang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06231v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 our system for SemEval-2026 Task 9: Detecting Multilingual, Multicultural and Multievent Online Polarization, which identifies polarized social media content in 22 languages through three subtasks: binary detection, target classification, and manifestation identification. We propose a heterogeneous ensemble of multilingual pretrained models, combining XLM-RoBERTa-large and mDeBERTa-v3-base. We investigate techniques such as multi-task learning, translation-based data augmentation, and class weighting to improve classification performance under severe label imbalance. Our findings indicate that independent task modeling combined with class weighting is more effective.
128. ❌ UniPrefill: Universal Long-Context Prefill Acceleration via Block-wise Dynamic Sparsification
作者: Qihang Fan, Huaibo Huang, Zhiying Wu, Bingning Wang, Ran He 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06221v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 advance rapidly, they are becoming increasingly capable while simultaneously demanding ever-longer context lengths. To improve the inference efficiency of long-context processing, several novel low-complexity hybrid architectures have recently been proposed, effectively alleviating the computational burden of long-context inference. However, existing research on long-context prefill acceleration remains predominantly focused on sparse attention mechanisms, which achieve their maximum speedup only on full-attention models. When transferred to emerging architectures–such as linear/full attention hybrids or sliding window/full attention hybrids–these prefill acceleration approaches suffer significant performance degradation. Furthermore, such methods are generally incompatible with continuous batching, making them difficult to integrate into modern inference engines such as vLLM. To this end, we propose UniPrefill, a prefill acceleration framework applicable to virtually any model architecture, which directly accelerates the model’s computation at the token level. We further implement UniPrefill as a continuous batching operator and extend vLLM’s scheduling strategy to natively support prefill-decode co-processing and tensor parallel for UniPrefill, enabling its seamless integration into vLLM. UniPrefill achieves up to 2.1x speedup in Time-To-First-Token (TTFT), with the acceleration becoming increasingly pronounced as the number of concurrent requests grows.
129. ❌ TIDE: Every Layer Knows the Token Beneath the Context
作者: Ajay Jaiswal, Lauren Hannah, Han-Byul Kim, Duc Hoang, Mehrdad Farajtabar, Minsik Cho 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06216v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 revisit a universally accepted but under-examined design choice in every modern LLM: a token index is looked up once at the input embedding layer and then permanently discarded. This single-injection assumption induces two structural failures: (i) the Rare Token Problem, where a Zipf-type distribution of vocabulary causes rare-token embeddings are chronically under-trained due to receiving a fraction of the cumulative gradient signal compared to common tokens; and (ii) the Contextual Collapse Problem, where limited parameters models map distributionally similar tokens to indistinguishable hidden states. As an attempt to address both, we propose TIDE, which augments the standard transformer with EmbeddingMemory: an ensemble of K independent MemoryBlocks that map token indices to context-free semantic vectors, computed once and injected into every layer through a depth-conditioned softmax router with a learnable null bank. We theoretically and empirically establish the benefits of TIDE in addressing the issues associated with single-token identity injection as well as improve performance across multiple language modeling and downstream tasks.
130. ❌ Contrastive Identification and Generation in the Limit
作者: Xiaoyu Li, Andi Han, Jiaojiao Jiang, Junbin Gao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06211v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 the classical identification in the limit model of Gold [1967], a stream of positive examples is presented round by round, and the learner must eventually recover the target hypothesis. Recently, Kleinberg and Mullainathan [2024] introduced generation in the limit, where the learner instead must eventually output novel elements of the target’s support. Both lines of work focus on positive-only or fully labeled data. Yet many natural supervision signals are inherently relational rather than singleton, which encode relationships between examples rather than labels of individual ones. We initiate the study of contrastive identification and generation in the limit, where the learner observes a contrastive presentation of data: a stream of unordered pairs ${x,y}$ satisfying $h(x)\ne h(y)$ for an unknown target binary hypothesis $h$, but which element is positive is hidden from the learner. We first present three results in the noiseless setting: an exact characterization of contrastive identifiable classes (a one-line geometric refinement of Angluin [1980]’s tell-tale condition), a combinatorial dimension called contrastive closure dimension (a contrasitive analogue of the closure dimension in Raman et al. [2025]) and exactly characterizing uniform contrastive generation with tight sample complexity, and a strict hierarchy in which contrastive generation and text identification are mutually incomparable. We then prove a sharp reversal under finite adversarial corruption: there exist classes identifiable from contrastive pairs under any finite corruption budget by a single budget-independent algorithm, yet not identifiable from positive examples under even one corrupted observation. The unifying technical object is the common crossing graph, which encodes pairwise ambiguity, family-level generation obstructions, and corruption defects in a single coverage-and-incidence language.
131. ❌ A$^2$TGPO: Agentic Turn-Group Policy Optimization with Adaptive Turn-level Clipping
作者: Dingwei Chen, Zefang Zong, Zhipeng Ma, Leo Luo, Yang Li, Chengming Li, Peng Chen, Jie Jiang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06200v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 for agentic large language models (LLMs) typically relies on a sparse, trajectory-level outcome reward, making it difficult to evaluate the contribution of individual tool-calls within multi-turn interactions. Existing approaches to such process credit assignment either depend on separate external process reward models that introduce additional consumption, or tree-based structural rollout that merely redistributes the outcome signal while constraining trajectory diversity. A promising alternative leverages the per-turn change in the policy’s predicted probability of the ground-truth, termed Information Gain (IG), as an intrinsic process signal without an external evaluator. However, prior work on leveraging IG signals within the RL training loop faces three systematic challenges: normalizing across turns that face heterogeneous positional contexts can distort the relative standing of individual turns, accumulating a variable number of terms causes advantage magnitudes to drift with trajectory depth, and a fixed clipping range governs policy updates identically for turns with vastly different IG signals. In this paper, we propose A$^2$TGPO (Agentic Turn-Group Policy Optimization with Adaptive Turn-level Clipping), which retains IG as the intrinsic signal but re-designs how it is normalized, accumulated, and consumed: (i) turn-group normalization: normalizes IG within each (prompt, turn-index) group so that each turn is compared only against peers at the same interaction depth; (ii) variance-rescaled discounted accumulation: divides cumulative normalized IG by square root of accumulated terms to keep advantage magnitudes comparable across turn positions; and (iii) adaptive turn-level clipping: modulates each turn’s clipping range based on its normalized IG, widening the update region for informative turns and narrowing it for uninformative ones.
132. ❌ The Granularity Axis: A Micro-to-Macro Latent Direction for Social Roles in Language Models
作者: Chonghan Qin, Xiachong Feng, Ziyun Song, Xiaocheng Feng, Jing Xiong, Lingpeng Kong 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06196v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 routinely prompted to take on social roles ranging from individuals to institutions, yet it remains unclear whether their internal representations encode the granularity of such roles, from micro-level individual experience to macro-level organizational, institutional, or national reasoning. We show that they do. We define a contrast-based Granularity Axis as the difference between mean macro- and micro-role hidden states. In Qwen3-8B, this axis aligns with the principal axis (PC1) of the role representation space at cosine 0.972 and accounts for 52.6% of its variance, indicating that granularity is the dominant geometric axis organizing prompted social roles. We construct 75 social roles across five granularity levels and collect 91,200 role-conditioned responses over shared questions and prompt variants, then extract role-level hidden states and project them onto the axis. Role projections increase monotonically across all five levels, remain stable across layers, prompt variants, endpoint definitions, held-out splits, and score-filtered subsets, and transfer to Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct. The axis is also causally relevant: activation steering along it shifts response granularity in the predicted direction, with Llama moving from 2.00 to 3.17 on a five-point macro scale under positive steering on prompts that admit local responses. The two models differ in controllability, suggesting that steering depends on each model’s default operating regime. Overall, our findings suggest that social role granularity is not merely a stylistic surface feature, but a structured, ordered, and causally manipulable latent direction in role-conditioned language model behavior.
133. ❌ OPSD Compresses What RLVR Teaches: A Post-RL Compaction Stage for Reasoning Models
作者: Jaehoon Kim, Dongha Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06188v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
On-Policy Self-Distillation (OPSD) has recently emerged as an alternative to Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR), promising higher accuracy and shorter responses through token-level credit assignment from a self-teacher conditioned on privileged context. However, this promise does not carry over to thinking-enabled mathematical reasoning, where reported accuracy gains shrink and sometimes turn negative. We hypothesize that hindsight supervision can specify better token-level alternatives in short thinking-disabled outputs, but in long thinking-enabled traces it more readily identifies redundancy than supplies better replacements. To test this, we applied OPSD separately to correct and incorrect rollout groups, so that compression and correction can be observed in isolation. Our results show that in thinking-enabled mathematical reasoning, OPSD behaves most reliably as a compression mechanism rather than a correction mechanism: training only on correct rollouts preserves accuracy while substantially shortening responses, whereas training only on incorrect rollouts damages accuracy. In light of these findings, we propose a revised post-training pipeline for thinking-enabled mathematical reasoning: SFT then RLVR then OPSD.
134. ❌ Rethinking Adapter Placement: A Dominant Adaptation Module Perspective
作者: Suoxin Zhang, Run He, Di Fang, Xiang Tan, Kaixuan Chen, Huiping Zhuang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06183v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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-rank adaptation (LoRA) is a widely used parameter-efficient fine-tuning method that places trainable low-rank adapters into frozen pre-trained models. Recent studies show that using fewer LoRA adapters may still maintain or even improve performance, but existing methods still distribute adapters broadly, leaving where to place a limited number of adapters to maximize performance largely open. To investigate this, we introduce PAGE (Projected Adapter Gradient Energy), a gradient-based sensitivity probe that estimates the initial trainable gradient energy available to each candidate LoRA adapter. Surprisingly, we find that PAGE is highly concentrated on a single shallow FFN down-projection across two model families and four downstream tasks. We term this module the dominant adaptation module and show that its layer index is architecture-dependent but task-stable. Motivated by this finding, we propose DomLoRA, a placement method that places a single adapter at the dominant adaptation module. With only ~0.7% of vanilla LoRA’s trainable parameters, DomLoRA outperforms it on average across various downstream tasks, including instruction following, mathematical reasoning, code generation, and multi-turn conversation. This method also improves other LoRA variants, supporting the dominant adaptation module perspective as a practical placement guideline.
135. ❌ Grokking or Glitching? How Low-Precision Drives Slingshot Loss Spikes
作者: Liu Hanqing, Jianjun Cao, Yuanze Li, Zijian Zhou 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06152v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 neural networks exhibit periodic loss spikes during unregularized long-term training, a phenomenon known as the “Slingshot Mechanism.” Existing work usually attributes this to intrinsic optimization dynamics, but its triggering mechanism remains unclear. This paper proves that this phenomenon is a result of floating-point arithmetic precision limits. As training enters a high-confidence stage, the difference between the correct-class logit and the other logits may exceed the absorption-error threshold. Then during backpropagation, the gradient of the correct class is rounded exactly to zero, while the gradients of the incorrect classes remain nonzero. This breaks the zero-sum constraint of gradients across classes and introduces a systematic drift in the parameter update of the classifier layer. We prove that this drift forms a positive feedback loop with the feature, causing the global classifier mean and the global feature mean to grow exponentially. We call this mechanism Numerical Feature Inflation (NFI). This mechanism explains the rapid norm growth before a Slingshot spike, the subsequent reappearance of gradients, and the resulting loss spike. We further show that NFI is not equivalent to an observed loss spike: in more practical tasks, partial absorption may not produce visible spikes, but it can still break the zero-sum constraint and drive rapid growth of parameter norms. Our results reinterpret Slingshot as a numerical dynamic of finite-precision training, and provide a testable explanation for abnormal parameter growth and logit divergence in late-stage training.
136. ❌ IRC-Bench: Recognizing Entities from Contextual Cues in First-Person Reminiscences
作者: Yehudit Aperstein, Eden Moran, Alexander Apartsin 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06142v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 people recount personal memories, they often refer to people, places, and events indirectly, relying on contextual cues rather than explicit names. Such implicit references are central to reminiscence narratives: first-person accounts of lived experience used in therapeutic, archival, and social settings. They pose a difficult computational problem because the intended entity must be inferred from dispersed narrative evidence rather than from a local mention. We introduce IRC-Bench, the Implicit Reminiscence Context Benchmark, for evaluating implicit entity recognition in reminiscence transcripts. The benchmark targets non-locality: entity-identifying cues are distributed across multiple, non-contiguous clauses, unlike named entity recognition, entity linking, or coreference resolution. IRC-Bench comprises 25,136 samples constructed from 12,337 Wiki-data-linked entities across 1,994 transcripts spanning 11 thematic domains. Each sample pairs an Entity-Grounded Narrative, in which the target entity is explicitly mentioned, with an Entity-Elided Narrative, in which direct mentions are removed. We evaluate 19 configurations across LLM generation, dense retrieval, RAG, and fine-tuning. QLoRA-adapted Llama 3.1 8B performs best in the open-world setting (38.94% exact match; 51.59% Jaccard), while fine-tuned DPR leads closed-world retrieval (35.38% Hit@1; 71.49% Hit@10). We release IRC-Bench with data, code, and evaluation tools.
137. ❌ MemReranker: Reasoning-Aware Reranking for Agent Memory Retrieval
作者: Chunyu Li, Jingyi Kang, Ding Chen, Mengyuan Zhang, Jiajun Shen, Bo Tang, Xuanhe Zhou, Feiyu Xiong, Zhiyu Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06132v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 agent memory systems, the reranking model serves as the critical bridge connecting user queries with long-term memory. Most systems adopt the “retrieve-then-rerank” two-stage paradigm, but generic reranking models rely on semantic similarity matching and lack genuine reasoning capabilities, leading to a problem where recalled results are semantically highly relevant yet do not contain the key information needed to answer the question. This deficiency manifests in memory scenarios as three specific problems. First, relevance scores are miscalibrated, making threshold-based filtering difficult. Second, ranking degrades when facing temporal constraints, causal reasoning, and other complex queries. Third, the model cannot leverage dialogue context for semantic disambiguation. This report introduces MemReranker, a reranking model family (0.6B/4B) built on Qwen3-Reranker through multi-stage LLM knowledge distillation. Multi-teacher pairwise comparisons generate calibrated soft labels, BCE pointwise distillation establishes well-distributed scores, and InfoNCE contrastive learning enhances hard-sample discrimination. Training data combines general corpora with memory-specific multi-turn dialogue data covering temporal constraints, causal reasoning, and coreference resolution. On the memory retrieval benchmark, MemReranker-0.6B substantially outperforms BGE-Reranker and matches open-source 4B/8B models as well as GPT-4o-mini on key metrics. MemReranker-4B further achieves 0.737 MAP, with several metrics on par with Gemini-3-Flash, while maintaining inference latency at only 10–20% of large models. On finance and healthcare vertical-domain benchmarks, the models preserve generalization capabilities on par with mainstream large-parameter rerankers.
138. ❌ On Time, Within Budget: Constraint-Driven Online Resource Allocation for Agentic Workflows
作者: Xinglin Wang, Zishen Liu, Shaoxiong Feng, Peiwen Yuan, Yiwei Li, Jiayi Shi, Yueqi Zhang, Chuyi Tan, Ji Zhang, Boyuan Pan, Yao Hu, Kan Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06110v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 systems increasingly solve complex user requests by executing orchestrated workflows, where subtasks are assigned to specialized models or tools and coordinated according to their dependencies. While recent work improves agent efficiency by optimizing the performance–cost–latency frontier, real deployments often impose concrete requirements: a workflow must be completed within a specified budget and before a specified deadline. This shifts the goal from average efficiency optimization to maximizing the probability that the entire workflow completes successfully under explicit budget and deadline constraints. We study \emph{constraint-driven online resource allocation for agentic workflows}. Given a dependency-structured workflow and estimates of success rates and generation lengths for each subtask–model pair, the executor allocates models and parallel samples across simultaneously executable subtasks while managing the remaining budget and time. We formulate this setting as a finite-horizon stochastic online allocation problem and propose \emph{Monte Carlo Portfolio Planning} (MCPP), a lightweight closed-loop planner that directly estimates constrained completion probability through simulated workflow executions and replans after observed outcomes. Experiments on CodeFlow and ProofFlow demonstrate that MCPP consistently improves constrained completion probability over strong baselines across a wide range of budget–deadline constraints.
139. ❌ Uncovering Entity Identity Confusion in Multimodal Knowledge Editing
作者: Shu Wu, Xiaotian Ye, Xinyu Mou, Dongsheng Liu, Xiaohan Wang, Mengqi Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06096v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 knowledge editing (MKE) aims to correct the internal knowledge of large vision-language models after deployment, yet the behavioral patterns of post-edit models remain underexplored. In this paper, we identify a systemic failure mode in edited models, termed Entity Identity Confusion (EIC): edited models exhibit an absurd behavior where text-only queries about the original entity’s identity unexpectedly return information about the new entity. To rigorously investigate EIC, we construct EC-Bench, a diagnostic benchmark that directly probes how image-entity bindings shift before and after editing. Our analysis reveals that EIC stems from existing methods failing to distinguish between Image-Entity (I-E) binding and Entity-Entity (E-E) relational knowledge in the model, causing models to overfit E-E associations as a shortcut: the image is still perceived as the original entity, with the new entity’s name serving only as a spurious identity label. We further explore potential mitigation strategies, showing that constraining edits to the model’s I-E processing stage encourages edits to act more faithfully on I-E binding, thereby substantially reducing EIC. Based on these findings, we discuss principled desiderata for faithful MKE and provide methodological guidance for future research.
140. ❌ Milestone-Guided Policy Learning for Long-Horizon Language Agents
作者: Zixuan Wang, Yuchen Yan, Hongxing Li, Teng Pan, Dingming Li, Ruiqing Zhang, Weiming Lu, Jun Xiao, Yueting Zhuang, Yongliang Shen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06078v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 long-horizon agentic tasks require language agents to perform dozens of sequential decisions, training such agents with reinforcement learning remains challenging. We identify two root causes: credit misattribution, where correct early actions are penalized due to terminal failures, and sample inefficiency, where scarce successful trajectories result in near-total loss of learning signal. We introduce a milestone-guided policy learning framework, BEACON, that leverages the compositional structure of long-horizon tasks to ensure precise credit assignment. BEACON partitions trajectories at milestone boundaries, applies temporal reward shaping within segments to credit partial progress, and estimates advantages at dual scales to prevent distant failures from corrupting the evaluation of local actions. On ALFWorld, WebShop, and ScienceWorld, BEACON consistently outperforms GRPO and GiGPO. Notably, on long-horizon ALFWorld tasks, BEACON achieves 92.9% success rate, nearly doubling GRPO’s 53.5%, while improving effective sample utilization from 23.7% to 82.0%. These results establish milestone-anchored credit assignment as an effective paradigm for training long-horizon language agents. Code is available at https://github.com/ZJU-REAL/BEACON.
141. ❌ Navigating by Old Maps: The Pitfalls of Static Mechanistic Localization in LLM Post-Training
作者: Hang Chen, Jiaying Zhu, Hongyang Chen, Hongxu Liu, Xinyu Yang, Wenya Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06076v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 “Locate-then-Update” paradigm has become a predominant approach in the post-training of large language models (LLMs), identifying critical components via mechanistic interpretability for targeted parameter updates. However, this paradigm rests on a fundamental yet unverified assumption: can mechanisms derived from current static parameters reliably guide future dynamic parameter updates? To investigate this, we systematically track the structural evolution of Transformer circuits throughout the supervised fine-tuning (SFT) process, revealing the underlying dynamics of task mechanisms. We introduce three novel metrics-Circuit Distance, Circuit Stability, and Circuit Conflict-to analyze circuit evolution across three dimensions: neural migration, semantic stability, and cross-task interference. Our empirical results reveal that circuits inherently exhibit “Free Evolution” during parameter updates. Consequently, static mechanisms extracted from current states inevitably suffer from temporal latency, making them fundamentally inadequate for guiding future states. Moreover, by deconstructing the “illusion of effectiveness” in existing methods, this work underscores the necessity of “foresight” in mechanistic localization and proposes a predictive framework for future research.
142. ❌ Novelty-based Tree-of-Thought Search for LLM Reasoning and Planning
作者: Leon Hamm, Zlatan Ajanovic 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06040v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 advances such as chain-of-thought, tree-of-thought or reinforcement learning have improved the performance of LLMs in reasoning and planning tasks, they are still brittle and have not achieved human-level performance in many domains, and often suffer from high time and token costs. Inspired by the success of width-based search in planning, we explore how the concept of novelty can be transferred to language domains and how it can improve tree-of-thought reasoning. A tree of thoughts relies on building possible “paths” of consecutive ideas or thoughts. These are generated by repeatedly prompting an LLM. In our paper, a measurable concept of novelty is proposed that describes the uniqueness of a new node (thought) in comparison to nodes previously seen in the search tree. Novelty is estimated by prompting an LLM and making use of embedded general knowledge from pre-training. This metric can then be used to prune branches and reduce the scope of the search. Although this method introduces more prompts per state, the overall token cost can be reduced by pruning and reducing the overall tree size. This procedure is tested and compared using several benchmarks in language-based planning and general reasoning.
143. ❌ More Aligned, Less Diverse? Analyzing the Grammar and Lexicon of Two Generations of LLMs
作者: Adrián Gude, Roi Santos-Ríos, Francis Bond, Dan Flickinger, Carlos Gómez-Rodríguez, Olga Zamaraeva 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06030v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 contributes to a growing line of research in comparing LLM-generated texts with human-authored text, in this case, English news text. We focus in particular on the evaluation of syntactic properties through formal grammar frameworks. Our analysis compares two generations of LLMs in the context of two human-authored English news datasets from two different years. Employing the Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG) formalism, we investigate the distributions of syntactic structures and lexical types of AI-generated texts and contrast them with the corresponding distributions in the human-authored New York Times (NYT) articles. We use diversity metrics from ecology and information theory to quantify variation in grammatical constructions and lexical types. We show that English news text has changed little in the given time frame, while newer LLMs display reduced syntactic and, especially, lexical diversity compared to older, non-instruction-tuned models. These findings point to future work in studying effects of instruction tuning, which, while enhancing coherence and adherence to prompts, may narrow the expressive range of model output.
144. ❌ PersonaKit (PK): A Plug-and-Play Platform for User Testing Diverse Roles in Full-Duplex Dialogue
作者: Hyunbae Jeon, Jinho D. Choi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06007v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 spoken dialogue systems expand beyond traditional assistant roles to encompass diverse personas – such as authoritative instructors, uncooperative merchants, or distracted workers – they require distinct, human-like turn-taking behaviors to maintain psychological immersion. However, current full-duplex systems often default to a rigid, overly accommodating ``always-yield’’ policy during overlapping speech, which severely undermines character consistency for non-submissive roles. Evaluating alternative, persona-specific turn-taking strategies through empirical user studies is challenging because building real-time full-duplex test environments requires substantial engineering overhead. To address this, we present PersonaKit (PK), an open-source, low-latency web platform for the rapid prototyping and evaluation of conversational agents. Using intuitive JSON configurations, researchers can define personas, specify probabilistic interruption-handling behaviors (e.g., yield, hold, bridge, or override), and automatically deploy comparative A/B surveys. Through an in-the-wild evaluation with 8 distinct personas, we demonstrate that PersonaKit provides an extensible, end-to-end framework for studying complex sociolinguistic behaviors in next-generation spoken agents.
145. ❌ From Articles to Premises: Building PrimeFacts, an Extraction Methodology and Resource for Fact-Checking Evidence
作者: Premtim Sahitaj, Jawan Kolanowski, Ariana Sahitaj, Veronika Solopova, Max Upravitelev, Daniel Röder, Iffat Maab, Junichi Yamagishi, Sebastian Möller, Vera Schmitt 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06006v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Fact-checking articles encode rich supporting evidence and reasoning, yet this evidence remains largely inaccessible to automated verification systems due to unstructured presentation. We introduce PrimeFacts, a methodology and resource for extracting fine-grained evidence from full fact-checking articles. We compile 13,106 PolitiFact articles with claims, verdicts, and all referenced sources, and we identify 49,718 in-article hyperlinks as natural anchors to pinpoint key evidence. Our framework leverages large language models (LLMs) to rewrite these anchor sentences into stand-alone, context-independent premises and investigates the extraction of additional implicit evidence. In evaluations on cross-article evidence retrieval and claim verification, the extracted premises substantially improve performance. Decontextualized evidence yields higher retrievability, achieving up to a 30 percent relative gain in Mean Reciprocal Rank over verbatim sentences, and using the evidence for verdict prediction raises Macro-F1 by 10-20 points over the baseline. These gains are consistent across different verdict granularities (2-class vs. 5-class) and model architectures. A qualitative analysis indicates that the decontextualized premises remain faithful to the original sources. Our work highlights the promise of reusing fact-checkers’ evidence for automation and provides a large-scale resource of structured evidence from real-world fact-checks.
146. ❌ Safety Anchor: Defending Harmful Fine-tuning via Geometric Bottlenecks
作者: Guoxin Lu, Letian Sha, Qing Wang, Peijie Sun, Hao Zhou, Hua Dai, Fu Xiao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05995v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 safety alignment of Large Language Models (LLMs) remains vulnerable to Harmful Fine-tuning (HFT). While existing defenses impose constraints on parameters, gradients, or internal representations, we observe that they can be effectively circumvented under persistent HFT. Our analysis traces this failure to the inherent redundancy of the high-dimensional parameter space: attackers exploit optimization trajectories that are orthogonal to defense constraints to restore harmful capabilities while deceptively adhering to safety restrictions. To address this, we propose Safety Bottleneck Regularization (SBR). SBR shifts the defensive focus from the redundant parameter space to the unembedding layer, which serves as a geometric bottleneck. By anchoring the final hidden states of harmful queries to those of the safety-aligned model, SBR enables the model to maintain safe responses even under persistent HFT. Extensive experiments confirm SBR’s effectiveness, demonstrating that utilizing just a single safety anchor is sufficient to reduce the Harmful Score to $<$10 while preserving competitive performance on benign downstream tasks.
147. ❌ TheraAgent: Self-Improving Therapeutic Agent for Precise and Comprehensive Treatment Planning
作者: Junkai Li, Yunghwei Lai, Tianyi Zhu, Zheng Long Lee, Weizhi Ma, Yang Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05963v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Formulating a treatment plan is inherently a complex reasoning and refinement task rather than a simple generation problem. However, existing large language models (LLMs) mainly rely on one-shot output without explicit verification, which may result in rough, incomplete, and potentially unsafe treatment plans. To address these limitations, we propose TheraAgent, an agentic framework that replaces one-shot generation with an iterative generate-judge-refine pipeline. By mirroring the actual reasoning process of human experts who iteratively revise treatment plans, our framework progressively transforms coarse and incomplete drafts into precise, comprehensive, and safer therapeutic regimens. To facilitate the critical judge component, we introduce TheraJudge, a treatment-specific evaluation module integrated into the inference loop to enforce clinical standards. Experiments show TheraAgent achieves state-of-the-art results on HealthBench, leading in Accuracy and Completeness. In expert evaluations, it attains an 86% win rate against physicians, with superior Targeting and Harm Control. Moreover, the highly agreement between TheraJudge and HealthBench evaluations confirms the reliability of our framework.
148. ❌ Tatarstan Toponyms: A Bilingual Dataset and Hybrid RAG System for Geospatial Question Answering
作者: Mullosharaf K. Arabov 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05962v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 addresses automatic geospatial question answering over multilingual toponymic data. An original bilingual dataset of toponyms of the Republic of Tatarstan is introduced, comprising 9,688 structured records with linguistic, etymological, administrative, and coordinate information (93.1% georeferenced). Based on this dataset, a question-answering corpus of approximately 39,000 question-context-answer triples is constructed with guaranteed answer localization. A hybrid retriever integrates dense semantic indexing (multilingual-e5-large) with geospatial filtering via KD-trees and haversine distance. On 500 test queries, the hybrid search achieves Recall@1=0.988, Recall@5=1.000, and MRR=0.994, significantly outperforming BM25 and purely spatial methods. Among tested reader architectures (RuBERT, XLM-RoBERTa-large, T5-RUS), XLM-RoBERTa-large attains the best quality: EM=0.992, F1=0.994. On raw outputs, RuBERT models fail on coordinate questions (F1=0) while XLM-RoBERTa-large reaches F1=0.984; however, simple post-processing eliminates numerical gaps and restores RuBERT accuracy to 100%. This discrepancy stems from tokenization differences and pre-training corpora composition. All resources (dataset, QA corpus, model weights, web demo) are openly published on Hugging Face. Results apply to geospatial QA services, geocoding, and digital humanities in multilingual regions.
149. ❌ TableVista: Benchmarking Multimodal Table Reasoning under Visual and Structural Complexity
作者: Zheyuan Yang, Liqiang Shang, Junjie Chen, Xun Yang, Chenglong Xu, Bo Yuan, Chenyuan Jiao, Yaoru Sun, Yilun Zhao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05955v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 TableVista, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating foundation models in multimodal table reasoning under visual and structural complexity. TableVista consists of 3,000 high-quality table reasoning problems, where each instance is expanded into 10 distinct visual variants through our multi-style rendering and transformation pipeline. This process encompasses diverse scenario styles, robustness perturbations, and vision-only configurations, culminating in 30,000 multimodal samples for a multi-dimensional evaluation. We conduct an extensive evaluation of 29 state-of-the-art open-source and proprietary foundation models on TableVista. Through comprehensive quantitative and qualitative analysis, we find that while evaluated models remain largely stable across diverse rendering styles, they exhibit pronounced performance degradation on complex structural layouts and vision-only settings, revealing that current models struggle to maintain reasoning consistency when structural complexity combines with visually integrated presentations. These findings highlight critical gaps in current multimodal capabilities, providing insights for advancing more robust and reliable table understanding models.
150. ❌ Hallucination as an Anomaly: Dynamic Intervention via Probabilistic Circuits
作者: Erik Nielsen, Elia Cunegatti, Marcus Vukojevic, Giovanni Iacca 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05953v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 critical challenges in Large Language Models is their tendency to hallucinate, i.e., produce factually incorrect responses. Existing approaches show promising results in terms of hallucination correction, but still suffer from a main limitation: they apply corrections indiscriminately to every token, corrupting also the originally correct generations. To overcome this drawback, we propose PCNET, a Probabilistic Circuit trained as a tractable density estimator over the LLM residual stream. The method detects hallucinations as geometric anomalies on the factual manifold, which is done via exact Negative Log-Likelihood computation, hence without the need for sampling, external verifiers, or weight modifications, as in existing techniques. To demonstrate its effectiveness, we exploit PCNET as a dynamic gate that distinguishes hallucinated from factual hidden states at each decoding step. This triggers our second main contribution, PC-LDCD (Probabilistic Circuit Latent Density Contrastive Decoding), only when the latent geometry deviates from factual regions, while leaving correct generations untouched. Across four LLMs, ranging from 1B to 8B models, and four benchmarks covering conversational reasoning, knowledge-intensive QA, reading comprehension, and truthfulness, PCNET achieves near-perfect hallucination detection across CoQA, SQuAD v2.0, and TriviaQA, with AUROC reaching up to 99%. Moreover, PC-LDCD obtains the highest True+Info, MC2, and MC3 scores on TruthfulQA in three out of four models, in comparison with state-of-the-art baselines, while reducing the mean corruption rate to 53.7% and achieving a preservation rate of 79.3%. Our proposed method is publicly available on GitHub.
151. ❌ Lightweight Stylistic Consistency Profiling: Robust Detection of LLM-Generated Textual Content for Multimedia Moderation
作者: Siyuan Li, Aodu Wulianghai, Xi Lin, Xibin Yuan, Qinghua Mao, Guangyan Li, Xiang Chen, Jun Wu, Jianhua Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05950v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 increasing prevalence of Large Language Models (LLMs) in content creation has made distinguishing human-written textual content from LLM-generated counterparts a critical task for multimedia moderation. Existing detectors often rely on statistical cues or model-specific heuristics, making them vulnerable to paraphrasing and adversarial manipulations, and consequently limiting their robustness and interpretability. In this work, we proposeLiSCP , a novel lightweight stylistic consistency profiling method for robust detection of LLM-generated textual content, focusing on feature stability under adversarial manipulation. Our approach constructs a consistency profile that combines discrete stylistic features with continuous semantic signals, leveraging stylistic stability across multimodal-guided paraphrased text variants. Experiments spanning real-world multimedia news and movie datasets and conventional text domains demonstrate that LiSCP achieves superior performance on in-domain detection and outperforms existing approaches by up to 11.79% in cross-domain settings. Additionally,it demonstrates notable robustness under adversarial scenarios, including adversarial attacks and hybrid human-AI settings.
152. ❌ MobileEgo Anywhere: Open Infrastructure for long horizon egocentric data on commodity hardware
作者: Senthil Palanisamy, Abhishek Anand, Satpal Singh Rathor, Pratyush Patnaik, Shubhanshu Khatana 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05945v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 recent advancement of Vision Language Action (VLA) models has driven a critical demand for large scale egocentric datasets. However, existing datasets are often limited by short episode durations, typically spanning only a few minutes, which fails to capture the long horizon temporal dependencies necessary for complex robotic task execution. To bridge this gap, we present MobileEgo Anywhere, a framework designed to facilitate the collection of robust, hour plus egocentric trajectories using commodity mobile hardware. We leverage the ubiquitous sensor suites of modern smartphones to provide high fidelity, long term camera pose tracking, effectively removing the high hardware barriers associated with traditional robotics data collection. Our contributions are three fold: (1) we release a novel dataset comprising 200 hours of diverse, long form egocentric data with persistent state tracking; (2) we open source a mobile application that enables any user to record egocentric data, and (3) we provide a comprehensive processing pipeline to convert raw mobile captures into standardized, training ready formats for Vision Language Action model and foundation model research. By democratizing the data collection process, this work enables the massive scale acquisition of long horizon data across varied global environments, accelerating the development of generalizable robotic policies.
153. ❌ Near-Policy: Accelerating On-Policy Distillation via Asynchronous Generation and Selective Packing
作者: Miao Rang, Zhenni Bi, Hang Zhou, Kai Han, Xuechun Wang, An Xiao, Xinghao Chen, Yunhe Wang, Hanting Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05940v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Standard knowledge distillation for autoregressive models often suffers from distribution mismatch. While on-policy methods mitigate this by leveraging student-generated outputs, they rely on computationally expensive Reinforcement Learning (RL) frameworks. To improve efficiency, we propose Near-Policy Distillation (NPD), an asynchronous approach that decouples student generation from training. This reformulation enables Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) with sequence packing. However, asynchronous updates inevitably introduce policy lag and sample noise, which can cause the behavior to drift from near-policy toward off-policy. To counteract this without sacrificing efficiency, NPD integrates sparse student updates and the $Δ$-IFD filtering mechanism, a heuristic sample selection mechanism that empirically stabilizes the optimization trajectory. By filtering extreme out-of-distribution samples, $Δ$-IFD prevents noise from dominating the gradients, ensuring updates remain within a safe proximal learning zone. Empirically, the NPD framework achieves a 8.1x speedup over on-policy baselines and outperforms SFT by 8.09%. Crucially, by effectively narrowing the exploration space for subsequent RL, our method enables openPangu-Embedded-1B to reach a state-of-the-art score of 68.73%, outperforming the substantially larger Qwen3-1.7B. Codes will be released soon.
154. ❌ Minimizing Modality Gap from the Input Side: Your Speech LLM Can Be a Prosody-Aware Text LLM
作者: Wenqian Cui, Xiao-Hui Li, Daxin Tan, Qiyong Zheng, Irwin King 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05927v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Speech large language models (SLMs) are typically built from text large language model (TLM) checkpoints, yet they still suffer from a substantial modality gap. Prior work has mainly attempted to reduce this gap from the output side by making speech generation more text-like, but the gap remains. We argue that the key remaining bottleneck lies on the input side. We propose TextPro-SLM, an SLM that makes spoken input more closely resemble that of a prosody-aware text LLM. TextPro-SLM combines WhisperPro, a unified speech encoder that produces synchronized text tokens and prosody embeddings, with an LLM backbone trained to preserve the semantic capabilities of the original TLM while learning paralinguistic understanding. Experiments show that TextPro-SLM achieves the lowest modality gap among leading SLMs at both 3B and 7B scales, while also delivering strong overall performance on paralinguistic understanding tasks. These gains are achieved with only roughly 1,000 hours of LLM training audio, suggesting that reducing the modality gap from the input side is both effective and data-efficient.
155. ❌ Logic-Regularized Verifier Elicits Reasoning from LLMs
作者: Xinyu Wang, Changzhi Sun, Lian Cheng, Yuanbin Wu, Dell Zhang, Xiaoling Wang, Xuelong Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05893v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Verifiers are crucial components for enhancing modern LLMs’ reasoning capability. Typicalverifiers require resource-intensive superviseddataset construction, which is costly and faceslimitations in data diversity. In this paper, wepropose LOVER, an unsupervised verifier regularized by logical rules. LOVER treats theverifier as a binary latent variable, utilizinginternal activations and enforcing three logical constraints on multiple reasoning paths:negation consistency, intra-group consistency,and inter-group consistency (grouped by thefinal answer). By incorporating logical rulesas priors, LOVER can leverage unlabeled examples and is directly compatible with any offthe-shelf LLMs. Experiments on 10 datasetsdemonstrate that LOVER significantly outperforms unsupervised baselines, achieving performance comparable to the supervised verifier(reaching its 95% level on average). The sourcecode is publicly available at https://github.com/wangxinyufighting/llm-lover.
156. ❌ Beyond Steering Vector: Flow-based Activation Steering for Inference-Time Intervention
作者: Zehao Jin, Ruixuan Deng, Junran Wang, Xinjie Shen, Chao Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05892v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Activation steering has emerged as a promising alternative for controlling language-model behavior at inference time by modifying intermediate representations while keeping model parameters frozen. However, large-scale evaluations such as AxBench show that existing steering methods are often outperformed by simple in-context prompting and generalize poorly to unseen concepts. We hypothesize that these limitations arise from unvalidated simplifying assumptions shared across prior methods, which typically restrict steering interventions to fixed, single-step, position-invariant transforms. We propose FLAS (Flow-based Activation Steering), which learns a general, concept-conditioned velocity field $v_t(h,t,c)$ that transports unsteered activations to steered ones without relying on these assumptions. On AxBench, FLAS is the first learned method to consistently outperform prompting, reaching held-out harmonic means of $1.015$ on Gemma-2-2B-IT and $1.113$ on Gemma-2-9B-IT without per-concept tuning. Analysis of the learned flow shows curved, multi-step, token-varying trajectories, which suggests that previous hypotheses on activation space geometry might be incomplete.
157. ❌ Bridging Passive and Active: Enhancing Conversation Starter Recommendation via Active Expression Modeling
作者: Yiqing Wu, Haoming Li, Guanyu Jiang, Jiahao Liang, Yongchun Zhu, Jingwu Chen, Feng Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05855v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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)-driven conversational search is shifting information retrieval from reactive keyword matching to proactive, open-ended dialogues. In this context, Conversation Starters are widely deployed to provide personalized query recommendations that help users initiate dialogues. Conventionally, recommending these starters relies on a closed “exposure-click” loop. Yet, this feedback loop mechanism traps the system in an echo chamber where, compounded by data sparsity, it fails to capture the dynamic nature of conversational search intents shaped by the open world. As a result, the system skews towards popular but generic suggestions.In this work, we uncover an untapped paradigm shift to shatter this harmful feedback loop: harnessing user “free will” through active user expressions. Unlike traditional recommendations, conversational search empowers users to bypass menus entirely through manually typed queries. The open-world intents in active queries hold the key to breaking this loop. However, incorporating them is non-trivial: (1) there exists an inherent distribution shift between active queries and formulated starters. (2) Furthermore, the “non-ID-able” nature of open text renders traditional item-based popularity statistics ineffective for large-scale industrial streaming training. To this end, we propose Passive-Active Bridge (PA-Bridge), a novel framework that employs an adversarial distribution aligner to bridge the distributional gap between passively recommended starters and active expressions. Moreover, we introduce a semantic discretizer to enable the deployment of popularity debiasing algorithms. Online A/B tests on our platform, demonstrate that PA-Bridge significantly boosts the Feature Penetration Rate by 0.54% and User Active Days
158. ❌ Evaluation Awareness in Language Models Has Limited Effect on Behaviour
作者: Amelie Knecht, Lucas Florin, Thilo Hagendorff 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05835v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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) sometimes note in their chain of thought (CoT) that they may be under evaluation. Researchers worry that this verbalised evaluation awareness (VEA) causes models to adapt their outputs strategically, optimising for perceived evaluation criteria, which, for instance, can make models appear safer than they actually are. However, whether VEA actually has this effect is largely unknown. We tested this across open-weight LRMs and benchmarks covering safety, alignment, moral reasoning, and political opinion. We tested this both on-policy, sampling multiple CoTs per item and comparing those that spontaneously contained VEA against those that did not, and off-policy, using model prefilling to inject evaluation-aware sentences where missing and remove them where present, with subsequent resampling. VEA has limited effect on model behaviour: injecting VEA into CoTs produces near-zero effects ($ω\leq 0.06$), removing it causes small shifts ($ω\leq 0.12$) and spontaneously occurring VEA shifts answer distributions by at most 3.7 percentage points ($ω\leq 0.31$). Our findings call for caution when interpreting high VEA rates as evidence of strategic behaviour or alignment tampering. Evaluation awareness may pose a smaller safety risk than the current literature assumes.
159. ❌ LeakDojo: Decoding the Leakage Threats of RAG Systems
作者: Maosen Zhang, Jianshuo Dong, Boting Lu, Wenyue Li, Xiaoping Zhang, Tianwei Zhang, Han Qiu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05818v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) enables large language models (LLMs) to leverage external knowledge, but also exposes valuable RAG databases to leakage attacks. As RAG systems grow more complex and LLMs exhibit stronger instruction-following capabilities, existing studies fall short of systematically assessing RAG leakage risks. We present LeakDojo, a configurable framework for controlled evaluation of RAG leakage. Using LeakDojo, we benchmark six existing attacks across fourteen LLMs, four datasets, and diverse RAG systems. Our study reveals that (1) query generation and adversarial instructions contribute independently to leakage, with overall leakage well approximated by their product; (2) stronger instruction-following capability correlates with higher leakage risk; and (3) improvements in RAG faithfulness can introduce increased leakage risk. These findings provide actionable insights for understanding and mitigating RAG leakage in practice. Our codebase is available at https://github.com/yeasen-z/LeakDojo.
160. ❌ Estimating the Black-box LLM Uncertainty with Distribution-Aligned Adversarial Distillation
作者: Huizi Cui, Huan Ma, Qilin Wang, Yuhang Gao, Changqing Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05777v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 progressed rapidly in complex reasoning and question answering, yet LLM hallucination remains a central bottleneck that hinders practical deployment, especially for commercial black-box LLMs accessible only via APIs. Existing uncertainty quantification methods typically depend on computationally expensive multiple sampling or internal parameters, which prevents real-time estimation and fails to capture information implicit in the black-box reasoning process. To address this issue, we propose Distribution-Aligned Adversarial Distillation (DisAAD), which introduces a generation-discrimination architecture to guide a lightweight proxy model to learn the high-quality regions of the output distribution of the black-box LLM, thus effectively endowing it with the ability to know whether the black-box LLM knows or not. Subsequently, we use the proxy model to reproduce the specific responses of the black-box LLM and estimate the corresponding uncertainty based on evidence learning. Extensive experiments have verified the effectiveness and promise of our proposed method, indicating that a proxy model even one that only accounts for 1% of the target LLM’s size can achieve reliable uncertainty quantification.
161. ❌ Adaptive Selection of LoRA Components in Privacy-Preserving Federated Learning
作者: Myoungjun Kim, Sangwoo Park, Yoseob Han, Jin-Hyun Ahn 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05769v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Differentially private federated fine-tuning of large models with LoRA suffers from aggregation error caused by LoRA’s multiplicative structure, which is further amplified by DP noise and degrades both stability and accuracy. Existing remedies apply a single update mode uniformly across all layers and all communication rounds (or alternate them on a fixed schedule), ignoring both the structural asymmetry between the two LoRA factors and the round-wise dynamics of training. We propose AS-LoRA, an adaptive framework defined by three axes (i) layer-wise freedom, in which each layer independently selects its active component, (ii) round-wise adaptivity, in which the selection updates over communication rounds, and (iii) a curvature-aware score derived from a second-order approximation of the loss. Theoretically, AS-LoRA eliminates the reconstruction-error floor of layer-tied schedules, accelerates convergence, implicitly biases solutions toward flatter minima, and incurs no additional privacy cost. Across GLUE, SQuAD, CIFAR-100, and Tiny-ImageNet under strict DP budgets and non-IID partitions, AS-LoRA improves over the federated LoRA baselines by up to $+7.5$ pp on GLUE and $+12.5$ pp on MNLI-mm for example, while matching or exceeding SVD-based aggregation methods at $33\text{–}180 \times$ lower aggregation cost and with negligible communication overhead. Code for the proposed method is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/as_lora-F75F/.
162. ❌ Priming, Path-dependence, and Plasticity: Understanding the molding of user-LLM interaction and its implications from (many) chat logs in the wild
作者: Shengqi Zhu, Jeffrey M. Rzeszotarski, David Mimno 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05767v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
User interactions with LLMs are shaped by prior experiences and individual exploration, but in-lab studies do not provide system designers with visibility into these in-the-wild factors. This work explores a new approach to studying real-world user-LLM interactions through large-scale chat logs from the wild. Through analysis of 140K chatbot sessions from 7,955 anonymized global users over time, we demonstrate key patterns in user expressions despite varied tasks: (1) LLM users are not tabula rasa, nor are they constantly adapting; rather, interaction patterns form and stabilize rapidly through individual early trajectories; (2) Longitudinal outcomes, such as recurring text patterns and retention rates, are strongly correlated with early exploration; (3) Parallel dynamics are present, including organizing expressions by task types such as emotional support, or in response to model-version updates. These results present an ``agency paradox’’: despite LLM input spaces being unconstrained and user-driven, we in fact see less user exploration. We call for design consideration surrounding the molding procedure and its incorporation in future research.
163. ❌ BioTool: A Comprehensive Tool-Calling Dataset for Enhancing Biomedical Capabilities of Large Language Models
作者: Xin Gao, Ruiyi Zhang, Meixi Du, Peijia Qin, Pengtao Xie 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05758v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 success of large language models (LLMs) on general-purpose tasks, their performance in highly specialized domains such as biomedicine remains unsatisfactory. A key limitation is the inability of LLMs to effectively leverage biomedical tools, which clinical experts and biomedical researchers rely on extensively in daily workflows. While recent general-domain tool-calling datasets have substantially improved the capabilities of LLM agents, existing efforts in the biomedical domain largely rely on in-context learning and restrict models to a small set of tools. To address this gap, we introduce BioTool, a comprehensive biomedical tool-calling dataset designed for fine-tuning LLMs. BioTool comprises 34 frequently used tools collected from the NCBI, Ensembl, and UniProt databases, along with 7,040 high-quality, human-verified query-API call pairs spanning variation, genomics, proteomics, evolution, and general biology. Fine-tuning a 4-billion-parameter LLM on BioTool yields substantial improvements in biomedical tool-calling performance, outperforming cutting-edge commercial LLMs such as GPT-5.1. Furthermore, human expert evaluations demonstrate that integrating a BioTool-fine-tuned tool caller significantly improves downstream answer quality compared to the same LLM without tool usage, highlighting the effectiveness of BioTool in enhancing the biomedical capabilities of LLMs. The full dataset and evaluation code are available at https://github.com/gxx27/BioTool
164. ❌ RVPO: Risk-Sensitive Alignment via Variance Regularization
作者: Ivan Montero, Tomasz Jurczyk, Bhuwan Dhingra 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05750v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 critic-less RLHF methods aggregate multi-objective rewards via an arithmetic mean, leaving them vulnerable to constraint neglect: high-magnitude success in one objective can numerically offset critical failures in others (e.g., safety or formatting), masking low-performing “bottleneck” rewards vital for reliable multi-objective alignment. We propose Reward-Variance Policy Optimization (RVPO), a risk-sensitive framework that penalizes inter-reward variance during advantage aggregation, shifting the objective from “maximize sum” to “maximize consistency.” We show via Taylor expansion that a LogSumExp (SoftMin) operator effectively acts as a smooth variance penalty. We evaluate RVPO on rubric-based medical and scientific reasoning with up to 17 concurrent LLM-judged reward signals (Qwen2.5-3B/7B/14B) and on tool-calling with rule-based constraints (Qwen2.5-1.5B/3B). By preventing the model from neglecting difficult constraints to exploit easier objectives, RVPO improves overall scores on HealthBench (0.261 vs. 0.215 for GDPO at 14B, $p < 0.001$) and maintains competitive accuracy on GPQA-Diamond without the late-stage degradation observed in other multi-reward methods, demonstrating that variance regularization mitigates constraint neglect across model scales without sacrificing general capabilities.
165. ❌ Multi-Dimensional Behavioral Evaluation of Agentic Stock Prediction Systems Using LLM Judges with Closed-Loop Reinforcement Learning Feedback
作者: Mohammad Al Ridhawi, Mahtab Haj Ali, Hussein Al Osman 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05739v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 stock prediction systems make sequences of interdependent decisions (regime detection, pathway routing, reinforcement learning control) whose individual quality is hidden by aggregate metrics such as mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) or directional accuracy. We present a behavioral evaluation framework that addresses this gap. Behavioral traces logged at every autonomous decision point are grouped into five-day episodes and scored along six domain-specific dimensions (regime detection, routing, adaptation, risk calibration, strategy coherence, error recovery) by an ensemble of three large language model (LLM) judges (GPT 5.4, Claude 4.6 Opus, Gemini 3.1 Pro). Perturbation-based validation on 420 episodes yields targeted score drops of $-1.6$ to $-2.4$ on intended dimensions versus an average of $-0.32$ on the remaining five, with cross-model agreement up to Krippendorff’s $α= 0.85$. The composite behavioral score, used here only for cross-episode reporting, correlates at $ρ= 0.72$ with realized 20-day Sharpe ratio from offline backtesting. Closing the loop, the framework converts deficient per-dimension scores into a credit-assigned penalty term added to the Soft Actor-Critic (SAC) reward. Three short fine-tuning cycles, all confined to the validation period, produce on the held-out 2017-2025 test period a one-day MAPE reduction from 0.61% to 0.54% (an 11.5% relative reduction; $p<0.001$, Cohen’s $d=0.31$), a directional accuracy increase from 71% to 74%, and an 18% Sharpe ratio improvement (95% bootstrap CI [8.2%, 27.4%]), with gains concentrated in high-volatility episodes where the original system was most behaviorally deficient. Results are from offline backtesting and do not address effects specific to live deployment.
166. ❌ ReFlect: An Effective Harness System for Complex Long-Horizon LLM Reasoning
作者: Fan Huang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05737v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 reasoning paradigms for LLMs include chain-of-thought, ReAct, and post-hoc self-critique. These paradigms rely on two assumptions that fail on long-horizon, multi-stage tasks. As a result, errors accumulate silently across reasoning steps, leaving an open question: can a reasoning system effectively detect and recover from its own failures? We present ReFlect, a \emph{harness} system for LLM reasoning that creates standalone error detection and recovery logic as a deterministic wrapper around the model. Controlled experiments across 6 reasoning domains show that prompt-level self-critique produces formulaic templates that flag no issues in 90 of 100 audited reflection blocks, and the investigated LLMs wrongly accept a wrong answer in at least 76% of cases. Our ReFlect harness achieves task success rates ranging from 41% on gpt-4o-mini to 56% on Claude Sonnet 4.5 across six models spanning small and frontier scale, with per-model gains over Direct CoT ranging from +7 pp on Qwen2.5-72B to +29 pp on Claude Sonnet 4.5, and additionally raises SWE-bench patch-structural quality from 0% (Direct CoT) to between 82% (Qwen2.5-72B) and 87% (GPT-4o). Notably, the harness gain is inversely proportional to the model’s Direct CoT task success rate (the fitted slope is -1.69 with r=-0.76): each pp lost in baseline success rate is mechanically recovered by 1.69 pp of harness gain. We spot that adding structured reasoning state and operators yields only 15.0–18.7% pair-mean on Llama-3.3-70B and Qwen2.5-72B because models at this scale cannot reliably populate the state its operators require. ReFlect is model-agnostic, training-free, and operates entirely at inference time.
167. ❌ More Is Not Always Better: Cross-Component Interference in LLM Agent Scaffolding
作者: Ming Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05716v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 agent systems are built by stacking scaffolding components (planning, tools, memory, self-reflection, retrieval) assuming more is better. We study cross-component interference (CCI): degradation when components interact destructively. We run a full factorial experiment over all 2^5=32 subsets of five components on HotpotQA and GSM8K with Llama-3.1-8B/70B (96 conditions, up to 10 seeds). The All-In system is consistently suboptimal: on HotpotQA, a single-tool agent surpasses All-In by 32% (F1 0.233 vs 0.177, p=0.023); on GSM8K, a 3-component subset beats All-In by 79% (0.43 vs 0.24, p=0.010). Optimal component count is task-dependent (k*=1-4) and scale-sensitive: at 70B, combinations that hurt at 8B provide gains, though All-In still trails the best subset. We fit a main-effects regression (R^2=0.916, adj-R^2=0.899, LOOCV=0.872), compute exact Shapley values, and find 183/325 submodularity violations (56.3%), showing greedy selection is unreliable. A three-body synergy among Tool Use, Self-Reflection, and Retrieval (INT_3=+0.175, 95% CI [+0.003,+0.351]) is reported as exploratory. CCI replicates across model families (Qwen2.5) and is robust to prompt paraphrasing. Our findings suggest maximally-equipped agent defaults should be replaced by task-specific subset selection via interaction-aware analysis.
168. ❌ Decodable but Not Corrected by Fixed Residual-Stream Linear Steering: Evidence from Medical LLM Failure Regimes
作者: Ming Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05715v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Can linearly decodable failure signals in LLM hidden states be leveraged to correct those failures? We investigate this classification-correction gap via Overthinking (OT)–a stable behavioral regime (Jaccard >= 0.81, 94% inter-annotator agreement) in medical QA where models answer correctly under resampling yet fail in extended chain-of-thought. OT is linearly decodable at 71.6% balanced accuracy (p < 10^{-16}). Yet five families of fixed linear steering (29 configurations, n=1,273) all yield Delta ~= 0, with identical null results cross-architecture (Qwen2.5-7B) and cross-domain (MMLU-STEM). Three convergent lines of evidence suggest representational entanglement: the OT direction has 85-88% overlap with task-critical computation (specificity ratio <= 0.152); non-targeted shared-direction steering damages accuracy (-12.1pp); and LEACE concept erasure damages accuracy (-3.6pp, p=0.01), while 10 random erasures produce Delta=+0.3pp. The per-instance probe-steering correlation is r=-0.002 (p=0.97). Positively, the same probe enables selective abstention (held-out AUROC=0.610, exceeding all five uncertainty baselines, p=0.009): decodable failure structure supports post-generation reliability estimation even when the fixed linear steering family cannot exploit it for correction.
169. ❌ Decomposing the Basic Abilities of Large Language Models: Mitigating Cross-Task Interference in Multi-Task Instruct-Tuning
作者: Bing Wang, Ximing Li, Changchun Li, Jinjin Chi, Gang Niu, Masashi Sugiyama 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05676v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Recently, the prominent performance of large language models (LLMs) has been largely driven by multi-task instruct-tuning. Unfortunately, this training paradigm suffers from a key issue, named cross-task interference, due to conflicting gradients over shared parameters among different tasks. Some previous methods mitigate this issue by isolating task-specific parameters, e.g., task-specific neuron selection and mixture-of-experts. In this paper, we empirically reveal that the cross-task interference still exists for the existing solutions because of many parameters also shared by different tasks, and accordingly, we propose a novel solution, namely Basic Abilities Decomposition for multi-task Instruct-Tuning (BADIT). Specifically, we empirically find that certain parameters are consistently co-activated, and that co-activated parameters naturally organize into base groups. This motivates us to analogize that LLMs encode several orthogonal basic abilities, and that any task can be represented as a linear combination of these abilities. Accordingly, we propose BADIT that decomposes LLM parameters into orthogonal high-singular-value LoRA experts representing basic abilities, and dynamically enforces their orthogonality during training via spherical clustering of rank-1 components. We conduct extensive experiments on the SuperNI benchmark with 6 LLMs, and empirical results demonstrate that BADIT can outperform SOTA methods and mitigate the degree of cross-task interference.
170. ❌ XL-SafetyBench: A Country-Grounded Cross-Cultural Benchmark for LLM Safety and Cultural Sensitivity
作者: Dasol Choi, Eugenia Kim, Jaewon Noh, Sang Seo, Eunmi Kim, Myunggyo Oh, Yunjin Park, Brigitta Jesica Kartono, Josef Pichlmeier, Helena Berndt, Sai Krishna Mendu, Glenn Johannes Tungka, Özlem Gökçe, Suresh Gehlot, Katherine Pratt, Amanda Minnich, Haon Park 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05662v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 LLM safety benchmarks are predominantly English-centric and often rely on translation, failing to capture country-specific harms. Moreover, they rarely evaluate a model’s ability to detect culturally embedded sensitivities as distinct from universal harms. We introduce XL-SafetyBench. a suite of 5,500 test cases across 10 country-language pairs, comprising a Jailbreak Benchmark of country-grounded adversarial prompts and a Cultural Benchmark where local sensitivities are embedded within innocuous requests. Each item is constructed via a multi-stage pipeline that combines LLM-assisted discovery, automated validation gates, and dual independent native-speaker annotators per country. To distinguish principled refusal from comprehension failure, we evaluate Attack Success Rate (ASR) alongside two complementary metrics we introduce: Neutral-Safe Rate (NSR) and Cultural Sensitivity Rate (CSR). Evaluating 10 frontier and 27 local LLMs reveals two key findings. First, jailbreak robustness and cultural awareness do not show a coupled relationship among frontier models, so a composite safety score obscures per-axis variation. Second, local models exhibit a near-linear ASR-NSR trade-off (r = -0.81), indicating that their apparent safety reflects generation failure rather than genuine alignment. XL-SafetyBench enables more nuanced, cross-cultural safety evaluation in the multilingual era.
171. ❌ Negative Before Positive: Asymmetric Valence Processing in Large Language Models
作者: Sohan Venkatesh 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05653v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Mechanistic interpretability has revealed how concepts are encoded in large language models (LLMs), but emotional content remains poorly understood at the mechanistic level. We study whether LLMs process emotional valence through dedicated internal structure or through surface token matching. Using activation patching and steering on open-source LLMs, we find that negative and positive valence are processed at different network depths. Negative outcomes localize to early layers while positive outcomes peak at mid-to-late layers. Holding topic fixed while flipping valence produces sign-opposite responses, ruling out topic detection. Steering with the good-news direction at the identified layers shifts neutral prompts toward positive valence, showing these layers encode valence as a manipulable direction. Emotional valence in LLMs is localized, causal and steerable, making it a concrete target for interpretability-based oversight.
172. ❌ Architecture Matters: Comparing RAG Systems under Knowledge Base Poisoning
作者: Samuel Korn 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05632v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems are vulnerable to knowledge base poisoning, yet existing attacks have been evaluated almost exclusively against vanilla retrieve-then-generate pipelines. Architectures designed to handle conflicting retrieved information - multi-agent debate, agentic retrieval, recursive language models - remain untested against adversarially optimized contradictions. We evaluate four RAG architectures (vanilla RAG, agentic RAG, MADAM-RAG, and Recursive Language Models) under controlled single-document (N=1) poisoning on 921 Natural Questions QA pairs, comparing a clean baseline, naive injection, and CorruptRAG-AK - an adversarial attack whose meta-epistemic framing targets credibility assessment. Architecture is a high-impact variable in adversarial robustness: under CorruptRAG-AK, attack success rates range from 81.9% (vanilla) to 24.4% (RLM) - a spread of nearly 58 percentage points across architectures with comparable clean accuracy (~92%). Decomposing this gap, once the poisoned document is retrieved, adversarial framing - not retrieval optimization - drives the majority of CorruptRAG-AK’s advantage for three of four architectures, localizing the cross-architecture vulnerability at the content-reasoning stage. Our MADAM-RAG reimplementation shows the highest apparent contradiction detection rate, though our LLM judge over-identifies this behavior (~48.5% precision), so reported rates are upper bounds. Regardless of detection, MADAM-RAG cannot resolve contradictions reliably, producing a 41.4% non-answer rate even on clean inputs - though implementation divergences from the original may contribute. We introduce a seven-category behavioral taxonomy capturing contradiction detection, hedging, and failure modes beyond binary accuracy. Code, data, and analysis notebooks are publicly available.
173. ❌ One Turn Too Late: Response-Aware Defense Against Hidden Malicious Intent in Multi-Turn Dialogue
作者: Xinjie Shen, Rongzhe Wei, Peizhi Niu, Haoyu Wang, Ruihan Wu, Eli Chien, Bo Li, Pin-Yu Chen, Pan Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05630v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Hidden malicious intent in multi-turn dialogue poses a growing threat to deployed large language models (LLMs). Rather than exposing a harmful objective in a single prompt, increasingly capable attackers can distribute their intent across multiple benign-looking turns. Recent studies show that even modern commercial models with advanced guardrails remain vulnerable to such attacks despite advances in safety alignment and external guardrails. In this work, we address this challenge by detecting the earliest turn at which delivering the candidate response would make the accumulated interaction sufficient to enable harmful action. This objective requires precise turn-level intervention that identifies the harm-enabling closure point while avoiding premature refusal of benign exploratory conversations. To further support training and evaluation, we construct the Multi-Turn Intent Dataset (MTID), which contains branching attack rollouts, matched benign hard negatives, and annotations of the earliest harm-enabling turns. We show that MTID helps enable a turn-level monitor TurnGate, which substantially outperforms existing baselines in harmful-intent detection while maintaining low over-refusal rates. TurnGate further generalizes across domains, attacker pipelines, and target models. Our code is available at https://github.com/Graph-COM/TurnGate.
174. ❌ Spherical Flows for Sampling Categorical Data
作者: Jannis Chemseddine, Gregor Kornhardt, Gabriele Steidl 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05629v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 problem of learning generative models for discrete sequences in a continuous embedding space. Whereas prior approaches typically operate in Euclidean space or on the probability simplex, we instead work on the sphere $\mathbb S^{d-1}$. There the von Mises-Fisher (vMF) distribution induces a natural noise process and admits a closed-form conditional score. The conditional velocity is in general intractable. Exploiting the radial symmetry of the vMF density we reduce the continuity equation on $\mathbb S^{d-1}$ to a scalar ODE in the cosine similarity, whose unique bounded solution determines the velocity. The marginal velocity and marginal score on $(\mathbb S^{d-1})^L$ both decompose into posterior-weighted tangent sums that differ only by per-token scalar weights. This gives access to both ODE and predictor-corrector (PC) sampling. The posterior is the only learned object, trained by a cross-entropy loss. Experiments compare the vMF path against geodesic and Euclidean alternatives. The combination of vMF and PC sampling significantly improves results on Sudoku and language modeling.
175. ❌ When2Speak: A Dataset for Temporal Participation and Turn-Taking in Multi-Party Conversations for Large Language Models
作者: Vihaan Nama, Shreya Mendi, Zian Ye, Brinnae Bent 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05626v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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) excel at generating contextually appropriate responses but remain poorly calibrated for multi-party conversations, where deciding when to speak is as critical as what to say. In such settings, naively responding at every turn leads to excessive interruptions and degraded conversational coherence. We introduce When2Speak, a grounded synthetic dataset and four-stage generation pipeline for learning intervention timing in group interactions. The dataset comprises over 215,000 examples derived from 16,000 conversations involving 2-6 speakers, spanning diverse conversational styles, tones, and participant dynamics, and explicitly modeling SPEAK vs. SILENT decisions at each turn. Our pipeline combines real-world grounding, structured augmentation, controlled transcript synthesis, and fine-tuning-ready supervision, and is fully open-sourced to support reproducibility and adaptation to domain-specific conversational norms. Across multiple model families, supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on When2Speak significantly outperforms zero-shot baselines (e.g., the average Macro F1 increase across 4B+ parameter models was 60%, with the largest increase being 120%). However, SFT-trained models remain systematically over-conservative, missing nearly half of warranted interventions as seen through the Missed Intervention Rate (MIR), which was on average 0.50 and is noticed even at larger model sizes. To address this limitation, we apply reinforcement learning with asymmetric reward shaping, which reduces MIR to 0.186-0.218 and increases recall from 0.479 to 0.78-0.81. Our findings establish that temporal participation is a distinct and trainable dimension of conversational intelligence, and that grounded synthetic data provides an effective and scalable pathway for enabling LLMs to participate more naturally and appropriately in multi-party interactions.
176. ❌ The Cost of Context: Mitigating Textual Bias in Multimodal Retrieval-Augmented Generation
作者: Hoin Jung, Xiaoqian Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05594v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly integrated with Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to mitigate hallucinations, the introduction of external documents can conceal severe failure modes at the instance level. We identify and formalize the phenomenon of recorruption, where the introduction of even perfectly accurate “oracle” context causes a capable model to abandon an initially correct prediction. Through a mechanistic diagnosis of internal attention matrices, we show that recorruption is driven by a two-fold attentional collapse: (1) visual blindness, characterized by the systemic suppression of visual attention mass ($M_{vis}$) and sharpness ($S_{vis}$), and (2) a structural positional bias that forces the model to prioritize boundary tokens over semantic relevance. Our analysis reveals an Illusion of Success, demonstrating that many seemingly correct RAG outcomes are merely positional coincidences where the model’s textual copying bias happens to align with the ground-truth location. To address these vulnerabilities, we propose Bottleneck Attention Intervention for Recovery (BAIR), a parameter-free, inference-time framework that restores visual saliency and applies position-aware penalties to textual distractors. Across medical factuality, social fairness, and geospatial benchmarks, BAIR successfully restores multimodal grounding and improves diagnostic reliability without requiring model retraining or fine-tuning.
177. ❌ Belief Memory: Agent Memory Under Partial Observability
作者: Junfeng Liao, Qizhou Wang, Jianing Zhu, Bo Du, Rui Yan, Xiuying Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05583v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 agents that operate over long context depend on external memory to accumulate knowledge over time. However, existing methods typically store each observation as a single deterministic conclusion (e.g., inferring “API~X failed” from temporary errors), even though such observations are inherently partial and potentially ambiguous. By committing to one conclusion and discarding uncertainty, these methods introduce self-reinforcing error: the agent acts on the stored conclusion, never revisits alternatives, and reinforces the conclusion over time. To address this issue, we propose BeliefMem, which shifts the memory paradigm from committing to a single conclusion per observation to retaining multiple candidate conclusions with their probabilities. Concretely, BeliefMem stores the candidate conclusions as separate memory entries, each carrying a probability that is updated via Noisy-OR rules as new observations arrive. At retrieval, all candidates surface together with their probabilities, keeping alternatives visible to the agent. Since each conclusion in memory retains its probability, BeliefMem preserves the uncertainty that the deterministic paradigm discards, enabling the agent to act with high confidence on well-evidenced knowledge while retaining the capacity to update its confidence when new evidence arrives. Empirical evaluations on LoCoMo and ALFWorld benchmarks show that, even with limited data, BeliefMem achieves the best average performance, remarkably outperforming well-known baselines. More broadly, such probabilistic memory produces substantial gains and explores a new direction for agent memory in partially observable environments.
178. ❌ Nonsense Helps: Prompt Space Perturbation Broadens Reasoning Exploration
作者: Langlin Huang, Chengsong Huang, Jinyuan Li, Donghong Cai, Yuyi Yang, Jiaxin Huang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05566v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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, particularly Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), has significantly advanced the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, in complex tasks, GRPO frequently suffers from the ``zero-advantage problem’’: when all sampled rollouts for a query fail, the relative advantage collapses to zero. Consequently, the model loses effective training signals for these questions, wasting the training data and computational budget. While simply increasing the sampling budget for these questions is a common remedy, the static sampling policy inherently constrains reasoning exploration, limiting the success rate. In this paper, we propose Lorem Perturbation for Exploration (LoPE), a simple yet effective training framework to break this exploration bottleneck. We posit that task-irrelevant prompt-space perturbations can shift the model’s output distribution enough to unlock orthogonal reasoning pathways for hard questions. Specifically, LoPE prepends sequences stochastically assembled from Lorem Ipsum vocabulary (a pseudo-Latin placeholder text) to the prompts before resampling. Experiments across 1.7B, 4B, and 7B models demonstrate that LoPE significantly outperforms resampling with the original prompts. Further analysis reveals that other Latin-based random sequences with low perplexity are also effective perturbations. Our results establish LoPE as a strong baseline for broadening exploration in LLM reinforcement learning.
179. ❌ A Few Good Clauses: Comparing LLMs vs Domain-Trained Small Language Models on Structured Contract Extraction
作者: Nicole Lincoln, Nick Whitehouse, Jaron Mar, Rivindu Perera 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05532v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 evaluates whether a domain trained Small Language Model (SLM) can outperform frontier Large Language Models on structured contract extraction at radically lower cost. We test Olava Extract, a self hosted legal domain Mixture of Experts model, against five frontier models. Olava Extract achieved the strongest aggregate performance in the study, with a macro F1 of 0.812 and a micro F1 of 0.842, while reducing inference cost by 78% to 97% compared with the frontier models tested. It also achieved the highest precision scores, producing fewer hallucinated and unsupported extractions, an important distinction in legal workflows where hallucinations create operational risk and downstream review burden. The findings shows that high performing, human comparable legal AI no longer requires the largest externally hosted models. More broadly, they challenge the assumption that commercially valuable enterprise AI capability must remain tied to ever larger models, massive infrastructure expenditure, and centrally hosted providers.
180. ❌ Anatomy of a Query: W5H Dimensions and FAR Patterns for Text-to-SQL Evaluation
作者: Vicki Stover Hertzberg, Eduardo Valverde, Joyce C. Ho 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05525v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Natural language interfaces to databases have gained popularity, yet the theoretical foundations for evaluating and designing these systems remain underdeveloped. We present QUEST (Query Understanding Evaluation through Semantic Translation), a framework resting on two independently motivated components: the FAR structural invariant, which holds that every well-formed query reduces to Filter, Aggregate, and Return operations; and the W5H dimensional framework, which holds that all filtering criteria map to six semantic dimensions (Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How). Validated across five text-to-SQL datasets (n = 120,464), FAR conformance is universal across all domains and schema types, while W5H dimensional profiles vary substantially. Healthcare queries are strongly concentrated in temporal (WHEN: 80.4%) and person-centric (WHO: 73.0%) dimensions far exceeding general-domain benchmarks, and causal (WHY) and mechanistic (HOW) reasoning are near-zero everywhere, with apparent HOW exceptions reflecting quantitative aggregation rather than genuine procedural reasoning. These results identify a frontier that must be crossed for genuine machine reasoning over structured data.
181. ❌ Relit-LiVE: Relight Video by Jointly Learning Environment Video
作者: Weiqing Xiao, Hong Li, Xiuyu Yang, Houyuan Chen, Wenyi Li, Tianqi Liu, Shaocong Xu, Chongjie Ye, Hao Zhao, Beibei Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06658v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 have shown that large-scale video diffusion models can be repurposed as neural renderers by first decomposing videos into intrinsic scene representations and then performing forward rendering under novel illumination. While promising, this paradigm fundamentally relies on accurate intrinsic decomposition, which remains highly unreliable for real-world videos and often leads to distorted appearances, broken materials, and accumulated temporal artifacts during relighting. In this work, we present Relit-LiVE, a novel video relighting framework that produces physically consistent, temporally stable results without requiring prior knowledge of camera pose. Our key insight is to explicitly introduce raw reference images into the rendering process, enabling the model to recover critical scene cues that are inevitably lost or corrupted in intrinsic representations. Furthermore, we propose a novel environment video prediction formulation that simultaneously generates relit videos and per-frame environment maps aligned with each camera viewpoint in a single diffusion process. This joint prediction enforces strong geometric-illumination alignment and naturally supports dynamic lighting and camera motion, significantly improving physical consistency in video relighting while easing the requirement of known per-frame camera pose. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Relit-LiVE consistently outperforms state-of-the-art video relighting and neural rendering methods across synthetic and real-world benchmarks. Beyond relighting, our framework naturally supports a wide range of downstream applications, including scene-level rendering, material editing, object insertion, and streaming video relighting. The Project is available at https://github.com/zhuxing0/Relit-LiVE.
182. ❌ DPM++: Dynamic Masked Metric Learning for Occluded Person Re-identification
作者: Lei Tan, Yingshi Luan, Pincong Zou, Pingyang Dai, Liujuan Cao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06637v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 person re-identification has made impressive progress, occlusion caused by obstacles remains an unsettled issue in real applications. The difficulty lies in the mismatch between incomplete occluded samples and holistic identity representations. Severe occlusion removes discriminative body cues and introduces interference from background clutter and occluders, making global metric learning unreliable. Existing methods mainly rely on extra pre-trained models to estimate visible parts for alignment or construct occluded samples via data augmentation, but still lack a unified framework that learns robust visibility-consistent matching under realistic occlusion patterns. In this paper, we propose DPM++, a Dynamic Masked Metric Learning framework for occluded person re-identification. DPM++ learns an input-adaptive masked metric that dynamically selects reliable identity subspaces for each occluded instance, enabling matching to emphasize visibility-consistent evidence while suppressing unreliable components. Built upon the classifier-prototype space, DPM++ introduces a CLIP-based two-stage supervision scheme, where ID-level semantic priors are learned from the text branch and transferred into the classifier-prototype space for dynamic masked matching. To strengthen the masked metric, we introduce a saliency-guided patch transfer strategy to synthesize controllable and photo-realistic occluded samples during training. Exploiting real scene priors, this strategy exposes the model to realistic partial observations and provides richer supervision than random erasing. In addition, occlusion-aware sample pairing and mask-guided optimization improve the stability and effectiveness of the framework. Experiments on occluded and holistic person re-identification benchmarks show that DPM++ consistently outperforms previous state-of-the-art methods in both holistic and occlusion scenarios.
183. ❌ SoftSAE: Dynamic Top-K Selection for Adaptive Sparse Autoencoders
作者: Jakub Stępień, Marcin Mazur, Jacek Tabor, Przemysław Spurek 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06610v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 Autoencoders (SAEs) have become an important tool in mechanistic interpretability, helping to analyze internal representations in both Large Language Models (LLMs) and Vision Transformers (ViTs). By decomposing polysemantic activations into sparse sets of monosemantic features, SAEs aim to translate neural network computations into human-understandable concepts. However, common architectures such as TopK SAEs rely on a fixed sparsity level. They enforce the same number of active features (K) across all inputs, ignoring the varying complexity of real-world data. Natural data often lies on manifolds with varying local intrinsic dimensionality, meaning the number of relevant factors can change significantly across samples. This suggests that a fixed sparsity level is not optimal. Simple inputs may require only a few features, while more complex ones need more expressive representations. Using a constant K can therefore introduce noise in simple cases or miss important structure in more complex ones. To address this issue, we propose SoftSAE, a sparse autoencoder with a Dynamic Top-K selection mechanism. Our method uses a differentiable Soft Top-K operator to learn an input-dependent sparsity level k. This allows the model to adjust the number of active features based on the complexity of each input. As a result, the representation better matches the structure of the data, and the explanation length reflects the amount of information in the input. Experimental results confirm that SoftSAE not only finds meaningful features, but also selects the right number of features for each concept. The source code is available at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/SoftSAE-8F71/.
184. ❌ Solving Minimal Problems Without Matrix Inversion Using FFT-Based Interpolation
作者: Haidong Wu, Snehal Bhayani, Janne Heikkilä 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06572v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 camera geometry typically involves solving minimal problems formulated as systems of multivariate polynomial equations, which often pose computational challenges when using existing Gröbner-basis or resultant-based methods due to matrix inversion needed in the online solver. Here we propose a sampling-based, matrix inversion-free method that constructs the solvers using sparse hidden-variable resultants. The determinant polynomial in the hidden variable is efficiently reconstructed via inverse fast Fourier transform interpolation from sampled evaluations, avoiding symbolic expansion. Solving this polynomial yields the hidden variable, and the remaining unknowns are recovered by identifying rank-1 deficient submatrices and applying Cramer’s rule. A greatest common divisor-based criterion ensures robust submatrix identification under noise. Experiments on diverse minimal problems demonstrate that the proposed solver achieves strong numerical stability and competitive runtime, particularly for small-scale problems, providing a practical alternative to traditional Gröbner-basis and resultant-based solvers.
185. ❌ Agentic AIs Are the Missing Paradigm for Out-of-Distribution Generalization in Foundation Models
作者: Xin Wang, Haibo Chen, Wenxuan Liu, Wenwu Zhu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06522v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Foundation models (FMs) are increasingly deployed in open-world settings where distribution shift is the rule rather than the exception. The out-of-distribution (OOD) phenomena they face – knowledge boundaries, capability ceilings, compositional shifts, and open-ended task variation – differ in kind from the settings that have shaped prior OOD research, and are further complicated because the pretraining and post-training distributions of modern FMs are often only partially observed. Our position is that OOD for foundation models is a structurally distinct problem that cannot be solved within the prevailing model-centric paradigm, and that agentic systems constitute the missing paradigm required to address it. We defend this claim through four steps. First, we give a stage-aware formalization of OOD that accommodates partially observed multi-stage training distributions. Second, we prove a parameter coverage ceiling: there exist practically relevant inputs that no model-centric method (training-time or test-time) can handle within tolerance $\varepsilon$, for reasons intrinsic to parameter-based representation. Third, we characterize agentic OOD systems by four structural properties – perception, strategy selection, external action, and closed-loop verification – and show that they strictly extend the reachable set beyond the ceiling. Fourth, we respond to seven counterarguments, conceding two, and outline a research agenda. We do not claim that agentic methods subsume model-centric ones; we argue that the two are complementary, and that progress on FM-OOD requires explicit recognition of the agentic paradigm as a first-class research direction.
186. ❌ MedHorizon: Towards Long-context Medical Video Understanding in the Wild
作者: Bodong Du, Bowen Liu, Yang Yu, Xinpeng Ding, Zhiheng Wu, Shuning Wang, Shuo Nie, Naiming Liu, Qifeng Chen, Yangqiu Song, Xiaomeng Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06537v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Medical multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have advanced image understanding and short-video analysis, but real clinical review often requires full-procedure video understanding. Unlike general long videos, medical procedures contain highly redundant anatomical views, while decisive evidence is temporally sparse, spatially subtle, and context dependent. Existing benchmarks often assume this evidence has already been localized through images, short clips, or pre-segmented videos, leaving the retrieval-before-reasoning problem under-tested. We introduce MedHorizon, an in-the-wild benchmark for long-context medical video understanding. MedHorizon preserves 759 hours of full-length clinical procedures and provides 1,253 evidence-grounded multiple-choice questionsthat jointly evaluate sparse evidence understanding and multi-hop clinical reasoning. Its evidence is extremely sparse, with only 0.166% evidence frames on average, requiring models to search noisy procedural streams before interpreting and aggregating findings. We evaluate representative general-domain, medical-domain, and long-video MLLMs. The best model reaches only 41.1% accuracy, showing that current systems remain far from robust full-procedure understanding. Further analysis yields four key findings: performance does not scale reliably with more frames, evidence retrieval and clinical interpretation remain primary bottlenecks; these bottlenecks are rooted in weak procedural reasoning and attention drift under redundancy, and generic sampling methods only partially balances local detail with global coverage. MedHorizon provides a rigorous testbed for MLLMs that retrieve sparse evidence and reason over complete clinical workflows.
187. ❌ DCR: Counterfactual Attractor Guidance for Rare Compositional Generation
作者: Taewon Kang, Matthias Zwicker 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06512v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 models generate realistic visual content, yet often fail to produce rare but plausible compositions. When prompted with combinations that are valid but underrepresented in training data, such as a snowy beach or a rainbow at night, the generation process frequently collapses toward more common alternatives. We identify this failure mode as default completion bias, where denoising trajectories are implicitly attracted toward high-frequency semantic configurations. Existing guidance mechanisms do not explicitly model this competing tendency and therefore struggle to prevent such collapse. We introduce Default Completion Repulsion (DCR), a training-free framework that explicitly models and suppresses default completion behavior. DCR constructs a counterfactual attractor by relaxing the rare compositional factor while preserving surrounding semantics, inducing an alternative denoising trajectory reflecting the model’s preferred completion. We define the discrepancy between target and attractor trajectories as a counterfactual drift, and propose a projection-based repulsion mechanism that removes guidance components aligned with this drift direction. This suppresses undesired frequent completions while preserving other semantic components. DCR operates entirely within the standard diffusion sampling process without retraining or architectural modification. Experiments on rare compositional prompts show that DCR improves compositional fidelity while maintaining visual quality. Our analysis further shows that the framework exposes and counteracts intrinsic model biases, offering a new perspective on controllable generation beyond explicit constraint enforcement.
188. ❌ FreeSpec: Training-Free Long Video Generation via Singular-Spectrum Reconstruction
作者: Fangda Chen, Shanshan Zhao, Longrong Yang, Chuanfu Xu, Zhigang Luo, Long Lan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06509v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Video diffusion models perform well in short-video synthesis, but their training-free extension to long videos often suffers from content drift, temporal inconsistency, and over-smoothed dynamics. Existing methods improve temporal consistency by combining a global branch with a local branch, but they often further decompose appearance consistency and temporal dynamics within each branch using predefined criteria. This assignment is unreliable when appearance and action progression are tightly coupled, such as in camera motion and sequential motion. We analyze the video temporal extension issue from a singular-spectrum perspective and show that enlarged self-attention windows induce spectral concentration: spectral energy becomes dominated by a few low-rank singular directions, preserving coarse structure but suppressing high-rank spatial details and motion-rich temporal variations. To mitigate this problem, we propose FreeSpec, a training-free spectral reconstruction framework for long-video generation. FreeSpec decomposes global and local features with singular value decomposition, and uses the global branch as low-rank spectral guidance and the local branch as a high-rank reconstruction basis. This spectrum-level fusion avoids the rigid feature partitioning of previous decomposition rules, preserving long-range consistency while better retaining spatial details and temporal dynamics. Experiments on Wan2.1 and LTX-Video demonstrate that FreeSpec improves long-video generation, especially for temporal dynamics, while maintaining strong visual quality and temporal consistency. Project demo: https://fdchen24.github.io/FreeSpec-Website/.
189. ❌ MARBLE: Multi-Aspect Reward Balance for Diffusion RL
作者: Canyu Zhao, Hao Chen, Yunze Tong, Yu Qiao, Jiacheng Li, Chunhua Shen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06507v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 fine-tuning has become the dominant approach for aligning diffusion models with human preferences. However, assessing images is intrinsically a multi-dimensional task, and multiple evaluation criteria need to be optimized simultaneously. Existing practice deal with multiple rewards by training one specialist model per reward, optimizing a weighted-sum reward $R(x)=\sum_k w_k R_k(x)$, or sequentially fine-tuning with a hand-crafted stage schedule. These approaches either fail to produce a unified model that can be jointly trained on all rewards or necessitates heavy manually tuned sequential training. We find that the failure stems from using a naive weighted-sum reward aggregation. This approach suffers from a sample-level mismatch because most rollouts are specialist samples, highly informative for certain reward dimensions but irrelevant for others; consequently, weighted summation dilutes their supervision. To address this issue, we propose MARBLE (Multi-Aspect Reward BaLancE), a gradient-space optimization framework that maintains independent advantage estimators for each reward, computes per-reward policy gradients, and harmonizes them into a single update direction without manually-tuned reward weighting, by solving a Quadratic Programming problem. We further propose an amortized formulation that exploits the affine structure of the loss used in DiffusionNFT, to reduce the per-step cost from K+1 backward passes to near single-reward baseline cost, together with EMA smoothing on the balancing coefficients to stabilize updates against transient single-batch fluctuations. On SD3.5 Medium with five rewards, MARBLE improves all five reward dimensions simultaneously, turns the worst-aligned reward’s gradient cosine from negative under weighted summation in 80% of mini-batches to consistently positive, and runs at 0.97X the training speed of baseline training.
190. ❌ GeoStack: A Framework for Quasi-Abelian Knowledge Composition in VLMs
作者: Pranav Mantini, Shishir K. Shah 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06477v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 challenge of knowledge composition in Vision-Language Models (VLMs), where accumulating expertise across multiple domains or tasks typically leads to catastrophic forgetting. We introduce GeoStack (Geometric Stacking), a modular framework that allows independently trained domain experts to be composed into a unified model. By imposing geometric and structural constraints on the adapter manifold, GeoStack ensures the foundational knowledge of the base model is preserved. Furthermore, we mathematically demonstrate a weight-folding property that achieves constant-time inference complexity ($O(1)$), regardless of the number of integrated experts. Experimental results across multi-domain adaptation and class-incremental learning show that GeoStack provides an efficient mechanism for long-term knowledge composition while significantly mitigating catastrophic forgetting. Code is available at https://github.com/QuantitativeImagingLaboratory/GeoStack.
191. ❌ Hyperbolic Concept Bottleneck Models
作者: Daniel Uyterlinde, Swasti Shreya Mishra, Pascal Mettes 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06440v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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) have become a popular approach to enable interpretability in neural networks by constraining classifier inputs to a set of human-understandable concepts. While effective, current models embed concepts in flat Euclidean space, treating them as independent, orthogonal dimensions. Concepts, however, are highly structured and organized in semantic hierarchies. To resolve this mismatch, we propose Hyperbolic Concept Bottleneck Models (HypCBM), a post-hoc framework that grounds the bottleneck in this structure by reformulating concept activation as asymmetric geometric containment in hyperbolic space. Rather than treating entailment cones as a pre-training penalty, we show they encode a natural test-time activation signal: the margin of inclusion within a concept’s entailment cone yields sparse, hierarchy-aware activations without any additional supervision or learned modules. We further introduce an adaptive scaling law for hierarchically faithful interventions, propagating user corrections coherently through the concept tree. Empirically, HypCBM rivals post-hoc Euclidean models trained on 20$\times$ more data in sparse regimes required for human interpretability, with stronger hierarchical consistency and improved robustness to input corruptions.
192. ❌ From Review to Design: Ethical Multimodal Driver Monitoring Systems for Risk Mitigation, Incident Response, and Accountability in Automated Vehicles
作者: Bilal Khana, Waseem Shariff, Rory Coyne, Muhammad Ali Farooq, Peter Corcoran 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06439v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 vehicles transition toward higher levels of automation, Driver Monitoring Systems (DMS) have become essential for ensuring human oversight, safety, and regulatory compliance in a vehicle. These systems rely on multimodal sensing and AI-driven inference to assess driver attention, cognitive state, and readiness to take control. While technologically promising, their deployment introduces a complex set of ethical and legal challenges - ranging from privacy and consent to data ownership and algorithmic fairness. While overarching frameworks such as the GDPR, EU AI Act, and IEEE standards offer important guidance, they lack the specificity required for addressing the unique risks posed by in-cabin sensing technologies. This paper adopts a review-to-design perspective, critically examining existing regulatory instruments and ethical frameworks – such as the GDPR, the EU AI Act, and IEEE guidelines – and identifying gaps in their applicability to the distinctive risks posed by multimodal, AI-enabled in-cabin monitoring. Building on this review, we propose a modular ethical design framework tailored specifically to Driver Monitoring Systems. The framework translates high-level principles into actionable design and deployment guidance, including user-configurable consent mechanisms, fairness-aware model development, transparency and explainability tools, and safeguards for driver emotional well-being. Finally, the paper outlines a risk analysis and failure mitigation strategy, emphasizing proactive incident response and accountability mechanisms tailored to the DMS context. Together, these contributions aim to inform the development of transparent, trustworthy, and human-centered driver monitoring systems for next-generation autonomous vehicles.
193. ❌ FREPix: Frequency-Heterogeneous Flow Matching for Pixel-Space Image Generation
作者: Mingfeng Lin, Jiakun Chen, Liang Han, Liqiang Nie 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06421v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Pixel-space diffusion has re-emerged as a promising alternative to latent-space generation because it avoids the representation bottleneck introduced by VAEs. Yet most existing methods still treat image generation as a frequency-homogeneous process, overlooking the distinct roles and learning dynamics of low- and high-frequency components. To address this, we propose FREPix, a FREquency-heterogeneous flow matching framework for Pixel-space image generation. FREPix explicitly decomposes generation into low- and high-frequency components, assigns them separate transport paths, predicts them with a factorized network, and trains them with a frequency-aware objective. In this way, coarse-to-fine generation becomes an explicit design principle rather than an implicit behavior. On ImageNet class-to-image generation, FREPix achieves competitive results among pixel-space generation models, reaching 1.91 FID at $256\times256$ and 2.38 FID at $512\times512$, with particularly strong behavior in the low-NFE regime.
194. ❌ Reconstruction or Semantics? What Makes a Latent Space Useful for Robotic World Models
作者: Nilaksh, Saurav Jha, Artem Zholus, Sarath Chandar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06388v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
World model-based policy evaluation is a practical proxy for testing real-world robot control by rolling out candidate actions in action-conditioned video diffusion models. As these models increasingly adopt latent diffusion modeling (LDM), choosing the right latent space becomes critical. While the status quo uses autoencoding latent spaces like VAEs that are primarily trained for pixel reconstruction, recent work suggests benefits from pretrained encoders with representation-aligned semantic latent spaces. We systematically evaluate these latent spaces for action-conditioned LDM by comparing six reconstruction and semantic encoders to train world model variants under a fixed protocol on BridgeV2 dataset, and show effective world model training in high-dimensional representation spaces with and without dimension compression. We then propose three axes to assess robotic world model performance: visual fidelity, planning and downstream policy performance, and latent representation quality. Our results show visual fidelity alone is insufficient for world model selection. While reconstruction encoders like VAE and Cosmos achieve strong pixel-level scores, semantic encoders such as V-JEPA 2.1 (strongest overall on policy), Web-DINO, and SigLIP 2 generally excel across the other two axes at all model scales. Our study advocates semantic latent space as stronger foundation for policy-relevant robotics diffusion world models.
195. ❌ Empirical Evidence for Simply Connected Decision Regions in Image Classifiers
作者: Arjhun Swaminathan, Mete Akgün 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06380v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 the topology of decision regions is central to explaining the inner workings of deep neural networks. Prior empirical work has provided evidence that these regions are path connected. We study a stronger topological question: whether closed loops inside a decision region can be contracted without leaving that region. To this end, we propose an iterative quad-mesh filling procedure that constructs a finite-resolution label-preserving surface bounded by a given loop and lying entirely within the same decision region. We further connect this construction to natural Coons patches in order to quantify its deviation from a canonical geometric interpolation of the loop. By evaluating our method across several modern image-classification models, we provide empirical evidence supporting the hypothesis that decision regions in deep neural networks are not only path connected, but also simply connected.
196. ❌ The frame-level leakage trap: rethinking evaluation protocols for intrinsic image decomposition, with source-separable uncertainty as a case study
作者: Jihwan Woo 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06359v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Evaluation protocols for learned intrinsic image decomposition on MPI Sintel have been inconsistent. Several prior works split the dataset by frames, which allows spatially similar frames of the same scene to appear in both train and test partitions. We quantify this leakage effect for the first time, across three architectures: a frame-level split inflates test R_PSNR by 1.6 to 2.0 dB (p less than 0.01 for all three, paired t-test across 3 seeds) relative to a scene-level split, confirming an architecture-independent protocol effect. A three-point gradient (random/temporal/scene) shows the gap is continuous, and under extended training the frame-level inflation exceeds 10 dB. We advocate scene-level splits as the community standard and provide reference numbers for six representative models under this protocol. As a case study within the corrected protocol, we present a physics-informed decomposition I = R composed with S + N with a source-separable three-way heteroscedastic uncertainty head. We empirically verify channel specialization: the non-Lambertian uncertainty channel shows r = 0.67 cross-correlation with non-Lambertian residual error, more than 4 times the texture channel’s correlation. We further demonstrate downstream utility: filtering out the 75% highest-uncertainty pixels reduces reconstruction MSE by 77% on retained pixels, whereas random filtering produces no improvement. The specialization also holds on out-of-distribution real photographs. We report negative results for a more elaborate variant combining frequency decomposition, cross-task supervision, evidential learning, contrastive loss, and test-time adaptation. Our method reaches 15.98 plus or minus 0.41 dB R_PSNR, within 0.8 dB of a 5-member Deep Ensemble at one-fifth the cost, with the unique capability of source-separated uncertainty.
197. ❌ SwiftI2V: Efficient High-Resolution Image-to-Video Generation via Conditional Segment-wise Generation
作者: YaoYang Liu, Yuechen Zhang, Wenbo Li, Yufei Zhao, Rui Liu, Long Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06356v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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-resolution image-to-video (I2V) generation aims to synthesize realistic temporal dynamics while preserving fine-grained appearance details of the input image. At 2K resolution, it becomes extremely challenging, and existing solutions suffer from various weaknesses: 1) end-to-end models are often prohibitively expensive in memory and latency; 2) cascading low-resolution generation with a generic video super-resolution tends to hallucinate details and drift from input-specific local structures, since the super-resolution stage is not explicitly conditioned on the input image. To this end, we propose SwiftI2V, an efficient framework tailored for high-resolution I2V. Following the widely used two-stage design, it addresses the efficiency–fidelity dilemma by first generating a low-resolution motion reference to reduce token costs and ease the modeling burden, then performing a strongly image-conditioned 2K synthesis guided by the motion to recover input-faithful details with controlled overhead. Specifically, to make generation more scalable, SwiftI2V introduces Conditional Segment-wise Generation (CSG) to synthesize videos segment-by-segment with a bounded per-step token budget, and adopts bidirectional contextual interaction within each segment to improve cross-segment coherence and input fidelity. On VBench-I2V at 2K resolution, SwiftI2V achieves performance comparable to end-to-end baselines while reducing total GPU-time by 202x. Particularly, it enables practical 2K I2V generation on a single datacenter GPU (e.g., H800) or consumer GPU (e.g., RTX 4090).
198. ❌ Earth-o1: A Grid-free Observation-native Atmospheric World Model
作者: Junchao Gong, Kaiyi Xu, Wangxu Wei, Siwei Tu, Jingyi Xu, Zili Liu, Hang Fan, Zhiwang Zhou, Tao Han, Yi Xiao, Xinyu Gu, Zhangrui Li, Wenlong Zhang, Hao Chen, Xiaokang Yang, Yaqiang Wang, Lijing Cheng, Pierre Gentine, Wanli Ouyang, Feng Zhang, Zhe-Min Tan, Bowen Zhou, Fenghua Ling, Ben Fei, Lei Bai 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06337v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 unprecedented volume of multimodal data provided by modern Earth observation systems, our ability to model atmospheric dynamics remains constrained. Traditional modeling frameworks force heterogeneous measurements into predefined spatial grids, inherently limiting the full exploitation of raw sensor data and creating severe computational bottlenecks. Here we present Earth-o1, an observation-native atmospheric world model that overcomes these structural limitations. Rather than relying on conventional atmospheric dynamical modeling systems or traditional data assimilation, Earth-o1 directly learns the continuous, three-dimensional physical evolution of the Earth system from ungridded observational data. By integrating diverse sensor inputs into a unified, grid-free dynamical field, the model autonomously advances the atmospheric state in space and time. We show that this fundamentally distinct paradigm enables direct, real-time forecasting and cross-sensor inference without the overhead of explicit numerical solvers. In hindcast evaluations, Earth-o1 achieves surface forecast skill comparable to the operational Integrated Forecasting System (IFS). These results establish that continuous, observation-driven world models – a new class of fully observation-native geophysical simulators – can match the fidelity of established physical frameworks, providing a scalable data-driven foundation for a digital twin of the Earth.
199. ❌ Eulerian Motion Guidance: Robust Image Animation via Bidirectional Geometric Consistency
作者: Thong Nguyen, Khoi M. Le, Cong-Duy Nguyen, Luu Anh Tuan, See-Kiong Ng, Chunyan Miao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06280v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 advancements in image animation have utilized diffusion models to breathe life into static images. However, existing controllable frameworks typically rely on Lagrangian motion guidance, where optical flow is estimated relative to the initial frame. This paper revisits the same optical-flow primitive through a more local supervision design: we use adjacent-frame Eulerian motion fields to guide generation, where the motion signal always describes a short temporal hop. This shift enables parallelized training and provides bounded-error supervision throughout the generation process. To mitigate the drift artifacts common in adjacent frame generation, we introduce a Bidirectional Geometric Consistency mechanism, which computes a forward-backward cycle check to mathematically identify and mask occluded regions, preventing the model from learning incorrect warping objectives. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our approach accelerates training, preserves temporal coherence, and reduces dynamic artifacts compared to reference-based baselines.
200. ❌ When Labels Have Structure: Improving Image Classification with Hierarchy-Aware Cross-Entropy
作者: April Chan, Davide D’Ascenzo, Sebastiano Cultrera di Montesano 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06274v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Standard cross-entropy is the default classification loss across virtually all of machine learning, yet it treats all misclassifications equally, ignoring the semantic distances that a class hierarchy encodes. We propose Hierarchy-Aware Cross-Entropy (HACE), a drop-in replacement for standard cross-entropy that incorporates a known class hierarchy directly into the loss. HACE combines two components: prediction aggregation, which propagates the model’s probability mass upward through the class hierarchy to ensure that parent nodes accumulate the confidence of their children; and ancestral label smoothing, which distributes the ground-truth signal along the path from the true class to the root. We evaluate HACE on CIFAR-100, FGVC Aircraft, and NABirds in two regimes: end-to-end training across six architectures spanning convolutional and attention-based designs, and linear probing on frozen DINOv2-Large features. In end-to-end training, HACE improves accuracy over standard cross-entropy in 15 out of 18 architecture–dataset pairs, with a mean gain of 4.66%. In linear probing on frozen DINOv2-Large features, HACE outperforms all competing methods on all three datasets, with a mean improvement of 2.18% over the next best baseline.
201. ❌ On-Orbit Real-Time Wildfire Detection Under On-Board Constraints
作者: Matthias Rötzer, Veronika Pörtge, Martin Ickerott, Jayendra Praveen Kumar Chorapalli, Dimitri Scheftelowitsch, Max Bereczky, Dmitry Rashkovetsky, Sai Manoj Appalla, Julia Gottfriedsen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06273v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 deployed system for on-orbit wildfire detection aboard a nine-satellite commercial thermal infrared constellation, operating under demanding joint constraints: sub-megabyte model footprint, sub-150 ms per-batch TensorRT FP16 inference on an NVIDIA Jetson Xavier NX, and an end-to-end alert pipeline targeting under 10 minutes from satellite overpass to fire event communication. The system operates on uncalibrated mid-wave infrared (MWIR) single-band imagery at 200 m ground sampling distance, where fires frequently appear as sub-pixel or single-pixel thermal anomalies under extreme class imbalance – challenges not addressed by the contextual thermal-thresholding pipelines (MODIS, VIIRS) that currently dominate operational fire monitoring. We present an empirical study of lightweight dense representation learning for this regime using a proprietary nine-satellite MWIR dataset. We compare dense masked autoencoding (DenseMAE) and a hybrid DenseMAE+EMA (exponential moving average) distillation variant, and evaluate representations via linear probing and full-distribution pixel-level average precision (AP) under extreme class imbalance. DenseMAE pretraining enables compact downstream models on the latency-accuracy Pareto frontier: our fastest SSL-pretrained model achieves 0.640 test AP and 0.69 event-level Fire-F1 with 65.34 ms latency per batch and a 0.52 MB engine, without pruning or compression. The best configuration reaches 0.699 AP and 0.744 Fire-F1 below 1 MB, outperforming a supervised baseline (0.650 AP) under comparable constraints.
202. ❌ Spark3R: Asymmetric Token Reduction Makes Fast Feed-Forward 3D Reconstruction
作者: Zecheng Tang, Jiaye Fu, Qiankun Gao, Haijie Li, Yanmin Wu, Jiaqi Zhang, Siwei Ma, Jian Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06270v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Feed-forward 3D reconstruction models based on Vision Transformers can directly estimate scene geometry and camera poses from a small set of input images, but scaling them to video inputs with hundreds or thousands of frames remains challenging due to the quadratic cost of global attention layers. Recent token-merging methods accelerate these models by compressing the token sequence within the global attention layers, but they apply a uniform reduction to query tokens and key-value tokens, ignoring their functionally distinct roles in 3D reconstruction. In this work, we identify a key property of feed-forward 3D reconstruction models: query tokens encode view-specific geometric requests and are sensitive to compression, while key-value tokens represent shared scene context and tolerate aggressive compression. Guided by this insight, we propose Spark3R, a training-free acceleration framework that decouples the compression of query tokens and key-value tokens by assigning distinct reduction factors, with intra-group token merging applied to query tokens and lightweight token pruning to key-value tokens. Additionally, Spark3R adaptively adjusts the key-value reduction factor across layers, further improving the quality-efficiency trade-off. As a plug-and-play framework requiring no retraining, Spark3R integrates directly into multiple pretrained feed-forward 3D reconstruction models, including VGGT, $π^3$, and Depth-Anything-3, and achieves up to $28\times$ speedup on 1,000-frame inputs while maintaining competitive reconstruction quality.
203. ❌ ZScribbleSeg: A comprehensive segmentation framework with modeling of efficient annotation and maximization of scribble supervision
作者: Ke Zhang, Bomin Wang, Hangqi Zhou, Xiahai Zhuang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06266v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Curating fully annotated datasets for medical image segmentation is labour-intensive and expertise-demanding. To alleviate this problem, prior studies have explored scribble annotations for weakly supervised segmentation. Existing solutions mainly compute losses on annotated areas and generate pseudo labels by propagating annotations to adjacent regions. However, these methods often suffer from inaccurate and unrealistic segmentations due to insufficient supervision and incomplete shape information. In contrast, we first investigate the principle of good scribble annotations, which leads to efficient scribble forms via supervision maximization and randomness simulation. We further introduce regularization terms to encode the spatial relationship and the shape constraints, where the EM algorithm is utilized to estimate the mixture ratios of label classes. These ratios are critical in identifying the unlabeled pixels for each class and correcting erroneous predictions, thus the accurate estimation lays the foundation for the incorporation of spatial prior. Finally, we integrate the efficient scribble supervision with the prior into a framework, referred to as ZScribbleSeg, and apply it to multiple scenarios. Leveraging only scribble annotations, ZScribbleSeg achieves competitive performance on six segmentation tasks including ACDC, MSCMRseg, BTCV, MyoPS, Decathlon-BrainTumor and Decathlon-Prostate. Our code will be released via https://github.com/DLwbm123/ZScribbleSeg.
204. ❌ Look Beyond Saliency: Low-Attention Guided Dual Encoding for Video Semantic Search
作者: Faisal Aljehrai, Mohammed A. Alkhrashi, Alreem Almuhrij, Sarah Abuhimed, Noorh Aldossary, Abdullah Aldwyish, Raied Aljadaany, Huda Alamri, Muhammad Kamran J Khan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06229v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Video semantic search in densely crowded scenes remains a challenging task due to visual encoders tendency to prioritize salient foreground regions while neglecting contextually important, background areas. We propose an Inverse Attention Embedding mechanism that explicitly captures and highlights these overlooked regions. By combining inverse attention embeddings with traditional visual embeddings, our method significantly enhances semantic retrieval performance without additional training. Initial experiments and ablation studies demonstrate promising improvements over existing approaches in recall for video semantic search in crowded environments.
205. ❌ Differentiable Adaptive 4D Structured Illumination for Joint Capture of Shape and Reflectance
作者: Huakeng Ding, Yaowen Chen, Kun Zhou, Hongzhi Wu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06214v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 differentiable framework to adaptively compute 4D illumination conditions with respect to an object, for efficient, high-quality simultaneous acquisition of its shape and reflectance, with a unified spatial-angular structured light and a single camera. Using a simple histogram-based pixel-level probability model for depth and reflectance, we differentiably link the next illumination condition(s) with a loss that encourages the reduction in depth uncertainty. As new structured illumination is cast, corresponding image measurements are used to update the uncertainty at each pixel. Finally, a fine-tuning-based approach reconstructs the depth map and reflectance parameter maps, by minimizing the differences between all physical measurements and their simulated counterparts. The effectiveness of our framework is demonstrated on physical objects with wide variations in shape and appearance. Our depth results compare favorably with state-of-the-art techniques, while our reflectance results are comparable when validated against photographs.
206. ❌ Playing the network backward: A Game Theoretic Attribution Framework
作者: Jakob Paul Zimmermann, Jim Berend, Georg Loho, Sebastian Lapuschkin, Wojciech Samek 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06212v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Attribution methods explain which input features drive a model’s prediction, making them central to model debugging and mechanistic interpretability. Yet backward attribution methods, including gradients, LRP, and transformer-specific rules, lack a shared framework in which to compare the underlying backward calculations. We introduce such a framework by recasting backward attribution as a two-player game on an extended network graph, building on Gaubert and Vlassopoulos’ ReLU Net Game. Gradients and the full alpha-beta-LRP family arise as integrals over game trajectories under specific equilibria, so attribution maps become projections of trajectory distributions rather than the primary object. Desired explanation properties, such as localisation focus, robustness to input noise, or stable attention routing, can be specified as game-theoretic concepts, including policy regularization, risk aversion, and extended action sets, and translate directly into novel adaptations of the well-known backward rules. On ViT-B/16, one such selected adaptation of alpha-beta-LRP outperforms prior transformer-specific backward methods across all considered localisation metrics.
207. ❌ Taming the Entropy Cliff: Variable Codebook Size Quantization for Autoregressive Visual Generation
作者: Bowen Zheng, Weijian Luo, Guang Yang, Colin Zhang, Tianyang Hu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06207v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Most discrete visual tokenizers rely on a default design: every position in the sequence shares the same codebook. Researchers try to scale the codebook size $K$ to get better reconstruction performance. Such a constant-codebook design hits a fundamental information-theoretic limit. We observe that the per-position conditional entropy of the training set decays so quickly along the sequence that, after a few positions, the conditional distribution becomes essentially deterministic. On ImageNet with $K=16384$, this happens within only 2 out of 256 positions, turning the remaining 254 into a memorization problem. We call this phenomenon the Entropy Cliff and formalize it with a simple expression: $t^{*} = \lceil \log_2 N / \log_2 K \rceil$. Interestingly, this phenomenon is not observed in language, as its natural structure keeps the effective entropy per position well below the codebook capacity. To address this, we propose Variable Codebook Size Quantization (VCQ), where the codebook size $K_t$ grows monotonically along the sequence from $K_{\min}=2$ to $K_{\max}$, leaving the loss function, parameter count, and AR training procedure unchanged. With a vanilla autoregressive Transformer and standard next-token prediction, a base version of VCQ reduces gFID w/o CFG from 27.98 to 14.80 on ImageNet $256\times256$ over the baseline. Scaled up, it reaches gFID 1.71 with 684M autoregressive parameters, without any extra training techniques such as semantic regularization or causal alignment. The extreme information bottleneck at $K_{\min}=2$ naturally induces a coarse-to-fine semantic hierarchy: a linear probe on only the first 10 tokens reaches 43.8% top-1 accuracy on ImageNet, compared to 27.1% for uniform codebooks. Ultimately, these results show that what matters is not only the total capacity of the codebook, but also how that capacity is distributed and organized.
208. ❌ Bridging visual saliency and large language models for explainable deep learning in medical imaging
作者: Paul Valery Nguezet, Elie Tagne Fute, Yusuf Brima, Benoit Martin Azanguezet, Marcellin Atemkeng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06197v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 opaque nature of deep learning models remains a significant barrier to their clinical adoption in medical imaging. This paper presents a multimodal explainability framework that bridges the gap between convolutional neural network (CNN) predictions and clinically actionable insights for brain tumor classification, leveraging large language models (LLMs) to deliver human-interpretable diagnostic narratives. The proposed framework operates through three coupled stages. First, nine CNN architectures are extended with a dual-output hybrid formulation that simultaneously optimises a classification head and a segmentation head, enabling spatially richer feature learning. Second, visual saliency attribution methods, namely Grad-CAM, Grad-CAM++, and ScoreCAM, are applied to generate class-discriminative heatmaps, which are subsequently refined into binary tumor masks via an adaptive percentile thresholding pipeline. Third, the resulting masks are mapped onto the Harvard-Oxford cortical atlas to translate pixel-level evidence into named neuroanatomical structures, and the extracted findings are encoded into a structured JSON file that conditions three LLMs (Grok3, Mistral, and LLaMA) to generate coherent, radiological-style diagnostic reports. Evaluated on a dataset of 4,834 contrast-enhanced T1-weighted brain MRI images spanning three tumor classes, InceptionResNetV2 achieved the highest classification performance and Grad-CAM++ yielded the best segmentation overlap. Among the language models, Grok3 led in lexical diversity and coherence, while LLaMA achieved the highest readability score. By integrating visual, anatomical, and linguistic modalities into a unified pipeline, the framework produces explanations that are technically grounded and meaningfully interpretable, advancing the transparency and clinical accountability of artificial intelligence assisted brain tumor diagnosis.
209. ❌ EA-WM: Event-Aware Generative World Model with Structured Kinematic-to-Visual Action Fields
作者: Zhaoyang Yang, Yurun Jin, Lizhe Qi, Cong Huang, Kai Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06192v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Pretrained video diffusion models provide powerful spatiotemporal generative priors, making them a natural foundation for robotic world models. While recent world-action models jointly optimize future videos and actions, they predominantly treat video generation as an auxiliary representation for policy learning. Consequently, they insufficiently explore the inverse problem: leveraging action signals to guide video synthesis, thereby often failing to preserve precise robot spatial geometry and fine-grained robot-object interaction dynamics in the generated rollouts. To bridge this gap, we present EA-WM, an Event-Aware Generative World Model that effectively closes the loop between kinematic control and visual perception. Rather than injecting joint or end-effector actions as abstract, low-dimensional tokens, EA-WM projects actions and kinematic states directly into the target camera view as Structured Kinematic-to-Visual Action Fields. To fully exploit this geometrically grounded representation, we introduce event-aware bidirectional fusion blocks that modulate cross-branch attention, capturing object state changes and interaction dynamics. Evaluated on the comprehensive WorldArena benchmark, EA-WM achieves state-of-the-art performance, outperforming existing baselines by a significant margin.
210. ❌ Event-Causal RAG: A Retrieval-Augmented Generation Framework for Long Video Reasoning in Complex Scenarios
作者: Peizheng Yan, Yu Zhao, Liang Xie, Juntong Qi, Mingming Wang, Erwei Yin 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06185v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 large vision-language models have achieved strong performance on short- and medium-length video understanding, yet they remain inadequate for ultra-long or even infinite video reasoning, where models must preserve coherent memory over extended durations and infer causal dependencies across temporally distant events. Existing end-to-end video understanding methods are fundamentally limited by the $O(n^2)$ complexity of self-attention, while recent retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) approaches still suffer from fragmented clip-level memory, weak modeling of temporal and causal structure, and high storage and online inference costs. We present Event-Causal RAG, a lightweight retrieval-augmented framework for infinite long-video reasoning. Instead of indexing fixed-length clips, our method segments streaming videos into semantically coherent events and represents each event as a structured State-Event-State (SES) graph, capturing the event together with its surrounding state transitions. These graphs are merged into a global Event Knowledge Graph and stored in a dual-store memory that supports both semantic matching and causal-topological retrieval. On top of this memory, we design a bidirectional retrieval strategy to efficiently identify the most relevant event causal chains and provide them, together with the associated video evidence, to a backbone video foundation model for answer generation. Experiments on long-video understanding benchmarks demonstrate that Event-Causal RAG consistently outperforms strong clip-based retrieval baselines and long-context video models, particularly on questions requiring multi-event integration and causal inference across long temporal gaps, while also achieving improved memory efficiency and robust streaming performance.
211. ❌ SuperFace: Preference-Aligned Facial Expression Estimation Beyond Pseudo Supervision
作者: Zejian Kang, Xuanyang Xu, Wentao Yang, Kai Zheng, Yuanchen Fei, Hongyuan Zou, Hui Shan, Shuo Yang, Xiangru Huang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06179v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 facial estimation is crucial for realistic digital human animation, and ARKit blendshape coefficients offer an interpretable representation by mapping facial motions to semantic animation controls. However, learning high-quality ARKit coefficient prediction remains limited by the absence of reliable ground-truth supervision. Existing methods typically rely on capture software such as Live Link Face to provide pseudo labels, which may contain noisy activations, biased coefficient magnitudes, and missing or inaccurate facial actions. Consequently, models trained with supervised learning tend to reproduce imperfect pseudo labels rather than optimize for perceptual expression fidelity. In this paper, we propose SuperFace, a preference-driven framework that moves ARKit facial expression estimation from pseudo-label imitation toward human-aligned perceptual optimization. Instead of treating software-estimated coefficients as fixed ground truth, SuperFace uses them only as an initialization and further improves coefficient prediction through human preference feedback on rendered facial expressions. By aligning the model with perceptual judgments rather than numerical pseudo labels, SuperFace enables more visually faithful and expressive facial animation. Experiments show that SuperFace improves expression fidelity over Live Link Face supervision, demonstrating the effectiveness of preference-driven optimization for semantic facial action prediction.
212. ❌ Retina-RAG: Retrieval-Augmented Vision-Language Modeling for Joint Retinal Diagnosis and Clinical Report Generation
作者: Abdelrahman Zaian, Sheethal Bhat, Mohamed Abdalkader, Andreas Maier 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06173v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of preventable blindness among working-age adults worldwide, yet most automated screening systems are limited to image-level classification and lack clinically structured reporting. We propose Retina-RAG, a low-cost modular framework that jointly performs DR severity grading, macular edema (ME) detection, and report generation. The architecture decouples a high-performance retinal classifier and a parameter-efficient vision-language model (Qwen2.5-VL-7B-Instruct) adapted via Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA), enabling flexible component integration. A retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) module injects curated ophthalmic knowledge together with structured classifier outputs at inference time to improve diagnostic consistency and reduce hallucinations. Retina-RAG achieves an F1-score of 0.731 for DR grading and 0.948 for ME detection, substantially outperforming zero-shot Qwen (0.096, 0.732) and MMed-RAG (0.541, 0.641) on a retinal disease detection dataset with captions. For report generation, Retina-RAG attains ROUGE-L 0.429 and SBERT similarity 0.884, exceeding all baselines. The full framework operates on a single consumer-grade GPU, demonstrating that clinically structured retinal AI can be achieved with modest computational resources.
213. ❌ DynT2I-Eval: A Dynamic Evaluation Framework for Text-to-Image Models
作者: Juntong Wang, Jiarui Wang, Huiyu Duan, Lewei Li, Guangtao Zhai, Xiongkuo Min 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06170v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 text-to-image (T2I) benchmarks largely rely on fixed prompt sets, leaving them vulnerable to overfitting and benchmark contamination once publicly released and repeatedly reused. In this work, we propose DynT2I-Eval, a fully automated dynamic evaluation framework for T2I models. It constructs a structured visual semantic space from long-form descriptions, decomposing prompts into controllable dimensions (e.g., subject, logical constraint, environment, and composition). This enables the continuous generation of fresh prompts via task-specific spaces and difficulty-aware sampling. DynT2I-Eval evaluates model performance across text alignment, perceptual quality, and aesthetics. Heterogeneous outputs are unified into prompt-conditioned pairwise comparisons, allowing a dynamic scheduler, micro-batch aggregation, and weighted Bayesian updates to maintain a stable online leaderboard despite changing prompt distributions and model injection. Experiments with independently sampled prompt streams demonstrate that continually refreshed prompts provide a robust evaluation protocol, reducing the impact of prompt-set-specific tuning. Simulations and ablations further confirm that the proposed ranking framework achieves a strong balance among cold-start convergence, late-entry discovery, and long-run ranking fidelity.
214. ❌ Beyond Forgetting in Continual Medical Image Segmentation: A Comprehensive Benchmark Study
作者: Bomin Wang, Hangqi Zhou, Yibo Gao, Xiahai Zhuang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06160v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Continual learning (CL) is essential for deploying medical image segmentation models in clinical environments where imaging domains, anatomical targets, and diagnostic tasks evolve over time. However, continual segmentation still faces three main challenges. First, the scenarios for this task remain insufficiently standardized for real-world clinical settings. Second, existing research has been primarily focused on mitigating forgetting, overlooking the other essential properties such as plasticity. Third, a benchmark work with comprehensive evaluation on existing methods is stll desirable. To address these gaps, we present such benchmark study of continual medical image segmentation. We first define three clinically motivated scenarios, namely Domain-CL, Class-CL, and Organ-CL, to respectively capture the cross-center domain shift, the incremental anatomical structure segmentation, and the cross-organ segmentation. We then introduce an evaluation framework that measures not only general performance and forgetting, but also plasticity, forward generalizability, parameter efficiency, and replay burden. The results, from extensive experiments with representative CL methods, showed that it was still challenging to develop a model that could satisfy all the requirements simultaneously. Nevertheless, these studies also suggested that the replay-based methods achieve the best overall balance between stability and plasticity, the parameter-isolation methods should be effective at reducing forgetting, though at the cost of increased model size, and the forward generalizability remain a significantly understudied aspect of this research field. Finally, we discuss related learning paradigms and outline future directions for continual medical image segmentation.
215. ❌ Secure Seed-Based Multi-bit Watermarking for Diffusion Models from First Principles
作者: Enoal Gesny, Eva Giboulot 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06153v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 emergence of generative image models has led to the development of specialized watermarking techniques, particularly in-generation methods such as seed-based embedding. However, current evaluations in this area remain largely empirical, making them heavily reliant on the specific model architectures used for generation and inversion. This prevents any clear conclusion on the performance of any method, especially regarding security, for which a rigorous definition is lacking. Against this approach, we argue that the effectiveness of a watermarking scheme should be established purely through a thorough theoretical analysis. This is enabled by decoupling the model-dependent part from the actual decision mechanism of the watermarking system. Using this decoupling, we introduce a formal evaluation framework based on security, robustness, and fidelity. This allows precise comparisons between watermarking systems through a characteristic surface representing the trade-off between these three quantities, independent of any generative model. Based on this framework, we propose SSB, a novel watermarking method that generalizes previous seed-based methods by allowing to reach any security-robustness-fidelity regime on its characteristic surface. This work opens the door to the design of modern watermarking systems with theoretical guarantees that do not necessitate any costly empirical evaluations.
216. ❌ Learning Discrete Autoregressive Priors with Wasserstein Gradient Flow
作者: Bowen Zheng, Yihong Luo, Tianyang Hu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06148v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Discrete image tokenizers are commonly trained in two stages: first for reconstruction, and then with a prior model fitted to the frozen token sequences. This decoupling leaves the tokenizer unaware of the model that will later generate its tokens. As a result, the learned tokens may preserve image information well but still be difficult for an autoregressive (AR) prior to predict from left to right. We analyze this mismatch using Tripartite Variational Consistency (TVC), which decomposes latent-variable learning into three consistency conditions: conditional-likelihood consistency, prior consistency, and posterior consistency. TVC shows that two-stage training preserves the reconstruction side but leaves prior consistency outside the tokenizer objective: the overall token distribution is fixed before the AR prior participates in training. Motivated by this view, we add a distribution-level prior-matching signal during tokenizer training, while keeping the reconstruction objective unchanged. We optimize this signal with a Wasserstein-gradient-flow update. For hard categorical tokens, the update reduces to a token-level contrast between an auxiliary AR model that tracks the tokenizer’s current token distribution and the target AR prior. It requires only forward passes through the two AR models and does not backpropagate through either of them. The resulting tokenizer, wAR-Tok, reduces AR loss and improves generation FID on CIFAR-10 and ImageNet at comparable reconstruction quality.
217. ❌ AI-Generated Images: What Humans and Machines See When They Look at the Same Image
作者: Silvia Poletti, Justin Ilyes, Marcel Hasenbalg, David Fischinger, Martin Boyer 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06143v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 misuse of generative AI in online disinformation campaigns highlights the urgent need for transparent and explainable detection systems. In this work, we investigate how detectors for AI-generated images can be more effective in providing human-understandable explanations for their predictions. To this end, we develop a suite of detectors with various architectures and fine-tuning strategies, trained on our large-scale photorealistic fake image dataset, AIText2Image, and assess their performance on state-of-the-art text-to-image AI generators. We integrate 16 different explainable AI (XAI) methods into our detection framework, and the visual explanations are comprehensively refined and evaluated through a novel approach that prioritizes human understanding of AI-generated images, using both textual and visual responses collected from a survey of 100 participants. This framework offers insights into visual-language cues in fake image detection and into the clarity of XAI methods from a human perspective, measuring the alignment of XAI outputs with human preferences.
218. ❌ Autoregressive Visual Generation Needs a Prologue
作者: Bowen Zheng, Weijian Luo, Guang Yang, Colin Zhang, Tianyang Hu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06137v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 work, we propose Prologue, an approach to bridging the reconstruction-generation gap in autoregressive (AR) image generation. Instead of modifying visual tokens to satisfy both reconstruction and generation, Prologue generates a small set of prologue tokens prepended to the visual token sequence. These prologue tokens are trained exclusively with the AR cross-entropy (CE) loss, while visual tokens remain dedicated to reconstruction. This decoupled design lets us optimize generation through the AR model’s true distribution without affecting reconstruction quality, which we further formalize from an ELBO perspective. On ImageNet 256x256, Prologue-Base reduces gFID from 21.01 to 10.75 without classifier-free guidance while keeping reconstruction almost unchanged; Prologue-Large reaches a competitive rFID of 0.99 and gFID of 1.46 using a standard AR model without auxiliary semantic supervision. Interestingly, driven only by AR gradients, prologue tokens exhibit emergent semantic structure: linear probing on 16 prologue tokens reaches 35.88% Top-1, far above the 23.71% of the first 16 tokens from a standard tokenizer; resampling with fixed prologue tokens preserves a similar high-level semantic layout. Our results suggest a new direction: generation quality can be improved by introducing a separate learned generative representation while leaving the original representation intact.
219. ❌ Continuous Expert Assembly: Instance-Conditioned Low-Rank Residuals for All-in-One Image Restoration
作者: Haisen He, Xiangyu Zou, SongLin Dong, Heng Li, Yihong Gong, Zhiheng Ma 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06127v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 degradation is often unknown, spatially non-uniform, and compositional, requiring all-in-one restoration models to adapt a single set of weights to diverse local corruption patterns without test-time degradation labels. Existing methods typically modulate a shared backbone with global prompts or degradation descriptors, or route features through predefined expert pools. However, compact global conditioning can bottleneck localized degradation evidence, while static expert routing may produce homogeneous updates or rely on unstable sparse assignments. We propose \textbf{Continuous Expert Assembly} (CEA), a token-wise dynamic parameterization framework for all-in-one image restoration. CEA employs a lightweight \textbf{Cross-Attention Hyper-Adapter} to probe intermediate spatial features and synthesize instance-conditioned low-rank routing bases and residual directions. Each spatial token then assembles its own residual update via dense signed dot-product affinities over the generated rank-wise components, avoiding external prompts, static expert banks, and discrete Top- selection. The resulting assembly rule also admits a linear-attention perspective, making its dense token-wise routing behavior transparent. Experiments on AIO-3, AIO-5, and CDD-11 show that CEA improves average restoration quality over strong prompt-, descriptor-, and expert-based baselines, with the clearest gains on spatially varying and compositional degradations, while maintaining favorable parameter, FLOP, and runtime efficiency.
220. ❌ Pest-Thinker: Learning to Think and Reason like Entomologists via Reinforcement Learning
作者: Xueheng Li, Yu Wang, Tao Hu, Ji Huang, Ke Cao, Qize Yang, Rui Li, Jie Zhang, Chengjun Xie 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06121v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Pest-induced crop losses pose a major threat to global food security and sustainable agricultural development. While recent advances in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have shown strong potential for visual understanding and smart agriculture, their direct application to pest recognition remains limited due to the domain’s unique challenges such as high inter-species complexity, intra-species variability, and the scarcity of expert-annotated data. In this work, we introduce Pest-Thinker, a knowledge-driven reinforcement learning (RL) framework that enables MLLMs to reason over fine-grained pest morphology. We first construct two high-definition pest benchmarks, QFSD and AgriInsect, comprising diverse species and expert-annotated morphological traits. Leveraging these datasets, we synthesize Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning trajectories to facilitate structured learning of pest-specific visual cues through Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT). Subsequently, we employ Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) with a novel feature reward that guides the model to focus on observable morphological evidence, assessed by an LLM-as-a-Judge strategy. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Pest-Thinker substantially improves both in-domain and out-of-domain morphological understanding, marking a step toward expert-level visual reasoning for intelligent agricultural pest analysis. The datasets and source code are available upon acceptance.
221. ❌ Dynamic Pondering Sparsity-aware Mixture-of-Experts Transformer for Event Stream based Visual Object Tracking
作者: Shiao Wang, Xiao Wang, Duoqing Yang, Wenhao Zhang, Bo Jiang, Lin Zhu, Yonghong Tian, Bin Luo 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06112v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 significant progress, RGB-based trackers remain vulnerable to challenging imaging conditions, such as low illumination and fast motion. Event cameras offer a promising alternative by asynchronously capturing pixel-wise brightness changes, providing high dynamic range and high temporal resolution. However, existing event-based trackers often neglect the intrinsic spatial sparsity and temporal density of event data, while relying on a single fixed temporal-window sampling strategy that is suboptimal under varying motion dynamics. In this paper, we propose an event sparsity-aware tracking framework that explicitly models event-density variations across multiple temporal scales. Specifically, the proposed framework progressively injects sparse, medium-density, and dense event search regions into a three-stage Vision Transformer backbone, enabling hierarchical multi-density feature learning. Furthermore, we introduce a sparsity-aware Mixture-of-Experts module to encourage expert specialization under different sparsity patterns, and design a dynamic pondering strategy to adaptively adjust the inference depth according to tracking difficulty. Extensive experiments on FE240hz, COESOT, and EventVOT demonstrate that the proposed approach achieves a favorable trade-off between tracking accuracy and computational efficiency. The source code will be released on https://github.com/Event-AHU/OpenEvTracking.
222. ❌ Metonymy in vision models undermines attention-based interpretability
作者: Ananthu Aniraj, Cassio F. Dantas, Dino Ienco, Massimiliano Mancini, Diego Marcos 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06095v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Part-based reasoning is a classical strategy to make a computer vision model directly focus on the object parts that are relevant to the downstream task. In the context of deep learning, this also serves to improve by-design interpretability, often by using part-centric attention mechanisms on top of a latent image representation provided by a standard, black-box model. This approach is based on a locality assumption: that the latent representation of an object part encodes primarily information about the corresponding image region. In this work, we test this basic assumption, measuring intra-object leakage in vision models using part-based attribute annotations. Through a comprehensive experimental evaluation, we show that modern pretrained vision transformers violate the locality assumption and exhibit a strong intra-object leakage, in which each part encodes information from the whole object, a visual metonymy that compromises the faithfulness of attention-based interpretable-by-design methods for part-based reasoning, ultimately rendering them uninterpretable. In addition, we establish an upper bound using a two-stage approach that prevents leakage by design. We then show that this inherently disentangled feature extraction improves attribute-driven part discovery on a variety of tasks, confirming the practical impact of intra-object leakage. Our results uncover a neglected issue affecting the interpretability of part-based representations, such as those in CBMs relying on part-centric concepts, highlighting that two-stage approaches offer a promising way to mitigate it.
223. ❌ VISD: Enhancing Video Reasoning via Structured Self-Distillation
作者: Hao Lin, Kunyang Lv, Xu Jiang, Jingqi Tian, Zhongjing Du, Jiayu Ding, Qiaoman Zhang, Hongbo Jin 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06094v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 VideoLLMs for complex reasoning remains challenging due to sparse sequence level rewards and the lack of fine grained credit assignment over long, temporally grounded reasoning trajectories. While reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) provides reliable supervision, it fails to capture token level contributions, leading to inefficient learning. Conversely, existing self distillation methods offer dense supervision but lack structure and diagnostic specificity, and often interact unstably with reinforcement learning. In this work, we propose VISD, a structured self distillation framework that introduces diagnostically meaningful privileged information for video reasoning. VISD employs a video aware judge model to decompose reasoning quality into multiple dimensions, including answer correctness, logical consistency, and spatio-temporal grounding, and uses this structured feedback to guide a teacher policy for token level supervision. To stably integrate dense supervision with RL, we introduce a direction magnitude decoupling mechanism, where rollout level advantages computed from rewards determine update direction, while structured privileged signals modulate token level update magnitudes. This design enables semantically aligned and fine grained credit assignment, improving both reasoning faithfulness and training efficiency. Additionally, VISD incorporates curriculum scheduling and EMA based teacher stabilization to support robust optimization over long video sequences. Experiments on diverse benchmarks show that VISD consistently outperforms strong baselines, improving answer accuracy and spatio temporal grounding quality. Notably, VISD reaches these gains with nearly 2x faster convergence in optimization steps, highlighting the effectiveness of structured self supervision in improving both performance and sample efficiency for VideoLLMs.
224. ❌ Boosting Self-Supervised Tracking with Contextual Prompts and Noise Learning
作者: Yaozong Zheng, Qihua Liang, Bineng Zhong, Shuimu Zeng, Yuanliang Xue, Ning Li, Shuxiang Song 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06092v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 robust contextual knowledge from unlabeled videos is essential for advancing self-supervised tracking. However, conventional self-supervised trackers lack effective context modeling, while existing context association methods based on non-semantic queries struggle to adapt to unlabeled tracking scenarios, making it difficult to learn reliable contextual cues. In this work, we propose a novel self-supervised tracking framework, named \textbf{\tracker}, which introduces a dual-modal context association mechanism that jointly leverages fine-grained semantic prompts and contextual noise to drive the model toward learning robust tracking representations. Adherent to the easy-to-hard learning principle, our contextual association mechanism operates based on two stages. During early training, instance patch tokens (prompts) are assigned to both forward and backward tracking branches to facilitate the acquisition of tracking knowledge. As training progresses, contextual noise is gradually injected into the model to perturb feature, encouraging the tracker to learn robust tracking representations in a more complex feature space. Thus, this novel contextual association mechanism enables our self-supervised model to learn high-quality tracking representations from unlabeled videos, while being applied exclusively during training to preserve efficient inference. Extensive experiments demonstrate the superiority of our method.
225. ❌ OpenGaFF: Open-Vocabulary Gaussian Feature Field with Codebook Attention
作者: Kunyi Li, Michael Niemeyer, Sen Wang, Stefano Gasperini, Nassir Navab, Federico Tombari 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06088v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 open-vocabulary 3D scenes with Gaussian-based representations remains challenging due to fragmented and spatially inconsistent semantic predictions across multi-view observations. In this paper, we present OpenGaFF, a novel framework for open-vocabulary 3D scene understanding built upon 3D Gaussian Splatting. At the core of our method is a Gaussian Feature Field that models semantics as a continuous function of Gaussian geometry and appearance. By explicitly conditioning semantic predictions on geometric structure, this formulation strengthens the coupling between geometry and semantics, leading to improved spatial coherence across similar structures in 3D space. To further enforce object-level semantic consistency, we introduce a structured codebook that serves as a set of shared semantic primitives. Furthermore, a codebook-guided attention mechanism is proposed to retrieve language features via similarity matching between query embeddings and learned codebook entries, enabling robust open-vocabulary reasoning while reducing intra-object feature variance. Extensive experiments on standard 2D and 3D open-vocabulary benchmarks demonstrate that our method consistently outperforms prior approaches, achieving improved segmentation quality, stronger 3D semantic consistency and a semantically interpretable codebook that provides insight into the learned representation.
226. ❌ LARGO: Low-Rank Hypernetwork for Handling Missing Modalities
作者: Niels Vyncke, Pooya Ashtari, Aleksandra Pižurica 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06086v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Addressing missing modalities is an important challenge in multimodal image analysis and often relies on complex architectures that do not transfer easily to different datasets without architectural modifications or hyperparameter tuning. While most existing methods tackle this problem in feature space by engineering representations that are robust to missing inputs, we instead operate in weight space. We propose LARGO, a hypernetwork that compresses the $2^N-1$ dedicated missing-modality models into a single network by modelling the convolutional weights using the Canonical Polyadic (CP) tensor decomposition. Extensive experimental validation on BraTS 2018 (4 modalities, 15 scenarios) and ISLES 2022 (3 modalities, 7 scenarios) shows that our method ranks first in 47 out of 52 configurations, achieving average Dice improvements of +0.68$%$ and +2.53$%$ over state-of-the-art baselines (mmFormer, M$^{3}$AE, ShaSpec, SimMLM). A proof-of-concept experiment on avMNIST suggests that LARGO may extend beyond medical imaging to heterogeneous non-medical modalities.
227. ❌ AMIEOD: Adaptive Multi-Experts Image Enhancement for Object Detection in Low-Illumination Scenes
作者: Xiaochen Huang, Honggang Chen, Weicheng Zhang, Xiaobo Dai, Yongyi Li, Linbo Qing, Xiaohai He 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06084v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 multimedia application scenarios, images captured under low-illumination conditions often lead to lower accuracy in visual perception tasks compared to those taken in well-lit environments. To tackle this challenge, we propose AMIEOD, an image enhancement-enabled object detection framework for low-illumination scenes, where the two tasks are jointly optimized in a detection performance-oriented manner. Specifically, to fully exploit the information in poorly lit images, a Multi-Experts Image Enhancement Module (MEIEM) is proposed, which leverages diverse enhancement strategies. On this basis, aiming to better align the MEIEM with the detection task, we propose a Detection-Guided Regression Loss (DGRL) that utilizes the detection result to decide the regression target. Moreover, to dynamically select the most suitable enhancement strategy from MEIEM during inference, we construct an Expert Selection Module (ESM) guided by the proposed Detection-Guided Cross-Entropy (DGCE) loss, which formulates the optimization of ESM as a classification task. The improved method is well-matched with current detection algorithms to improve their performance in dim scenes. Extensive experiments on multiple datasets demonstrate that the proposed method significantly improves object detection accuracy in low-illumination conditions. Our code has been released at https://github.com/scujayfantasy/AMIEOD
228. ❌ Revisiting Uncertainty: On Evidential Learning for Partially Relevant Video Retrieval
作者: Jun Li, Peifeng Lai, Xuhang Lou, Jinpeng Wang, Yuting Wang, Ke Chen, Yaowei Wang, Shu-Tao Xia 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06083v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Partially relevant video retrieval aims to retrieve untrimmed videos using text queries that describe only partial content. However, the inherent asymmetry between brief queries and rich video content inevitably introduces uncertainty into the retrieval process. In this setting, vague queries often induce semantic ambiguity across videos, a challenge that is further exacerbated by the sparse temporal supervision within videos, which fails to provide sufficient matching evidence. To address this, we propose Holmes, a hierarchical evidential learning framework that aggregates multi-granular cross-modal evidence to quantify and model uncertainty explicitly. At the inter-video level, similarity scores are interpreted as evidential support and modeled via a Dirichlet distribution. Based on the proposed three-fold principle, we perform fine-grained query identification, which then guides query-adaptive calibrated learning. At the intra-video level, to accumulate denser evidence, we formulate a soft query-clip alignment via flexible optimal transport with an adaptive dustbin, which alleviates sparse temporal supervision while suppressing spurious local responses. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Holmes outperforms state-of-the-art methods. Code is released at https://github.com/lijun2005/ICML26-Holmes.
229. ❌ MSD-Score: Multi-Scale Distributional Scoring for Reference-Free Image Caption Evaluation
作者: Shichao Kan, Xuyang Zhang, Haojie Zhang, Zhe Zhu, Yigang Cen, Yixiong Liang, Lianlei Shan, Linna Zhang, Zhe Qu, Jiazhi Xia 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06080v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 image captions without references remains challenging because global embedding similarity often misses fine-grained mismatches such as hallucinated objects, missing attributes, or incorrect relations. We propose MSD-Score, a reference-free metric that models image patch and text token embeddings as von Mises-Fisher mixtures on the unit hypersphere. Instead of treating each modality as a single point, MSD-Score formulates image-text matching as a multi-scale distributional scoring problem. Semantic discrepancies are quantified via a weighted bi-directional KL divergence and combined with global similarity in a multi-scale framework for both single- and multi-candidate evaluations. Extensive experiments show that MSD-Score achieves state-of-the-art correlation with human judgments among reference-free metrics. Beyond accuracy, its probabilistic formulation yields transparent and decomposable diagnostics of local grounding errors, providing a deterministic complementary signal to holistic similarity metrics and judge-based evaluators.
230. ❌ Arena as Offline Reward: Efficient Fine-Grained Preference Optimization for Diffusion Models
作者: Zhikai Li, Yue Zhao, Edward Zhongwei Zhang, Xuewen Liu, Jing Zhang, Qingyi Gu, Zhen Dong 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06070v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 from human feedback (RLHF) effectively promotes preference alignment of text-to-image (T2I) diffusion models. To improve computational efficiency, direct preference optimization (DPO), which avoids explicit reward modeling, has been widely studied. However, its reliance on binary feedback limits it to coarse-grained modeling on chosen-rejected pairs, resulting in suboptimal optimization. In this paper, we propose ArenaPO, which leverages Arena scores as offline rewards to provide refined feedback, thus achieving efficient and fine-grained optimization without a reward model. This enables ArenaPO to benefit from both the rich rewards of traditional RLHF and the efficiency of DPO. Specifically, we first construct a model Arena in which each model’s capability is represented as a Gaussian distribution, and infer these capabilities by traversing the annotated pairwise preferences. Each output image is treated as a sample from the corresponding capability distribution. Then, for a image pair, conditioned on the two capability distributions and the observed pairwise preference, the absolute quality gap is estimated using latent-variable inference based on truncated normal distribution, which serves as fine-grained feedback during training. It does not require a reward model and can be computed offline, thus introducing no additional training overhead. We conduct ArenaPO training on Pick-a-Pic v2 and HPD v3 datasets, showing that ArenaPO consistently outperforms existing baselines.
231. ❌ PersonaGesture: Single-Reference Co-Speech Gesture Personalization for Unseen Speakers
作者: Xiangyue Zhang, Yiyi Cai, Kunhang Li, Kaixing Yang, You Zhou, Zhengqing Li, Xuangeng Chu, Jiaxu Zhang, Haiyang Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06064v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 PersonaGesture, a diffusion-based pipeline for single-reference co-speech gesture personalization of unseen speakers. Given target speech and one motion clip from a new speaker, the model must synthesize gestures that follow the new utterance while retaining speaker-specific pose choices, without per-speaker optimization. This setting is useful for avatars and virtual agents, but it is hard because the reference mixes stable speaker habits with utterance-specific trajectories. PersonaGesture consists of two key components, Adaptive Style Infusion (ASI) and Implicit Distribution Rectification (IDR), to separate temporal identity evidence from residual statistic correction. A Style Perceiver first encodes the variable-length reference into compact speaker-memory tokens. ASI injects these tokens into denoising through zero-initialized residual cross-attention, enabling style evidence to affect motion formation without replacing the pretrained speech-to-motion prior. Building on this, IDR applies a length-aware diagonal affine map in latent space to correct residual channel-wise moments estimated from the same reference. Across BEAT2 and ZeroEGGS, we evaluate quantitative metrics, reference-identity controls, same-audio diagnostics, qualitative comparisons, and human preference. Experiments show that separating denoising-time speaker memory from conservative post-generation moment correction improves unseen-speaker personalization over collapsed style codes, full-reference attention, and one-clip finetuning. Project: https://xiangyue-zhang.github.io/PersonaGesture.
232. ❌ Towards Self-Explainable Document Visual Question Answering with Chain-of-Explanation Predictions
作者: Kjetil Indrehus, Adrian Duric, Changkyu Choi, Ali Ramezani-Kebrya 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06058v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Document Visual Question Answering (DocVQA) requires vision-language models to reason not only about what information in a document is relevant to a question, but also where the answer is grounded on the page. Existing DocVQA models entangle question-relevant evidence and answer localization and operate largely as black boxes, offering limited means to verify how predictions depend on visual evidence. We propose CoExVQA, a self-explainable DocVQA framework with a grounded reasoning process through a chain-of-explanation design. CoExVQA first identifies question-relevant evidence, then explicitly localizes the answer region, and finally decodes the answer exclusively from the grounded region. Prediction via CoExVQA’s chain-of-explanation enables direct inspection and verification of the reasoning process across modalities. Empirical results show that restricting decoding to grounded evidence achieves SotA explainable DocVQA performance on PFL-DocVQA, improving ANLS by 12% over the current explainable baselines while providing transparent and verifiable predictions.
233. ❌ Fusion in Your Way: Aligning Image Fusion with Heterogeneous Demands via Direct Preference Optimization
作者: Weijian Su, Songqian Zhang, Yuqi Han, Jian Zhuang, Yongdong Huang, Qiang Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06049v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 key technique in multi-modal processing, infrared and visible image fusion (IVIF) plays a crucial role in integrating complementary spectral information for visual enhancement and downstream vision tasks. Despite remarkable progress, existing methods struggle to flexibly accommodate heterogeneous demands. Achieving adaptive fusion that aligns with various preferences from both human and machine vision remains an open and challenging problem. To address this challenge, we propose DPOFusion, a direct preference optimization (DPO) framework integrating the property-aligned latent diffusion model (PALDM) and the preference-controllable latent diffusion model (PCLDM), enabling task-guided, preference-adaptive IVIF for both human and machine vision. The PALDM leverages a latent fusion prior and a joint conditional loss to generate diverse candidate fusion results with various properties. PCLDM is subsequently fine-tuned via instance direct preference optimization (IDPO), enabling direct control of the final fusion results with heterogeneous preference signals. Experimental results demonstrate that our framework not only attains precise preference alignment among humans, vision-language models, and task-driven networks, but also sets a new benchmark for adaptive fusion quality and task-oriented transferability.
234. ❌ RealCam: Real-Time Novel-View Video Generation with Interactive Camera Control
作者: Youcan Xu, Jiaxin Shi, Zhen Wang, Wensong Song, Feifei Shao, Chen Liang, Jun Xiao, Long Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06051v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Camera-controlled video-to-video (V2V) generation enables dynamic viewpoint synthesis from monocular footage, holding immense potential for interactive filmmaking and live broadcasting. However, existing implicit synthesis methods fundamentally rely on non-causal, full-sequence processing and rigid prefix-style temporal concatenation. This architectural paradigm mandates bidirectional attention, resulting in prohibitive computational latency, quadratic complexity scaling, and inherent incompatibility with real-time streaming or variable-length inputs. To overcome these limitations, we introduce \texttt{RealCam}, a novel autoregressive framework for interactive, real-time camera-controlled V2V generation. We first design a high-fidelity teacher model grounded in a \textbf{Cross-frame In-context Learning} paradigm. By interleaving source and target frames into synchronized contextual pairs, our design inherently enables length-agnostic generalization and naturally facilitates causal adaptation, breaking the rigid prefix bottleneck. We then distill this teacher into a few-step causal student via Self-Forcing with Distribution Matching Distillation, enabling efficient, on-the-fly streaming synthesis. Furthermore, to mitigate severe loop inconsistency in closed-loop trajectories, we propose \textbf{Loop-Closed Data Augmentation (LoopAug)}, a novel paradigm that synthesizes globally consistent loop sequences from existing multiview datasets. Extensive experiments demonstrate that \texttt{RealCam} achieves state-of-the-art visual fidelity and temporal consistency while enabling truly interactive camera control with orders-of-magnitude faster inference than existing paradigms. Our project page is at https://xyc-fly.github.io/RealCam/.
235. ❌ Domain Generalization through Spatial Relation Induction over Visual Primitives
作者: Dat Nguyen, Duc-Duy Nguyen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06043v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Domain generalization requires identifying stable representations that support reliable classification across domains. Most existing methods seek such stability through improving the training process, for example, through model selection strategies, data augmentation, or feature-alignment objectives. Although these strategies can be effective, they leave the representation learning of structural composition implicit, which may limit performance on compositional domain generalization benchmarks. In this work, we propose Primitive-Aware Relational Structure for domain gEneralization (PARSE), an image classification framework that factors visual recognition into visual primitives and their relational composition. We represent these compositions using soft binary, ternary, and quaternary predicates over primitive locations, yielding differentiable measures of spatial alignment that can be learned end-to-end. To learn primitives and relational structures jointly, we design an end-to-end architecture with three components: (1) a convolutional neural network (CNN) backbone that extracts general visual features, (2) a concept bottleneck layer that maps these features to primitive heatmaps with differentiable spatial coordinates, and (3) a structural scoring layer that evaluates candidate spatial relations among the detected primitives. We then compute class probability from the joint evidence of its class-specific relational compositions. Across CUB-DG and the DomainBed benchmark suite,PARSE improves accuracy by over 4.5 percentage points on CUB-DG and remains competitive with existing DG methods on DomainBed.
236. ❌ PlotPick: AI-powered batch extraction of numerical data from scientific figures
作者: Tommy Carstensen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06021v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 reviews and meta-analyses frequently require numerical data that authors report only as figures, yet manual digitisation is slow and does not scale. We present PlotPick, an open-source tool that uses vision-language models (VLMs) to batch-extract structured tabular data from scientific figures. We evaluate six VLMs from three providers on two established chart-to-table benchmarks (ChartX and PlotQA) and compare against the dedicated chart-to-table model DePlot. All six VLMs outperform DePlot on both benchmarks. On ChartX (restricted to bar charts, line charts, box plots, and histograms; n=300), VLMs achieve 88-96% recall versus 71% for DePlot. On PlotQA (n=529), VLMs achieve 86-99% RMSF1 versus 94% for DePlot. The gap is largest on chart types absent from the dedicated models’ training data: on box plots, DePlot achieves 24% RMSF1 while VLMs achieve 83-97%. PlotPick is available at https://plotpick.streamlit.app.
237. ❌ T2I-VeRW: Part-level Fine-grained Perception for Text-to-Image Vehicle Retrieval
作者: Xiao Wang, Ziwen Wang, Weizhe Kong, Wentao Wu, Yuehang Li, Aihua Zheng, Chenglong Li, Jin Tang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06012v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Vehicle Re-identification (Re-ID) aims to retrieve the most similar image to a given query from images captured by non-overlapping cameras. Extending vehicle Re-ID from image-only queries to text-based queries enables retrieval in real-world scenarios where only a witness description of the target vehicle is available. In this paper, we propose PFCVR, a Part-level Fine-grained Cross-modal Vehicle Retrieval model for text-to-image vehicle re-identification. PFCVR constructs locally paired images and texts at the part level and introduces learnable part-query tokens that aggregate both part-specific and full-sentence context before aligning with visual part features. On top of this explicit local alignment, a bi-directional mask recovery module lets each modality reconstruct its masked content under the guidance of the other, implicitly bridging local correspondences into global feature alignment. Furthermore, we construct a new large-scale dataset called T2I-VeRW, which contains 14,668 images covering 1,796 vehicle identities with fine-grained part-level annotations. Experimental results on the T2I-VeRI dataset show that PFCVR achieves 29.2% Rank-1 accuracy, improving over the best competing method by +3.7% percentage points. On the newly proposed T2I-VeRW benchmark, PFCVR achieves 55.2% Rank-1 accuracy, outperforming a comprehensive set of recent state-of-the-art methods. Source code will be released on https://github.com/Event-AHU/Neuromorphic_ReID
238. ❌ Adding Thermal Awareness to Visual Systems in Real-Time via Distilled Diffusion Models
作者: Yuchen Guo, Junli Gong, Wenjun Dong, Yiuming Cheung, Weifeng Su 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06010v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Purely RGB-based vision models often fail to provide reliable cues in challenging scenarios such as nighttime and fog, leading to degraded performance and safety risks. Infrared imaging captures heat-emitting sources and provides critical complementary information, but existing high-fidelity fusion methods suffer from prohibitive latency, rendering them impractical for real-time edge deployment. To address this, we propose FusionProxy, a real-time image fusion module designed as a fully independent, plug-and-play component with diffusion level quality. FusionProxy exploits two complementary statistics of a teacher sample ensemble: per-pixel variance in raw image space, used to weight pixel-level supervision, and per-pixel variance inside frozen foundation backbones, used to route feature-level alignment spatially. Once trained, FusionProxy can be directly integrated into any visual perception system without joint optimization. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method achieves superior performance on static recognition tasks and significantly enhances robustness in dynamic tasks, including closed-loop autonomous driving. Crucially, FusionProxy achieves real-time inference speeds on diverse platforms, from high-end GPUs to commodity hardware, providing a flexible and generalizable solution for all-day perception.
239. ❌ Neuromorphic visual attention for Sign-language recognition on SpiNNaker
作者: Sarka Liskova, Olha Vedmedenko, Mazdak Fatahi, Matej Hoffmann, P. Michael Furlong, Giulia D Angelo 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06005v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Sign-language recognition has achieved substantial gains in classification accuracy in recent years; however, the latency and power requirements of most existing methods limit their suitability for real-time deployment. Neuromorphic sensing and processing offer an alternative paradigm based on sparse, event-driven computation that supports low-latency and energy-efficient perception. In this work, we introduce an end-to-end neuromorphic architecture for American Sign Language (ASL) fingerspelling recognition that integrates a spiking visual attention mechanism for online region-of-interest extraction with a compact spiking neural network deployed on the SpiNNaker neuromorphic platform. We benchmark the proposed system against two datasets: a synthetically generated event-based version of the Sign Language MNIST dataset and a natively recorded ASL-DVS dataset, whilst providing a comprehensive overview of Sign-language recognition and related work. This work yields competitive performance in simulation (92.27%) and comparable performance on neuromorphic hardware deployment (83.1%), while achieving the most energy-efficient architecture (0.565 mW) and low latency (3 ms) across all benchmarked approaches. Despite its compact design, the system demonstrates the suitability of task-dependent visual attention applications for edge deployment.
240. ❌ 4DThinker: Thinking with 4D Imagery for Dynamic Spatial Understanding
作者: Zhangquan Chen, Manyuan Zhang, Xinlei Yu, Xiang An, Bo Li, Xin Xie, ZiDong Wang, Mingze Sun, Shuang Chen, Hongyu Li, Xiaobin Hu, Ruqi Huang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05997v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 spatial reasoning from monocular video is essential for bridging visual intelligence and the physical world, yet remains challenging for vision-language models (VLMs). Prior approaches either verbalize spatial-temporal reasoning entirely as text, which is inherently verbose and imprecise for complex dynamics, or rely on external geometric modules that increase inference complexity without fostering intrinsic model capability. In this paper, we present 4DThinker, the first framework that enables VLMs to “think with 4D” through dynamic latent mental imagery, i.e., internally simulating how scenes evolve within the continuous hidden space. Specifically, we first introduce a scalable, annotation-free data generation pipeline that synthesizes 4D reasoning data from raw videos. We then propose Dynamic-Imagery Fine-Tuning (DIFT), which jointly supervises textual tokens and 4D latents to ground the model in dynamic visual semantics. Building on this, 4D Reinforcement Learning (4DRL) further tackles complex reasoning tasks via outcome-based rewards, restricting policy gradients to text tokens to ensure stable optimization. Extensive experiments across multiple dynamic spatial reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that 4DThinker consistently outperforms strong baselines and offers a new perspective toward 4D reasoning in VLMs. Our code is available at https://github.com/zhangquanchen/4DThinker.
241. ❌ iPhoneBlur: A Difficulty-Stratified Benchmark for Consumer Device Motion Deblurring
作者: Abdullah Al Shafi, Kazi Saeed Alam 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05990v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Motion blur restoration on consumer mobile devices is typically evaluated using aggregate metrics that obscure performance variation across blur difficulty, masking model behavior under real deployment conditions. This work introduces iPhoneBlur, a difficulty-stratified benchmark of 7,400 image pairs synthesized from high-framerate iPhone 17 Pro videos captured in diverse real-world scenarios. Samples are partitioned into Easy, Medium, and Hard categories through PSNR-guided adaptive temporal windowing, with stratification validated by monotonic 2.2x increase in optical flow magnitude across tiers. Each sample includes comprehensive metadata enabling investigation of ISP-aware and difficulty-adaptive restoration strategies. Spectral analysis confirms synthesized blur exhibits high-frequency suppression patterns consistent with authentic motion degradation. Evaluation of six architectures reveals consistent 7-9 dB performance degradation from Easy to Hard subsets, a substantial gap entirely hidden by aggregate reporting. The benchmark further exposes a domain gap between professional and consumer cameras which targeted fine-tuning substantially recovers. By coupling difficulty stratification with deployment-critical metadata, iPhoneBlur enables systematic assessment of model reliability and failure modes for resource-constrained edge systems.
242. ❌ RAWild: Sensor-Agnostic RAW Object Detection via Physics-Guided Curve and Grid Modeling
作者: Shuhong Liu, Gengjia Chang, Jun Liu, Xuangeng Chu, Yinqiang Zheng, Tatsuya Harada, Ziteng Cui 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05941v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Camera sensor RAW data offers intrinsic advantages for object detection, including deeper bit depth, preserved physical information, and freedom from image signal processor (ISP) distortions. However, varying exposure conditions, spectral sensitivities, and bit depths across devices introduce substantially larger domain gaps than sRGB, making sensor-agnostic generalization a fundamental challenge. In this study, we present \textbf{RAWild}, a physics-guided global-local tone mapping framework for sensor-agnostic RAW object detection. By factoring sensor-induced variations into a global tonal correction and a spatially adaptive local color adjustment, both driven by RAW distribution priors, our framework enables a single network to train jointly across heterogeneous sensors. To further support cross-sensor generalization, we construct a physics-based RAW simulation pipeline that synthesizes realistic sensor outputs spanning diverse spectral sensitivities, illuminants, and sensor non-idealities. Extensive experiments across multiple RAW benchmarks covering bit depths from 10 to 24 demonstrate state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance under single-dataset, mixed-dataset, and challenging robustness settings.
243. ❌ Prompt-Free and Efficient SAM2 Adaptation for Biomedical Semantic Segmentation via Dual Adapters
作者: Hinako Mitsuoka, Kazuhiro Hotta 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05979v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Segment Anything Model 2 (SAM2) demonstrated impressive zero-shot capabilities on natural images but faces challenges in biomedical segmentation due to significant domain shifts and prompt dependency. To address these limitations, we propose a prompt-free, parameter-efficient fine-tuning framework designed for multi-class segmentation on variable-sized inputs. We introduce a convolutional Positional Encoding Generator to adapt effectively to arbitrary aspect ratios and present a dual-adapter strategy: High-Performance Adapter utilizing deformable convolutions for precise boundary modeling and Lightweight Adapter employing structural re-parameterization to minimize inference latency. Experiments on ISBI 2012, Kvasir-SEG, Synapse, and ACDC datasets demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms strong adaptation baselines. Specifically, our method improved segmentation accuracy by up to 19.66% over the vanilla SAM2, while reducing computational costs by approximately 87% compared to heavyweight medical SAM adaptations, establishing a superior trade-off between accuracy and efficiency.
244. ❌ Whole-body CT attenuation and volume charts from routine clinical scans via evidence-grounded LLM report filtering
作者: Christian Wachinger, Bernhard Renger, Christopher Späth, Jan Kirschke, Marcus Makowski 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05933v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Interpreting quantitative CT biomarkers, such as organ volume and tissue attenuation, requires large-scale healthy reference distributions. However, creating these is challenging because clinical datasets are often heavily enriched with pathology. Here, we develop an evidence-grounded, cross-verified large language model (LLM) ensemble to filter pathological findings from radiology reports, enabling the construction of pathology-reduced cohorts from over 350,000 CT examinations. Five LLMs, first, flag structure-level abnormality candidates grounded in verbatim report evidence and, second, resolve disagreements via cross-verification. Using distribution-aware generalized additive models for location, scale, and shape, we establish comprehensive whole-body reference charts for 106 anatomical structures (volumes and attenuation) across adulthood, accounting for age, sex, contrast enhancement, and acquisition parameters. Longitudinal analyses reveal structure- and contrast-dependent changes distinct from cross-sectional trends. These resources facilitate covariate-adjusted centile scoring from routine CT, supporting standardized quantitative phenotyping, multi-site imaging studies, and scalable opportunistic screening research.
245. ❌ Backdoor Mitigation in Object Detection via Adversarial Fine-Tuning
作者: Kealan Dunnett, Reza Arablouei, Dimity Miller, Volkan Dedeoglu, Raja Jurdak 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05928v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Backdoor attacks can implant malicious behaviours into deep models while preserving performance on clean data, posing a serious threat to safety-critical vision systems. Although backdoor mitigation has been studied extensively for image classification, defenses for object detection remain comparatively underdeveloped. Adversarial fine-tuning is a common backdoor mitigation approach in classification, but adapting it to detection is nontrivial as classification-oriented adversarial generation does not match the detection attack space, where attacks may cause object misclassification or disappearance, and standard detection losses can dilute the repair signal across many predictions. We address these challenges through a detection-aware adversarial fine-tuning framework for mitigating object-detection backdoors when the defender has access only to a compromised detector and a small clean dataset, without knowing the attack objective. For adversarial generation that does not require knowledge of the attack objective, we introduce soft-branch minimisation, which uses a soft gate to combine objectives aligned with misclassification and disappearance attacks, together with a detection-aware classification-loss maximisation. For targeted repair, we introduce a dual-objective fine-tuning loss applied to target-matched predictions, concentrating the defensive update on predictions most relevant to the backdoor behaviour. Experiments across CNN- and Transformer-based detectors show that our approach more effectively reduces attack success while preserving true detections, compared with classification-oriented baselines, and maintains competitive clean detection performance.
246. ❌ Think, then Score: Decoupled Reasoning and Scoring for Video Reward Modeling
作者: Yuan Wang, Ouxiang Li, Yulong Xu, Borui Liao, Jiajun Liang, Jinghan Li, Meng Wang, Xintao Wang, Pengfei Wang, Kuien Liu, Xiang Wang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05922v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 generative video models are increasingly driven by post-training and test-time scaling, both of which critically depend on the quality of video reward models (RMs). An ideal reward model should predict accurate rewards that align with human preferences across diverse scenarios. However, existing paradigms face a fundamental dilemma: \textit{Discriminative RMs} regress rewards directly on features extracted by multimodal large language models (MLLMs) without explicit reasoning, making them prone to shortcut learning and heavily reliant on massive data scaling for generalization. In contrast, \textit{Generative RMs} with Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning exhibit superior interpretability and generalization potential, as they leverage fine-grained semantic supervision to internalize the rationales behind human preferences. However, they suffer from inherent optimization bottlenecks due to the coupling of reasoning and scoring within a single autoregressive inference chain. To harness the generalization benefits of CoT reasoning while mitigating the training instability of coupled reasoning and scoring, we introduce DeScore, a training-efficient and generalizable video reward model. DeScore employs a decoupled ``think-then-score’’ paradigm: an MLLM first generates an explicit CoT, followed by a dedicated discriminative scoring module consisting of a learnable query token and a regression head that predicts the final reward. DeScore is optimized via a two-stage framework: (1) a discriminative cold start incorporating a random mask mechanism to ensure robust scoring capabilities, and (2) a dual-objective reinforcement learning stage that independently refines CoT reasoning quality and calibrates the final reward, ensuring that higher-quality reasoning directly translates to superior model performance.
247. ❌ From Drops to Grid: Noise-Aware Spatio-Temporal Neural Process for Rainfall Estimation
作者: Rafael Pablos Sarabia, Joachim Nyborg, Morten Birk, Ira Assent 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05912v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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-resolution rainfall observations are crucial for weather forecasting, water management, and hazard mitigation. Traditional operational measurements are often biased and low-resolution, limiting their ability to capture local rainfall. Accurate high-resolution rainfall maps require integrating sparse surface observations, yet existing deep learning densification methods are hindered by rainfall’s skewed, localized nature, noise, and limited spatio-temporal fusion. We present DropsToGrid, a Neural Process-based method that generates dense rainfall fields by fusing temporal sequences from noisy, irregularly distributed private weather stations with spatial context from radar. Leveraging multi-scale feature extraction, temporal attention, and multi-modal fusion, the model produces stochastic, continuous rainfall estimates and explicitly quantifies uncertainty. Evaluations on real-world datasets demonstrate that DropsToGrid outperforms both operational and deep learning baselines, generating accurate high-resolution rainfall maps with well-calibrated uncertainty, even when only few stations are available and in cross-regional scenarios.
248. ❌ Architecture-agnostic Lipschitz-constant Bayesian header and its application to resolve semantically proximal classification errors with vision transformers
作者: Frederik Schäfer, Luis Mandl, Lars Kälber, Tim Ricken 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05908v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Label noise remains a critical bottleneck for the generalization of supervised deep learning models, particularly when errors are structured rather than random. Standard robust training methods often fail in the presence of such semantically proximal classification errors. This work presents an architecture-agnostic Lipschitz-constant Bayesian header that can be integrated into feature extractors such as vision transformers, yielding the bi-Lipschitz-constrained Bayesian Vision Transformer (LipB-ViT). In contrast to conventional Bayesian layers, our approach enforces spectral normalization on both the mean and log-variance of the variational weights, which promotes calibrated predictive uncertainty and mitigates noise amplification. We further propose a novel metric to jointly capture uncertainty and confidence across misclassification rates, as well as an adaptive arithmetic-mean fusion scheme that combines feature-space proximity with predictive uncertainty to detect corrupted labels outperforming the state of the art k-nearest neighbor based identification methods by more than 7% reaching a recall of more than 0.93 at 15% semantically misclassified labels. Although computational costs increase due to Monte Carlo sampling, the method offers plug-and-play compatibility with pre-trained backbones and consistent hyperparameters across domains, suggesting strong utility for high-stakes applications with variable annotation reliability. The stabilized confidence estimates serve as the foundation for an analysis pipeline that jointly assesses dataset quality and label noise, yielding a second novel metric for their combined quantification. Lastly, we systematically evaluate LipB-ViT under both structured (adversarial) and unstructured noise at inference time, demonstrating its robustness in realistic high-noise and attack scenarios. We compare its performance against baseline methods.
249. ❌ Plug-and-play Class-aware Knowledge Injection for Prompt Learning with Visual-Language Model
作者: Junhui Yin, Nan Pu, Xinyu Zhang, Lingfeng Yang, Lin Wu, Xiaojie Wang, Zhun Zhong 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05910v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Prompt learning has become an effective and widely used technique in enhancing vision-language models (VLMs) such as CLIP for various downstream tasks, particularly in zero-shot classification within specific domains. Existing methods typically focus on either learning class-shared prompts for a given domain or generating instance-specific prompts through conditional prompt learning. While these methods have achieved promising performance, they often overlook class-specific knowledge in prompt design, leading to suboptimal outcomes. The underlying reasons are: 1) class-specific prompts offer more fine-grained supervision compared to coarse class-shared prompts, which helps prevent misclassification of data from different classes into a single class; 2) compared to class-specific prompts, instance-specific prompts neglect the richer class-level information across multiple instances, potentially causing data from the same class to be divided into multiple classes. To effectively supplement the class-specific knowledge into existing methods, we propose a plug-and-play Class-Aware Knowledge Injection (CAKI) framework. CAKI comprises two key components, i.e., class-specific prompt generation and query-key prompt matching. The former encodes class-specific knowledge into prompts from few-shot samples that belong to the same class and stores the learned prompts in a class-level knowledge bank. The latter provides a plug-and-play mechanism for each test instance to retrieve relevant class-level knowledge from the knowledge bank and inject such knowledge to refine model predictions. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our CAKI effectively improves the performance of existing methods on base and novel classes. Code is publicly available at \href{https://github.com/yjh576/CAKI}{this https URL}.
250. ❌ Understanding Cross-Language Transfer Improvements in Low-Resource HTR: The Role of Sequence Modeling
作者: Sana Al-azzawi, Chang Liu, Nudrat Habib, Elisa Barney, Marcus Liwicki 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05900v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Handwritten Text Recognition (HTR) for Arabic-script languages benefits from cross-language joint training under low-resource conditions, particularly when using CRNN-based models that combine convolutional encoders with sequence modeling. However, it remains unclear whether these improvements are better explained by shared visual representations or sequence-level dependencies. In this work, we conduct a controlled architectural study of line-level Arabic-script HTR, comparing CNN-only models with CTC decoding and CRNN models under identical single-script and multi-script training regimes. Experiments are performed on Arabic (KHATT), Urdu (NUST-UHWR), and Persian (PHTD) datasets under low-resource settings (K in {100, 500, 1000}). Our results show a clear divergence in transfer behavior: while CNN-only models exhibit limited or unstable improvements, CRNN models achieve better performance under multi-script training, particularly in the most data-constrained regimes. Focusing on transfer improvements (delta CER) rather than absolute performance, we find that cross-language improvements are associated with sequence-level modeling, while sharing visual representations learned by the CNN encoder, corresponding to similarities in character shapes across scripts, alone appears to be insufficient. This finding suggests that contextual modeling plays an important role in enabling effective transfer in low-resource scenarios, and that similar behavior may extend to other low-resource language settings.
251. ❌ Detecting AI-Generated Videos with Spiking Neural Networks
作者: Minsuk Jang, Yujin Yang, Heeseon Kim, Minseok Son, Younghun Kim, Changick Kim 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05895v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 AI-generated videos are photorealistic at the single-frame level, leaving inter-frame dynamics as the main remaining axis for detection. Existing detectors typically handle this temporal evidence in three ways: feeding the full frame sequence to a generic temporal backbone, reducing one dominant temporal cue to fixed video-level descriptors, or comparing temporal features to real-video statistics through a detection metric. These strategies degrade sharply under cross-generator evaluation, where artifact type and timescale vary across generators. On caption-paired benchmark, GenVidBench, we identify two signatures that prior detectors do not jointly exploit: AI-generated videos exhibit smoother frame-to-frame temporal residuals at the pixel level, and more compact trajectories in the semantic feature space, indicating a temporal smoothness gap at both levels. We further observe that, when raw video is fed into a Spiking Neural Networks (SNNs), fake clips elicit firing predominantly at object and motion boundaries, unlike real clips, suggesting that the SNN responds to temporal artifacts localized at edges. These cues are sparse, asynchronous, and concentrated at moments of change, which makes SNNs a natural choice for this task: their event-driven, sparsely-activated dynamics align with the structure of the residual signal in a way that dense ANN backbones do not. Building on this observation, we propose MAST, a detector that processes multi-channel temporal residuals with a spike-driven temporal branch alongside a frozen semantic encoder for cross-generator generalization. On the GenVideo benchmark, MAST achieves 93.14% mean accuracy across 10 unseen generators under strict cross-generator evaluation, matching or surpassing the strongest ANN-based detectors and demonstrating the practical applicability of SNNs to AI-generated video detection.
252. ❌ MTL-MAD: Multi-Task Learners are Effective Medical Anomaly Detectors
作者: Bogdan Alexandru Bercean, Florinel Alin Croitoru, Vlad Hondru, Ciprian Mihai Ceausescu, Andreea Iuliana Ionescu, Radu Tudor Ionescu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05891v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 images is a challenging task, since anomalies are not typically available during training. Recent methods leverage a single pretext task coupled with a large-scale pre-trained model to reach state-of-the-art performance. Instead, we propose to learn multiple self-supervised and pseudo-labeling tasks from scratch, using a joint model based on Mixture-of-Experts (MoE). By carefully integrating multiple proxy tasks, the joint model effectively learns a robust representation of normal anatomical structures, so that anomaly scores can be derived based on how well the multi-task learner (MTL) solves each task during inference. We perform comprehensive experiments on BMAD, a recent benchmark that comprises a broad range of medical image modalities. The empirical results indicate that our multi-task learner is an effective anomaly detector, outperforming all state-of-the-art competitors on BMAD. Moreover, our model produces interpretable anomaly maps, potentially helping physicians in providing more accurate diagnoses.
253. ❌ DBMSolver: A Training-free Diffusion Bridge Sampler for High-Quality Image-to-Image Translation
作者: Sankarshana Venugopal, Mohammad Mostafavi, Jonghyun Choi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05889v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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-based image-to-image (I2I) translation excels in high-fidelity generation but suffers from slow sampling in state-of-the-art Diffusion Bridge Models (DBMs), often requiring dozens of function evaluations (NFEs). We introduce DBMSolver, a training-free sampler that exploits the semi-linear structure of DBM’s underlying SDE and ODE via exponential integrators, yielding highly-efficient 1st- and 2nd-order solutions. This reduces NFEs by up to 5x while boosting quality (e.g., FID drops 53% on DIODE at 20 NFEs vs. 2nd-order baseline). Experiments on inpainting, stylization, and semantics-to-image tasks across resolutions up to 256x256 show DBMSolver sets new SOTA efficiency-quality tradeoffs, enabling real-world applicability. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/snumprlab/dbmsolver.
254. ❌ Training-Free Dense Hand Contact Estimation with Multi-Modal Large Language Models
作者: Daniel Sungho Jung, Kyoung Mu Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05886v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Dense hand contact estimation requires both high-level semantic understanding and fine-grained geometric reasoning of human interaction to accurately localize contact regions. Recently, multi-modal large language models (MLLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in understanding visual semantics, enabled by vision-language priors learned from large-scale data. However, leveraging MLLMs for dense hand contact estimation remains underexplored. There are two major challenges in applying MLLMs to dense hand contact estimation. First, encoding explicit 3D hand geometry is difficult, as MLLMs primarily operate on vision and language modalities. Second, capturing fine-grained vertex-level contact remains challenging, as MLLMs tend to focus on high-level semantics rather than detailed geometric reasoning. To address these challenges, we propose ContactPrompt, a training-free and zero-shot approach for dense hand contact estimation using MLLMs. To effectively encode 3D hand geometry, we introduce a detailed hand-part segmentation and a part-wise vertex-grid representation that provides structured, localized geometric information. To enable accurate and efficient dense contact prediction, we develop a multi-stage structured contact reasoning with part conditioning, progressively bridging global semantics and fine-grained geometry. Therefore, our method effectively leverages the reasoning capabilities of MLLMs while enabling precise dense hand contact estimation. Surprisingly, the proposed approach outperforms previous supervised methods trained on large-scale dense contact datasets without requiring any training. The codes will be released.
255. ❌ 3DSS: 3D Surface Splatting for Inverse Rendering
作者: Mae Younes, Adnane Boukhayma 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05876v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 3D Surface Splatting (3DSS), the first differentiable surface splatting renderer for physically-based inverse rendering from multi-view images. Our central insight is that the surface separation problem at the heart of surface splatting admits a direct formulation in terms of the reconstruction kernels themselves. From this foundation we derive a coverage-based compositing model whose per-layer opacity arises directly from the accumulated Elliptical Weighted Average reconstruction weight, yielding anti-aliased silhouettes and informative visibility gradients at sparsely covered edges. Combined with forward microfacet shading under co-optimized HDR environment lighting and density-aware adaptive refinement, 3DSS jointly recovers shape, spatially-varying BRDF materials, and illumination. Because the optimized representation is a set of oriented surface samples, it bridges natively to mesh-based workflows via surface reconstruction from oriented point cloud methods. We evaluate 3DSS against mesh-based, implicit, and Gaussian-splatting baselines across geometry reconstruction, novel-view synthesis, and novel-illumination relighting.
256. ❌ InkDiffuser: High-Fidelity One-shot Chinese Calligraphy via Differentiable Morphological Optimization
作者: Kunchong Shi, Jing Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05865v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 Chinese calligraphy generation methods suffer from poor stroke rendering and unrealistic ink morphology, resulting in outputs with limited visual fidelity and artistic fluidity. To address this problem, we propose \textbf{InkDiffuser}, a diffusion-based generative framework for one-shot Chinese calligraphy synthesis. To guarantee high-fidelity rendering, we introduce two core contributions: a high-frequency enhancement mechanism and a Differentiable Ink Structure (DIS) loss that explicitly regularizes ink morphology. Inspired by the observation that high-frequency information in individual samples typically carries contour details, we enhance content extraction by explicitly fusing high-frequency representations for more accurate font structure. Furthermore, we propose a differentiable ink structure loss that integrates differentiable morphological operations into the diffusion process. By allowing the model to learn an explicit decomposition of ink-trace structures, DIS facilitates fine-grained refinement of stroke contours and delivers significantly improved visual realism in the generated calligraphy. Extensive experiments on various calligraphic styles and complex characters demonstrate that InkDiffuser can generate superior calligraphy fonts with realistic ink rendering effects from only a single reference glyph and outperform existing few-shot font generation approaches in structural consistency, detail fidelity, and visual authenticity. The code is available at the following address: https://github.com/JingVIPLab/InkDiffuser.
257. ❌ Align3D-AD: Cross-Modal Feature Alignment and Dual-Prompt Learning for Zero-shot 3D Anomaly Detection
作者: Letian Bai, Xuanming Cao, Juan Du, Chengyu Tao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05850v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 3D anomaly detection aims to identify anomalies without access to training data from target categories. However, existing methods mainly rely on projecting 3D observations into multi-view representations that primarily capture geometric cues rather than realistic visual semantics and process them with vision encoders pretrained on RGB data, leading to a significant domain gap between the encoder and the projected representations. To address this issue, we propose Align3D-AD, a unified two-stage framework that leverages the RGB modality from auxiliary categories as cross-modal guidance for zero-shot 3D anomaly detection. First, we introduce a cross-modal feature alignment paradigm that maps rendering features into the RGB semantic space. Unlike prior works that implicitly rely on pretrained encoders, our method enables direct semantic transfer from RGB observations. A semantic consistency reweighting strategy is further introduced to refine feature alignment by reweighting local regions according to holistic semantic consistency. Second, we propose a modality-aware prompt learning framework with dual-prompt contrastive alignment. By assigning independent prompts to RGB-aligned and rendering features, our method captures complementary semantics across modalities, while the contrastive alignment further enhances prompt representations to improve discriminability. Extensive experiments on MVTec3D-AD, Eyecandies, and Real3D-AD demonstrate that Align3D-AD consistently outperforms existing zero-shot methods under both one-vs-rest and cross-dataset settings, highlighting its generalization capability and robustness. Code and the dataset will be made available once our paper is accepted.
258. ❌ VideoRouter: Query-Adaptive Dual Routing for Efficient Long-Video Understanding
作者: Kuanwei Lin, Wenhao Zhang, Ge Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05848v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Video large multimodal models increasingly face a scalability bottleneck: long videos produce excessively long visual-token sequences, which sharply increase memory and latency during inference. While existing compression methods are effective in specific settings, most are either weakly query-aware or apply a fixed compression policy across frames, proving suboptimal when visual evidence is unevenly distributed over time. To address this, we present VideoRouter, a query-adaptive dual-router framework built on InternVL for budgeted evidence allocation. The Semantic Router predicts the dominant allocation policy, choosing between broad temporal coverage and adaptive high-resolution preservation, while the Image Router uses early LLM layers to score frame relevance. This enables aggressive compression on less relevant frames while preserving detail on critical evidence frames. To train both routers, we build Video-QTR-10K for allocation-policy supervision and Video-FLR-200K for frame-relevance supervision. Experiments on VideoMME, MLVU, and LongVideoBench show that VideoRouter consistently improves over the InternVL baseline under comparable or lower budgets, achieving up to a 67.9% token reduction.
259. ❌ Unifying Scientific Communication: Fine-Grained Correspondence Across Scientific Media
作者: Megha Mariam K. M, Vineeth N. Balasubramanian, C. V. Jawahar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05831v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 communication of scientific knowledge has become increasingly multimodal, spanning text, visuals, and speech through materials such as research papers, slides, and recorded presentations. These different representations collectively convey a study’s reasoning, results, and insights, offering complementary perspectives that enrich understanding. However, despite their shared purpose, such materials are rarely connected in a structured way. The absence of explicit links across formats makes it difficult to trace how concepts, visuals, and explanations correspond, limiting unified exploration and analysis of research content. To address this gap, we introduce the Multimodal Conference Dataset (MCD), the first benchmark that integrates research papers, presentation videos, explanatory videos, and slides from the same works. We evaluate a range of embedding-based and vision-language models to assess their ability to discover fine-grained cross-format correspondences, establishing the first systematic benchmark for this task. Our results show that vision-language models are robust but struggle with fine-grained alignment, while embedding-based models capture text-visual correspondences well but equations and symbolic content form distinct clusters in the embedding space. These findings highlight both the strengths and limitations of current approaches and point to key directions for future research in multimodal scientific understanding. To ensure reproducibility, we release the resources for MCD at https://github.com/meghamariamkm2002/MCD
260. ❌ CXR-ContraBench: Benchmarking Negated-Option Attraction in Medical VLMs
作者: Zhengru Fang, Yanan Ma, Yu Guo, Senkang Hu, Yixian Zhang, Hangcheng Cao, Wenbo Ding, Yuguang Fang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05810v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 chest X-ray shows consolidation but the question asks which finding is present, a medical vision-language model may answer “No consolidation.” This is more than an incorrect choice: it is a polarity reversal that emits a clinical statement contradicting the image. We study this failure as negated-option attraction, where a model is drawn to a negated answer option even when it conflicts with both the visual evidence and the question. We introduce CXR-ContraBench (Chest X-Ray Contradiction Benchmark), a diagnostic benchmark spanning internal ReXVQA slices and external OpenI and CheXpert protocols. The benchmark centers on present-finding questions, where selecting “No X” despite visible X creates the main clinical risk, and uses absent-finding questions as secondary tests of whether models copy negated wording. Across CheXpert protocols, the failure is substantial and persistent. On a strict direct presence probe, MedGemma and Qwen2.5-VL reach only 31.49% and 30.21% accuracy, respectively; on a matched 135,754-record CheXpert training-split protocol, both models select negated options on over 62% of presence questions. Chain-of-thought prompting reduces some presence-side reversals but does not eliminate them and can amplify absence-side contradictions. Finally, QCCV-Neg (Question-Conditioned Consistency Verifier for Negation) deterministically repairs the measured polarity-confused subset without retraining, raising MedGemma and Qwen2.5-VL to 96.60% and 95.32% accuracy on the direct presence probe. These results show that standard accuracy can hide a clinically meaningful inference-time polarity failure. Source code and benchmark construction scripts are available at https://github.com/fangzr/cxr-contrabench-code.
261. ❌ ChartZero: Synthetic Priors Enable Zero Shot Chart Data Extraction
作者: Md Touhidul Islam, Yasir Mahmud, Sujan Kumar Saha, Mark Tehranipoor, Farimah Farahmandi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05820v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 data extraction from line charts remains fundamentally bottlenecked by extreme stylistic diversity and a severe scarcity of comprehensively annotated, real-world datasets. Current end-to-end pipelines depend heavily on costly manual annotations, crippling their ability to generalize across arbitrary aesthetics and grid layouts. Furthermore, existing models suffer from two critical failure modes during reconstruction. First, extracting thin, intersecting curves frequently causes structural fragmentation and the erasure of fine visual details, as standard architectures struggle against complex backgrounds. Second, semantic association is notoriously error-prone; current pipelines rely on rigid spatial heuristics that easily break down against the unpredictable legend placements of in-the-wild charts. Finally, measuring true progress is hindered by evaluation protocols that assess isolated sub-tasks rather than holistic, end-to-end data reconstruction. To address these foundational issues, we introduce ChartZero, a parsing framework that leverages synthetic priors to enable robust zero-shot chart data extraction. By training exclusively on a purely synthetic dataset of simple mathematical functions, our model completely bypasses the real-world annotation bottleneck. We overcome curve fragmentation via a novel Global Orthogonal Instance (GOI) loss, and replace brittle spatial rules with an open-vocabulary, Vision-Language Model (VLM)-guided legend matching strategy. Accompanied by a new metric and benchmark specifically designed for full end-to-end reconstruction, our evaluations demonstrate that ChartZero significantly advances generalized plot digitization without requiring real-world supervision. Code and dataset will be released upon acceptance.
262. ❌ Na-IRSTD: Enhancing Infrared Small Target Detection via Native-Resolution Feature Selection and Fusion
作者: Qian Xu, Chi Zhang, Qiming Zhang, Xi Li, Haojuan Yuan, Mingjin Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05804v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Infrared small target detection (IRSTD) faces the inherent challenge of precisely localizing dim targets amid complex background clutter. While progress has been made, existing methods usually follow conventional strategies to downsample features and discard small targets’ details, resulting in suboptimal performance. In this paper, we present Na-IRSTD, a native-resolution feature extraction and fusion framework for IRSTD. This framework elegantly incorporates native-resolution features to preserve subtle target cues, overcoming the resolution limitations of existing infrared approaches and significantly improving the model’s ability to localize small targets. We also introduce an effective token reduction and selection strategy, which selects target patches with high accuracy and confidence, boosting the low-level details of the feature while effectively reducing native-resolution patch tokens compared to dense processing, thereby avoiding imposing an unbearable computational burden. Extensive experiments demonstrate the robustness and effectiveness of our token reduction and selection strategy across multiple public datasets. Ultimately, our Na-IRSTD model achieves state-of-the-art performance on four benchmarks.
263. ❌ Why Global LLM Leaderboards Are Misleading: Small Portfolios for Heterogeneous Supervised ML
作者: Jai Moondra, Ayela Chughtai, Bhargavi Lanka, Swati Gupta 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06656v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Ranking LLMs via pairwise human feedback underpins current leaderboards for open-ended tasks, such as creative writing and problem-solving. We analyze ~89K comparisons in 116 languages from 52 LLMs from Arena, and show that the best-fit global Bradley-Terry (BT) ranking is misleading. Nearly 2/3 of the decisive votes cancel out, and even the top 50 models according to the global BT ranking are statistically indistinguishable (pairwise win probabilities are at most 0.53 within the top 50 models). We trace this failure to strong, structured heterogeneity of opinions across language, task, and time. Moreover, we find an important characteristic - language plays a key role. Grouping by language (and families) increases the agreement of votes massively, resulting in two orders of magnitude higher spread in the ELO scores (i.e., very consistent rankings). What appears as global noise is in fact a mixture of coherent but conflicting subpopulations. To address such heterogeneity in supervised machine learning, we introduce the framework of $(λ, ν)$-portfolios, which are small sets of models that achieve a prediction error at most $λ$, “covering” at least a $ν$ fraction of users. We formulate this as a variant of the set cover problem and provide guarantees using the VC dimension of the underlying set system. On the Arena data, our algorithms recover just 5 distinct BT rankings that cover over 96% of votes at a modest $λ$, compared to the 21% coverage by the global ranking. We also provide a portfolio of 6 LLMs that cover twice as many votes as the top-6 LLMs from a global ranking. We further construct portfolios for a classification problem on the COMPAS dataset using an ensemble of fairness-regularized classification models and show that these portfolios can be used to detect blind spots in the data, which might be of independent interest to policymakers.
264. ❌ Inductive Venn-Abers and related regressors
作者: Ivan Petej, Vladimir Vovk 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06646v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Venn-Abers predictors are probabilistic predictors that enjoy appealing properties of validity, but their major limitation is that they are applicable only to the case of binary classification, with a recent extension to bounded regression. We generalize them to the case of unbounded regression, which requires adding an element of conformal prediction. In our simulation and empirical studies we investigate the predictive efficiency of point regressors derived from Venn-Abers regressors and argue that they somewhat improve the predictive efficiency of standard regressors for larger training sets.
265. ❌ Edge-specific signal propagation on mature chromophore-region 3D mechanism graphs for fluorescent protein quantum-yield prediction
作者: Yuchen Xiong, Swee Keong Yeap, Steven Aw Yoong Kit 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06644v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Fluorescent protein quantum yield (QY) is governed by the mature chromophore and its three-dimensional microenvironment rather than sequence identity alone. Protein language models and emission-band averages capture global trends, but do not model how local physical signals act on specific chromophore regions. We present a chromophore-centred mechanism graph algorithm for QY prediction. Each PDB structure is converted into a typed 3D residue graph, registered to a mature-CRO state, partitioned into phenolate, bridge and imidazolinone regions, and transformed by channel-signal-region propagation. The representation contains 121 enrichment features; after removing identity shortcuts, 52 non-identity features are used for band-specific ExtraTrees regression. Because each feature encodes a contact channel, seed signal and target CRO region, interpretation is intrinsic rather than post hoc. On a 531-protein benchmark, the method achieved the best random-CV performance among model-based baselines (R = 0.772 +/- 0.008, MAE = 0.131 +/- 0.002), exceeding Band mean (R = 0.632), ESM-C (R = 0.734) and SaProt (R = 0.731), and ranked first in bright screening (Bright P@5 = 0.704). Under homology control, the advantage was clearest in the remote bucket (<50% similarity; R = 0.697 versus 0.633, 0.575 and 0.408), with the strongest overall bright/dark Top-K screening. Stable selected features recovered band-specific mechanisms: aromatic packing and clamp asymmetry in GFP-like proteins, charge/clamp balance in Red proteins, and flexibility-risk/bulky-contact features in Far-red proteins. Source code, feature tables and evaluation scripts are available from the first author upon request. Contact: yuchenak05@gmail.com
266. ❌ Crafting Reversible SFT Behaviors in Large Language Models
作者: Yuping Lin, Pengfei He, Yue Xing, Yingqian Cui, Jiayuan Ding, Subhabrata Mukherjee, Hui Liu, Zhen Xiang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06632v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 fine-tuning (SFT) induces new behaviors in large language models, yet imposes no structural constraint on how these behaviors are distributed within the model. Existing behavior interpretation methods, such as circuit attribution approaches, identify sparse subnetworks correlated with SFT-induced behaviors post-hoc. However, such correlations do not imply causal necessity, limiting the ability to selectively control SFT-induced behaviors at inference time. We pursue an alternative by asking: can an SFT-induced behavior be deliberately compressed into a sparse, mechanistically necessary subnetwork, termed a carrier, while remaining controllable at inference time without weight modification? We propose (a) Loss-Constrained Dual Descent (LCDD), which constructs such carriers by jointly optimizing routing masks and model weights under an explicit utility budget, and (b) SFT-Eraser, a soft prompt optimized via activation matching on extracted carrier channels, to reverse the SFT-induced behavior. Across safety, fixed-response, and style behaviors on multiple model families, LCDD yields sparse carriers that preserve target behaviors while enabling strong reversion when triggered by SFT-Eraser. Ablations further establish that the sparse structure is the key precondition for reversal: the same trigger optimization fails on standard SFT models, confirming that structure rather than trigger design is the operative factor. These results provide direct evidence that the learned carriers are causally necessary for the behaviors, pointing to a new direction for systematically localizing and selectively suppressing SFT-induced behaviors in deployed models.
267. ❌ Hybrid Quantum-Classical GANs for the Generation of Adversarial Network Flows
作者: Prateek Paudel, Nitin Jha, Abhishek Parakh, Mahadevan Subramaniam 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06629v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Classical generative adversarial networks (GANs) have been applied to generate adversarial network traffic capable of attacking intrusion detection systems, but they suffer from shortcomings such as the need for large amounts of high-dimensional datasets, mode collapse, and high computational overhead. In this work, we propose a hybrid quantum-classical GAN (QC-GAN) framework where a variational quantum generator is used to generate synthetic network traffic flows mimicking malicious traffic using latent representations. Instead of sampling classical noise vectors, we encode the latent vector (the hidden features) as a quantum state, which is the basis for claiming more expressive latent representations and reducing computational overhead. A classical discriminator will be trained on real-world datasets (UNSW-NB15) and the proposed QC-GAN-generated fake network flows. In this configuration, the generator aims to minimize the discriminator’s ability to distinguish real from fake traffic, while the discriminator aims to maximize its classification accuracy, in an iterative manner. In our attack model, we assume that the attacker is a state actor with access to limited quantum computing power, whereas the discriminator is chosen to be classical, as will likely be the case for most end users and organizations. We test the generated flows using classical intrusion detection system (IDS) models, such as a random forest classifier and a convolutional neural network-based classifier, for their ability to bypass the detection process. This work aims to highlight the possibilities of quantum machine learning as a means of generating advanced attack flows and stress testing classical IDS. Lastly, we further evaluate how hardware-based noise affects these attacks to offer a new perspective on IDS, highlighting the need for a quantum resilient defense system.
268. ❌ LiVeAction: a Lightweight, Versatile, and Asymmetric Neural Codec Design for Real-time Operation
作者: Dan Jacobellis, Neeraja J. Yadwadkar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06628v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 sensors generate rich, high-fidelity data, yet applications operating on wearable or remote sensing devices remain constrained by bandwidth and power budgets. Standardized codecs such as JPEG and MPEG achieve efficient trade-offs between bitrate and perceptual quality but are designed for human perception, limiting their applicability to machine-perception tasks and non-traditional modalities such as spatial audio arrays, hyperspectral images, and 3D medical images. General-purpose compression schemes based on scalar quantization or resolution reduction are broadly applicable but fail to exploit inherent signal redundancies, resulting in suboptimal rate-distortion performance. Recent generative neural codecs, or tokenizers, model complex signal dependencies but are often over-parameterized, data-hungry, and modality-specific, making them impractical for resource-constrained environments. We introduce a Lightweight, Versatile, and Asymmetric neural codec architecture (LiVeAction), that addresses these limitations through two key ideas. (1) To reduce the complexity of the encoder to meet the resource constraints of the execution environments, we impose an FFT-like structure and reduce the overall size and depth of the neural-network-based analysis transform. (2) To allow arbitrary signal modalities and simplify training, we replace adversarial and perceptual losses with a variance-based rate penalty. Our design produces codecs that deliver superior rate-distortion performance compared to state-of-the-art generative tokenizers, while remaining practical for deployment on low-power sensors. We release our code, experiments, and python library at https://github.com/UT-SysML/liveaction .
269. ❌ PianoCoRe: Combined and Refined Piano MIDI Dataset
作者: Ilya Borovik 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06627v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Symbolic music datasets with matched scores and performances are essential for many music information retrieval (MIR) tasks. Yet, existing resources often cover a narrow range of composers, lack performance variety, omit note-level alignments, or use inconsistent naming formats. This work presents PianoCoRe, a large-scale piano MIDI dataset that unifies and refines major open-source piano corpora. The dataset contains 250,046 performances of 5,625 pieces written by 483 composers, totaling 21,763 h of performed music. PianoCoRe is released in tiered subsets to support different applications: from large-scale analysis and pre-training (PianoCoRe-C and deduplicated PianoCoRe-B) to expressive performance modeling with note-level score alignment (PianoCoRe-A/A*). The note-aligned subset, PianoCoRe-A, provides the largest open-source collection of 157,207 performances aligned to 1,591 scores to date. In addition to the dataset, the contributions are: (1) a MIDI quality classifier for detecting corrupted and score-like transcriptions and (2) RAScoP, an alignment refinement pipeline that cleans temporal alignment errors and interpolates missing notes. The analysis shows that the refinement reduces temporal noise and eliminates tempo outliers. Moreover, an expressive performance rendering model trained on PianoCoRe demonstrates improved robustness to unseen pieces compared to models trained on raw or smaller datasets. PianoCoRe provides a ready-to-use foundation for the next generation of expressive piano performance research.
270. ❌ Online Bayesian Calibration under Gradual and Abrupt System Changes
作者: Yang Xu, Chiwoo Park 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06612v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Bayesian model calibration is central to digital twins and computer experiments, as it aligns model outputs with field observations by estimating calibration parameters and correcting systematic model bias. Classical Bayesian calibration introduces latent parameters and a discrepancy function to model bias, but suffers from parameter–discrepancy confounding and is typically formulated as an offline procedure under a stationary data-generating assumption. These limitations are restrictive in modern digital twin applications, where systems evolve over time and may exhibit gradual drift and abrupt regime shifts. While data assimilation methods enable sequential updates, they generally do not explicitly model systematic bias and are less effective under abrupt changes. We propose Bayesian Recursive Projected Calibration (BRPC), an online Bayesian calibration framework for streaming data under simulator mismatch and nonstationarity. BRPC extends projected calibration to the online setting by separating a discrepancy-free particle update for calibration parameters from a conditional Gaussian process update for discrepancy, preserving identifiability while enabling bias-aware adaptation under gradual system evolution. To handle abrupt changes, BRPC is integrated with restart mechanisms that detect regime shifts and reset the calibration process. We establish theoretical guarantees for both components, including tracking performance under gradual evolution and false-alarm and detection behavior for restart mechanisms. Empirical studies on synthetic and plant-simulation benchmarks show that BRPC improves calibration accuracy under gradual changes, while restart-augmented BRPC further improves robustness and predictive performance under abrupt regime shifts compared to sliding-window Bayesian calibration and data assimilation baselines.
271. ❌ Transformers Efficiently Perform In-Context Logistic Regression via Normalized Gradient Descent
作者: Chenyang Zhang, Yuan Cao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06609v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 demonstrated remarkable in-context learning (ICL) capabilities. The strong ICL performance of transformers is commonly believed to arise from their ability to implicitly execute certain algorithms on the context, thereby enhancing prediction and generation. In this work, we investigate how transformers with softmax attention perform in-context learning on linear classification data. We first construct a class of multi-layer transformers that can perform in-context logistic regression, with each layer exactly performing one step of normalized gradient descent on an in-context loss. Then, we show that our constructed transformer can be obtained through (i) training a single self-attention layer supervised by one-step gradient descent, and (ii) recurrently applying the trained layer to obtain a looped model. Training convergence guarantees of the self-attention layer and out-of-distribution generalization guarantees of the looped model are provided. Our results advance the theoretical understanding of ICL mechanism by showcasing how softmax transformers can effectively act as in-context learners.
272. ❌ DARTS: Targeting Prognostic Covariates in Budget-Constrained Sequential Experiments
作者: Kateryna Husar, Alexander Volfovsky 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06608v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Randomized controlled trials typically assume that prognostic covariates are known and available at no cost. In practice, obtaining high-dimensional pretreatment data is costly, forcing a trade-off between covariate-adaptive precision and a measurement budget. We introduce Dynamic Adaptive Rerandomization via Thompson Sampling (DARTS), which treats covariate acquisition as a sequential optimization problem embedded within a design-based causal inference task. A budgeted combinatorial Thompson sampler learns which covariates are most prognostic across successive batches; selected covariates then drive rerandomization and regression adjustment to reduce batch-level average treatment effect variance. Our primary theoretical contribution is a decoupling result: adaptive covariate selection based on past batches preserves batch-level randomization validity, and the cumulative inverse-variance weighted estimator achieves at least nominal asymptotic coverage. We further derive a Bayes risk bound for the acquisition layer that matches the minimax lower bound up to logarithmic factors. Empirically, DARTS systematically concentrates the budget on informative features, significantly closing the efficiency gap to oracle designs while maintaining strict inferential validity.
273. ❌ How Many Iterations to Jailbreak? Dynamic Budget Allocation for Multi-Turn LLM Evaluation
作者: Shai Feldman, Yaniv Romano 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06605v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 and predicting the performance of large language models (LLMs) in multi-turn conversational settings is critical yet computationally expensive; key events – e.g., jailbreaks or successful task completion by an agent – often emerge only after repeated interactions. These events might be rare, and under any feasible computational budget, remain unobserved. Recent conformal survival frameworks construct reliable lower predictive bounds (LPBs) on the number of iterations to trigger the event of interest, but rely on static budget allocation that is inefficient in multi-turn setups. To address this, we introduce \emph{Dynamic Allocation via PRojected Optimization} (DAPRO), the first theoretically valid dynamic budget allocation framework for bounding the time-to-event in multi-turn LLM interactions. We prove that DAPRO satisfies the budget constraint and provides distribution-free, finite-sample coverage guarantees without requiring the conditional independence between censoring and event times assumed by prior conformal survival approaches. A key theoretical contribution is a novel coverage bound that scales with the square root of the mean censoring weight rather than the worst-case weight, yielding provably tighter guarantees than prior work. Furthermore, DAPRO can be employed to obtain unbiased, low-variance estimates of population-level evaluation metrics, such as the jailbreak rate, under limited computing resources. Comprehensive experiments across agentic task success, adversarial jailbreaks, toxic content generation, and RAG hallucinations using LLMs such as Llama 3.1 and Qwen 2.5 demonstrate that DAPRO consistently achieves coverage closer to the nominal level with lower variance than static baselines, while satisfying the budget constraint.
274. ❌ Weight-Decay Turns Transformer Loss Landscapes Villani: Functional-Analytic Foundations for Optimization and Generalization
作者: Abhijit Das, Sayantan Dutta 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06599v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Weight decay is widely used as a regularizer in large language models, yet its precise role in shaping Transformer loss landscapes remains theoretically underexplored. This paper provides the first rigorous functional-analytic characterization of the standard Transformer objective–cross-entropy loss with $L^2$ regularization–by proving it satisfies Villani’s criteria for coercive energy functions. Specifically, we show that the regularized loss $\mathcal{F}$ is infinitely differentiable, grows at least quadratically, has Gaussian-integrable tails, and satisfies the differential growth condition $-Δ\mathcal{F} + \tfrac{1}{s}|\nabla\mathcal{F}|^{2} \to \infty$ as $|θ| \to \infty$ for all $s>0$. From this structure, we derive explicit log-Sobolev and Poincaré constants $C_{\mathrm{LS}} \leq λ^{-1} + d/λ^{2}$, linking the regularization strength $λ$ and model dimension $d$ to finite-time convergence guarantees for noisy stochastic gradient descent and PAC-Bayesian generalization bounds that tighten with increasing $λ$. To validate our theory, we introduce a scalable Villani diagnostic $Ψ_s(θ) = -Δ\mathcal{F} + s^{-1}|\nabla \mathcal{F}|^2$ and estimate it efficiently using Hutchinson trace probes in models with over 100M parameters. Experiments on GPT-Neo-125M across Penn Treebank and WikiText-103 confirm the predicted quadratic growth of $Ψ_s$, spectral inflation of the Hessian, and exponential convergence behavior consistent with our log-Sobolev analysis. These results demonstrate that weight decay not only improves generalization empirically but also establishes the mathematical conditions required for fast Langevin mixing and theoretically grounded curvature-aware optimization in deep learning.
275. ❌ FedAttr: Towards Privacy-preserving Client-Level Attribution in Federated LLM Fine-tuning
作者: Su Zhang, Junfeng Guo, Heng Huang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06596v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Watermark radioactivity testing type of methods can detect whether a model was trained on watermarked documents, and have become key tools for protecting data ownership in the fine-tuning of large language models (LLMs). Existing works have proved their effectiveness in centralized LLM fine-tuning. However, this type of method faces several challenges and remains underexplored in federated learning (FL), a widely-applied paradigm for fine-tuning LLMs collaboratively on private data across different users. FL mainly ensures privacy through secure aggregation (SA), which allows the server to aggregate updates while keeping clients’ updates private. This mechanism preserves privacy but makes it difficult to identify which client trained on watermarked documents. In this work, we propose FedAttr, a new client-level attribution protocol for FL. FedAttr identifies which clients trained on watermarked data via a paired-subset-difference mechanism, while preserving the privacy guarantees of SA and FL performance. FedAttr proceeds in three steps: (i) estimate each client’s update by differencing two SA queries, (ii) score the estimate with the watermark detector via differential scoring, and (iii) combine scores across rounds via Stouffer method. We theoretically show that FedAttr produces an unbiased estimator of each client’s update with bounded mutual information leakage (i.e., $O(d^*/N)$ per-round update). Moreover, FedAttr empirically achieves 100% TPR and 0% FPR, outperforming all baselines by at least 44.4% in TPR or 19.1% in FPR, with only 6.3% overhead relative to FL training time. Ablation studies confirm that FedAttr is robust to protocol parameters and configurations.
276. ❌ ReActor: Reinforcement Learning for Physics-Aware Motion Retargeting
作者: David Müller, Agon Serifi, Sammy Christen, Ruben Grandia, Espen Knoop, Moritz Bächer 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06593v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Retargeting human kinematic reference motion onto a robot’s morphology remains a formidable challenge. Existing methods often produce physical inconsistencies, such as foot sliding, self-collisions, or dynamically infeasible motions, which hinder downstream imitation learning. We propose a bilevel optimization framework that jointly adapts reference motions to a robot’s morphology while training a tracking policy using reinforcement learning. To make the optimization tractable, we derive an approximate gradient for the upper-level loss. Our framework requires only a sparse set of semantic rigid-body correspondences and eliminates the need for manual tuning by identifying optimal values for a parameterization expressive enough to preserve characteristic motion across different embodiments. Moreover, by integrating retargeting directly with physics simulation, we produce physically plausible motions that facilitate robust imitation learning. We validate our method in simulation and on hardware, demonstrating challenging motions for morphologies that differ significantly from a human, including retargeting onto a quadruped.
277. ❌ BRICKS: Compositional Neural Markov Kernels for Zero-Shot Radiation-Matter Simulation
作者: Richard Hildebrandt, Evangelos Kourlitis, Baran Hashemi, Manuel Bünstorf, Thierry Meyer, Nikola Boskov, Michael Kagan, Dan Rosenbaum, Sanmay Ganguly, Lukas Heinrich 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06591v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 strategy for compositional neural surrogates for radiation-matter interactions, a key task spanning domains from particle physics through nuclear and space engineering to medical physics. Exploiting the locality and the Markov nature of particle interactions, we create a \emph{next-particle prediction} kernel using hybrid discrete-continuous transformer models based on Riemannian Flow Matching on product manifolds. The model generates variable-sized typed sets of particles and radiation side effects that are the result of the interaction of an incident particle with a material volume. The resulting kernel can be composed to simulate unseen large-scale material distributions in a zero-shot manner. Unlike mechanistic simulators, our model is designed to be differentiable, provides tractable likelihoods for future downstream applications. A significant computational speed-up on GPU compared to CPU-bound mechanistic simulation is observed for single-kernel execution. We evaluate the model at the kernel level and demonstrate predictive stability over multi-round autoregressive rollouts. We additionally release a novel 20M-event radiation-matter interaction dataset for further research.
278. ❌ Distributionally-Robust Learning to Optimize
作者: Vinit Ranjan, Jisun Park, Bartolomeo Stellato 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06585v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 distributionally robust approach to learning hyperparameters for first-order methods in convex optimization. Given a dataset of problem instances, we minimize a Wasserstein distributionally robust version of the performance estimation problem (PEP) over algorithm parameters such as step sizes. Our framework unifies two extremes: as the robustness radius vanishes, we recover classical learning to optimize (L2O); as it grows, we recover worst-case optimal algorithm design via PEP. We solve the resulting problem with stochastic gradient descent, differentiating through the solution of an inner semidefinite program at each step. We prove high-probability bounds showing that the true risk of the learned algorithm is at most the in-sample L2O optimum plus a slack that shrinks with the sample size, and is no worse than the worst-case PEP bound. On unconstrained quadratic minimization, LASSO, and linear programming benchmarks, our learned algorithms achieve strong out-of-sample performance with certifiable robustness, outperforming both worst-case optimal and vanilla L2O baselines.
279. ❌ On the Safety of Graph Representation Learning
作者: Xiaoguang Guo, Zehong Wang, Ziming Li, Shawn Spitzel, Soonwoo Kwon, Tianyi Ma, Yanfang Ye, Chuxu Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06576v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 (GRL) has evolved from topology-only graph embeddings to task-specific supervised GNNs, and more recently to reusable representations and graph foundation models (GFMs). However, existing evaluations mainly measure clean transfer, adaptation, and task coverage. It remains unclear whether GRL methods stay reliable when deployment stresses affect graph signals, graph contexts, label support, structural groups, or predictive evidence. We introduce GRL-Safety, a multi-axis safety evaluation benchmark for GRL. GRL-Safety evaluates twelve representative methods, spanning topology-only embedding methods, supervised GNNs, self-supervised graph models, and GFMs, on twenty-five graph datasets under standardized evaluation conditions while preserving method-native adaptation. The evaluation covers five safety axes: corruption robustness, OOD generalization, class imbalance, fairness, and interpretation, with per-axis and sub-condition reporting rather than a single aggregate score. Our analysis yields three cross-axis insights that can inspire future research. First, safety behavior is shaped by the interaction between representation design and the stressed graph factor, rather than by method family alone. Second, foundation-era methods show axis-specific strengths rather than broad safety dominance. Third, several deployment regimes remain difficult even for the best evaluated method, revealing capability gaps that require new robustness, adaptation, or training objectives beyond model selection. The benchmark, evaluation protocols, and code are available at: https://github.com/GXG-CS/GRL-Safety.
280. ❌ CLAD: A Clustered Label-Agnostic Federated Learning Framework for Joint Anomaly Detection and Attack Classification
作者: Iason Ofeidis, Nikos Papadis, Randeep Bhatia, Leandros Tassiulas, TV Lakshman 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06571v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 expansion of the Internet of Things (IoT) and Industrial IoT (IIoT) has created a massive, heterogeneous attack surface that challenges traditional network security mechanisms. While Federated Learning (FL) offers a privacy-preserving alternative to centralized Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS), standard approaches struggle to generalize across diverse device behaviors and typically fail to utilize the vast amounts of unlabeled data present in realistic edge environments. To bridge these gaps, we propose CLAD, a holistic framework that seamlessly incorporates Clustered Federated Learning (CFL) with a novel Dual-Mode Micro-Architecture ($\text{DM}^2\text{A}$). This unified approach simultaneously tackles the two primary bottlenecks of IoT security: device heterogeneity and label scarcity. The $\text{DM}^2\text{A}$ component features a shared encoder followed by two branches, enabling joint unsupervised anomaly detection and supervised attack classification; this allows the framework to harvest intelligence from both labeled and unlabeled clients. Concurrently, the clustering component dynamically groups devices with congruent traffic patterns, preventing global model divergence. By carefully combining these elements, CLAD ensures that no data is discarded and distinct operational patterns are preserved. Extensive evaluations demonstrate that this integrated approach significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, achieving a 30% relative improvement in detection performance in scenarios with 80% unlabeled clients, with only half the communication cost.
281. ❌ SNAPO: Smooth Neural Adjoint Policy Optimization for Optimal Control via Differentiable Simulation
作者: Dmitri Goloubentsev, Natalija Karpichina 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06570v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Many real-world problems require sequential decisions under uncertainty: when to inject or withdraw gas from storage, how to rebalance a pension portfolio each month, what temperature profile to run through a pharmaceutical reactor chain. Dynamic programming solves small instances exactly but scales exponentially in state dimensions. Black-box reinforcement learning handles high-dimensional states but trains slowly and produces no sensitivities. We introduce SNAPO (Smooth Neural Adjoint Policy Optimization), a framework that embeds a neural policy inside a known, differentiable simulator, replaces hard constraints with smooth approximations, and computes exact gradients of the objective with respect to all policy parameters and all inputs in a single adjoint pass. We demonstrate SNAPO on three domains: natural gas storage (training in under a minute, 365 forward curve sensitivities at no additional cost per sensitivity), pension fund asset-liability management (6.5x-200x sensitivity speedup over bump-and-revalue, scaling with the number of risk factors), and pharmaceutical manufacturing (cross-unit sensitivities through a 4-unit process chain, with 20 ICH Q8 regulatory sensitivities from 5 adjoint passes in 74.5 milliseconds). All sensitivities are produced by the same backward pass that trains the policy, at a cost proportional to one reverse pass regardless of how many sensitivities are computed.
282. ❌ Dynamic Treatment on Networks
作者: Bengusu Nar, Jiguang Li, Veronika Ročková, Panos Toulis 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06564v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 networks, effective dynamic treatment allocation requires deciding both whom to treat and also when, so as to amplify policy impact through spillovers. An early intervention at a well-connected node can trigger cascades that change which nodes are worth targeting in the next period. Existing treatment strategies under network interference are largely static while dynamic treatment frameworks typically ignore network structure altogether. We integrate these perspectives and propose Q-Ising, a three-stage pipeline that (i) estimates network adoption dynamics via a Bayesian dynamic Ising model from a single observed panel, (ii) augments treatment adoption histories with continuous posterior latent states, and (iii) learns a dynamic policy via offline reinforcement learning. The Bayesian mechanism enables uncertainty quantification over dynamic decisions, yielding posterior ensemble policies with interpretable spillover estimates. We provide a finite-sample regret upper bound that decomposes into standard offline-RL uncertainty, network abstraction error, and first stage error in Ising state estimation. We apply our method to data from Indian village microfinance networks and synthetic stochastic block models under simulated heterogeneous susceptible-infected-susceptible (SIS) dynamics and demonstrate that adaptive targeting outperforms static centrality benchmarks.
283. ❌ Criticality and Saturation in Orthogonal Neural Networks
作者: Max Guillen, Jan E. Gerken 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06563v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
It has been known for a long time that initializing weight matrices to be orthogonal instead of having i.i.d. Gaussian components can improve training performance. This phenomenon can be analyzed using finite-width corrections, where the infinite-width statistics are supplemented by a power series in $1/\mathrm{width}$. In particular, recent empirical results by Day et al. show that the tensors appearing in this treatment stabilize for large depth, as opposed to the tensors of i.i.d.-initialized networks. In this article, we derive explicit layer-wise recursion relations for the tensors appearing in the finite-width expansion of the network statistics in the case of orthogonal initializations. We also provide an extension of recently-introduced Feynman diagrams for the corresponding recursions in the i.i.d.-case which are valid to all orders in $1/\mathrm{width}$. Finally, we show explicitly that the recursions we derive reproduce the stability of the finite-width tensors which was observed for activation functions with vanishing fixed point. This work therefore provides a theoretical explanation for the stability of nonlinear networks of finite width initialized with orthogonal weights, closing a long-standing gap in the literature. We validate our theoretical results experimentally by showing that numerical solutions of our recursion relations and their analytical large-depth expansions agree excellently with Monte-Carlo estimates from network ensembles.
284. ❌ Feature Dimensionality Outweighs Model Complexity in Breast Cancer Subtype Classification Using TCGA-BRCA Gene Expression Data
作者: Meena Al Hasani 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06562v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 classification of breast cancer subtypes from gene expression data is critical for diagnosis and treatment selection. However, such datasets are characterized by high dimensionality and limited sample size, posing challenges for machine learning models. In this study, we evaluate the impact of model complexity and feature selection on subtype classification performance using TCGA-BRCA gene expression data. Logistic regression, random forest, and support vector machine (SVM) models were trained using varying numbers of highly variable genes (50 to 20,518). Performance was evaluated using stratified 5-fold cross-validation and assessed with accuracy and macro F1 score. While all models achieved high accuracy, macro F1 analysis revealed substantial differences in subtype-level performance. Logistic regression demonstrated the most stable and balanced performance across subtypes, including improved detection of rare classes. Random forest underperformed on minority subtypes despite strong overall accuracy, while SVM showed sensitivity to feature dimensionality. These findings highlight the importance of model simplicity, evaluation metrics, and feature selection in high-dimensional biological classification tasks.
285. ❌ Optimal Counterfactual Search in Tree Ensembles: A Study Across Modeling and Solution Paradigms
作者: Awa Khouna, Youssouf Emine, Julien Ferry, Thibaut Vidal 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06561v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Trust in counterfactual explanations depends critically on whether their recommended changes are truly minimal: suboptimal explanations may vastly overshoot the actual changes needed to alter a decision, and heuristic errors can affect individuals unevenly, giving some users relevant recourse while assigning others unnecessarily costly recommendations. Consequently, we study the problem of computing optimal counterfactual explanations for tree ensembles under plausibility and actionability constraints. This is a combinatorial problem: for a fixed model, counterfactual search boils down to selecting consistent branching decisions and threshold-defined regions under a distance objective. We exploit this structure through CPCF, a constraint programming (CP) formulation in which numerical features are encoded as interval domains induced by split thresholds, while discrete features retain native finite-domain representations. This yields a compact finite-domain formulation that supports multiple distance objectives without continuous split-boundary search. We then place CPCF in a broader comparison across mathematical programming paradigms: we extend a maximum Boolean satisfiability (MaxSAT) formulation, originally designed for hard-voting random forests, to soft-voting ensembles, and compare against the current state-of-the-art mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) optimal approach. Across ten datasets and three types of tree ensembles, we analyze scalability, anytime performance, and sensitivity to distance metrics. We observe that CP achieves the best overall performance. More importantly, our results identify regimes in which the specific strengths of each paradigm make it best suited: CP is most versatile overall, MaxSAT handles hard-voting ensembles particularly well, and MILP remains competitive in amortized inference settings with a moderate number of split levels.
286. ❌ Diverse Sampling in Diffusion Models with Marginal Preserving Particle Guidance
作者: Gal Vinograd, Idan Achituve, Ethan Fetaya 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06553v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 EDDY (Exact-marginal Diversification via Divergence-free dYnamics), a guidance mechanism for diffusion and flow matching models that promotes diversity among samples generated while maintaining quality. EDDY exploits symmetries of the Fokker-Planck equation, using drift perturbations that change particle trajectories while preserving the evolving marginal distribution. We instantiate this principle through kernel-based anti-symmetric pairwise matrix fields, constructed from the repulsive directions. The resulting divergence-free dynamics promote diversity at the joint particle level while preserving each particle’s marginal distribution without any additional training. As computing the guidance can be computationally expensive in cases such as text-to-image generation with perceptual embeddings, we propose practical approximations as an effective and efficient solution. Experiments on synthetic distributions and text-to-image generation show that EDDY improves diversity while maintaining strong distributional fidelity compared to common baselines.
287. ❌ Sequential Design of Genetic Circuits Under Uncertainty With Reinforcement Learning
作者: Michal Kobiela, Diego A. Oyarzún, Michael U. Gutmann 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06552v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 design of biological systems is hindered by uncertainty arising from both intrinsic stochasticity of biomolecular reactions and variability across laboratory or experimental conditions. In this work, we present a sequential framework to optimize genetic circuits under both forms of uncertainty. By employing simulator models based on differential equations or Markov jump processes alongside a reinforcement learning (RL) policy-based approach, our method suggests experiments that adapt to unknown laboratory conditions while accounting for inherent stochasticity. While previous Bayesian methods address uncertainty through iterative experiment-inference-optimization cycles, they typically require computationally expensive inference and optimization steps after each experimental round, leading to delays. To overcome this bottleneck, we propose an amortized approach trained up-front across a distribution of possible uncertain parameters. This strategy sidesteps the need for explicit parameter inference during the design cycle, enabling immediate, observation-based adaptation. We demonstrate our framework on models for heterologous gene expression and a repressilator circuit, showing that it efficiently handles both molecular noise and cross-laboratory variability.
288. ❌ Hedging Memory Horizons for Non-Stationary Prediction via Online Aggregation
作者: Yutong Wang, Yannig Goude, Qiwei Yao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06541v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 online prediction under distribution shift, where inputs arrive chronologically and outcomes are revealed only after prediction. In this setting, predictors must remain stable in quiet regimes yet adapt when regimes shift, and the right adaptation memory is unknown in advance. We propose MELO (Memory-hedged Exponentially Weighted Least-Squares Online aggregation), a model-agnostic method that hedges across adaptation scales: it wraps any non-anticipating base-predictor pool with exponentially weighted least-squares (EWLS) adaptation experts at multiple forgetting factors, and aggregates raw and EWLS-adapted forecasts with MLpol, a parameter-free online aggregation rule. Under boundedness conditions, we establish deterministic oracle inequalities showing that it competes with both the best raw predictor and the best bounded, time-varying affine combinations of the base predictions, up to a path-length-dependent tracking cost and a sublinear aggregation overhead. We evaluate MELO on French national electricity-load forecasting through the COVID-19 lockdown using no regime indicators, lockdown dates, or policy covariates. MELO reduces overall RMSE by 34.7% relative to base-only MLpol and achieves lower overall RMSE than a TabICL reference supplied with an external COVID policy-response covariate. Moreover, MELO requires only lightweight per-step recursive updates without model retraining.
289. ❌ Diffusion-Based Posterior Sampling: A Feynman-Kac Analysis of Bias and Stability
作者: Matias G. Delgadino, Sebastien Motsch, Advait Parulekar, William Porteous, Sanjay Shakkottai 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06538v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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-based posterior samplers use pretrained diffusion priors to sample from measurement- or reward-conditioned posteriors, and are widely used for inverse problems. Yet their theoretical behavior remains poorly understood: even with exact prior scores, their outputs are biased, and in low-temperature regimes their discretizations can become unstable. We characterize this bias by introducing a tractable surrogate path connecting the true posterior to a standard Gaussian and comparing it to the sampler’s path. Their density ratio satisfies a parabolic PDE whose reaction term measures the accumulated bias. A Feynman-Kac representation then expresses the Radon-Nikodym correction as an explicit path expectation, identifying which posterior regions are over- or under-sampled. We apply this framework to DPS and STSL, a related sampler. For DPS, the correction is an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck path expectation coupling the data conditional covariance with the reward curvature, revealing where DPS over- or under-samples. Next, we reinterpret STSL as an auxiliary drift that steers trajectories toward low-uncertainty regions, flattening the spatially varying part of the DPS reaction term. Finally, we characterize early guidance-stopping, a common mitigation for low-temperature instabilities caused by forward-Euler integration of the vector field. Together, these results clarify sampler bias, explain existing correctives, and guide stable variant designs.
290. ❌ Optimizing Social Utility in Sequential Experiments
作者: Ander Artola Velasco, Stratis Tsirtsis, Manuel Gomez-Rodriguez 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06520v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Regulatory approval of products in high-stakes domains such as drug development requires statistical evidence of safety and efficacy through large-scale randomized controlled trials. However, the high financial cost of these trials may deter developers who lack absolute certainty in their product’s efficacy, ultimately stifling the development of `moonshot’ products that could offer high social utility. To address this inefficiency, in this paper, we introduce a statistical protocol for experimentation where the product developer (the agent) conducts a randomized controlled trial sequentially and the regulator (the principal) partially subsidizes its cost. By modeling the protocol using a belief Markov decision process, we show that the agent’s optimal strategy can be found efficiently using dynamic programming. Further, we show that the social utility is a piecewise linear and convex function over the subsidy level the principal selects, and thus the socially optimal subsidy can also be found efficiently using divide-and-conquer. Simulation experiments using publicly available data on antibiotic development and approval demonstrate that our statistical protocol can be used to increase social utility by more than $35$$%$ relative to standard, non-sequential protocols.
291. ❌ Efficient Techniques for Data Reconstruction, with Finite-Width Recovery Guarantees
作者: Edward Tansley, Roy Makhlouf, Estelle Massart, Coralia Cartis 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06519v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 reconstruction attacks on trained neural networks aim to recover the data on which the network has been trained and pose a significant threat to privacy, especially if the training dataset contains sensitive information. Here, we propose a unified optimization formulation of the data reconstruction problem based on initial and trained parameter values, incorporating state-of-the-art proposals. We show that in the random feature model, this formulation provably leads to training data reconstruction with high probability, provided the network width is sufficiently large; this unprecedented finite-width result uses PAC-style bounds. Furthermore, when the data lies in a low-dimensional subspace, we show that the network width requirement for successful reconstruction can be relaxed, with bounds depending on the subspace dimension rather than the ambient dimension. For general neural network models and unknown data orientations, we propose an efficient reconstruction algorithm that approximates the low-dimensional data subspace through the change in the first-layer weights during training and uses only the last-layer weights for reconstruction, thus reducing the search space dimension and the required network width for high-quality reconstructions. Our numerical experiments on synthetic datasets and CIFAR-10 confirm that our subspace-aware reconstruction approach outperforms standard full-space techniques.
292. ❌ Estimate Level Adjustment For Inference With Proxies Under Random Distribution Shifts
作者: Steven Wilkins-Reeves, Alexandra N. M. Darmon, Deeksha Sinha 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06484v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 scientific domains, including experimentation, researchers rely on measurements of proxy outcomes to achieve faster and more frequent reads, especially when the primary outcome of interest is challenging to measure directly. While proxies offer a more readily accessible observation for inference, the ultimate goal is to draw statistical inferences about the primary outcome parameter and proxy data are typically imperfect in some ways. To correct for these imperfections, current statistical inference methods often depend on strict identifying assumptions (such as surrogacy, covariate/label shift, or missingness assumptions). These assumptions can be difficult to validate and may be violated by various additional sources of distribution shift, potentially leading to biased parameter estimates and miscalibrated uncertainty quantification. We introduce an estimate-level framework, inspired by domain adaptation techniques, to empirically calibrate proxy-based inference. This framework models the proxy-primary metric discrepancy as a random effect at the parameter level, estimating its distribution from aggregated historical observations across past domains (e.g., experiments, time periods, or distinct segments). This method avoids the requirement for retaining individual-level response data. Additionally, this adjustment can be layered on top of existing proxy-correction methods (such as prediction-powered inference or importance weighting) to account for additional biases not addressed by those corrections. To manage uncertainty when the number of historical domains is limited, we provide both a method-of-moments estimator and a domain bootstrap procedure. We further validate this approach using publicly available datasets and real-world experiments.
293. ❌ Risk-Controlled Post-Processing of Decision Policies
作者: Sunay Joshi, Tao Wang, Hamed Hassani, Edgar Dobriban 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06479v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Predictive models are often deployed through existing decision policies that stakeholders are reluctant to change unless a risk constraint requires intervention. We study risk-controlled post-processing: given a deterministic baseline policy, choose a new policy that maximizes agreement with the baseline subject to a chance constraint on a user-specified loss. At the population level, we show that the optimal policy has a threshold structure: it follows the baseline except on contexts where switching to the oracle fallback policy yields a large reduction in conditional violation risk. At the finite-sample level, given a fitted fallback policy and score, we develop a post-processing algorithm that uses calibration data to select a threshold. Leveraging tools from algorithmic stability and stochastic processes, we show that under regularity conditions, in the i.i.d. setting, the expected excess risk of the post-processed policy is $O(\log n/n)$. In the special case when an exact-safe fallback policy is available, the algorithm achieves precise expected risk control under exchangeability. In this setting, we also give high-probability near-optimality guarantees on the post-processed policy. Experiments on a COVID-19 radiograph diagnosis task, an LLM routing problem, and a synthetic multiclass decision task show that targeted post-processing can meet or nearly meet risk budgets while preserving substantially more agreement with the baseline than score-blind random mixing.
294. ❌ Efficient Serving for Dynamic Agent Workflows with Prediction-based KV-Cache Management
作者: Haoyu Zheng, Fangcheng Fu, Jia Wu, Binhang Yuan, Yongqiang Zhang, Hao Wang, Yuanyuan Zhu, Xiao Yan, Jiawei Jiang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06472v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 workflows compose specialized agents to execute complex tasks, and these agents usually share substantial context, allowing KV-Cache reuse to save computation. Existing approaches either manage KV-Cache at agent level and fail to exploit the reuse opportunities within workflows, or manage cache at the workflow level but assume that each workflow calls a static sequence of agents. However, practical workflows are typically dynamic, where the sequence of invoked agents and thus induced cache reuse opportunities depend on the context of each task. To serve such dynamic workflows efficiently, we build a system dubbed PBKV (\textbf{P}rediction-\textbf{B}ased \textbf{KV}-Cache Management). For each workflow, PBKV predicts the agent invocations in several future steps by fusing the guidance from historical workflows and context of the target workflow. Based on the predictions, PBKV estimates the reuse potential of cache entries and keeps the high-potential entries in GPU memory. To be robust to prediction errors, PBKV utilizes the predictions conservatively during both cache eviction and prefetching. Experiments on three workflow benchmarks show that PBKV achieves up to $1.85\times$ speedup over LRU on dynamic workflows, and up to $1.26\times$ speedup over the SOTA baseline KVFlow on the static workflow.
295. ❌ Hitting Time Isomorphism for Multi-Stage Planning with Foundation Policies
作者: Magnus Victor Boock, Abdullah Akgül, Mustafa Mert Çelikok, Melih Kandemir 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06470v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 new operator-theoretic representation learning framework for offline reinforcement learning that recovers the directed temporal geometry of a controlled Markov process from hitting time observations. While prior art often produces symmetric distances or fails to satisfy the triangle inequality, our framework learns a Hilbert-space displacement geometry where expected hitting times are realized as linear functionals of latent displacements. We prove that this representation exists under latent linear closure and is uniquely identifiable up to a bounded linear isomorphism. For finite-dimensional implementations, we show that global hitting-time error is bounded by one-step transition error amplified by the environment’s transient spectral radius. Furthermore, we provide finite-sample guarantees accounting for approximation, statistical complexity, and trajectory-label mismatch. Derived from this theory, we curate Isomorphic Embedding Learning (IEL) as a new goal-agnostic foundation policy learning algorithm that anchors a HILP-style consistency objective with explicit hitting-time regression to ensure that the learned geometry reflects actual decision-time progress. This asymmetric and compositional structure enables robust graph-based multi-stage planning for long-horizon navigation. Our experiments demonstrate that IEL improves the state of the art of learning foundation policy policies from offline maze locomotion data. Our code can be found on https://github.com/MagnusBoock/IEL
296. ❌ Dynamic Controlled Variables Based Dynamic Self-Optimizing Control
作者: Chenchen Zhou, Shaoqi Wang, Hongxin Su, Xinhui Tang, Yi Cao, Shuang-Hua Yang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06469v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Self-optimizing control is a strategy for selecting controlled variables, where the economic objective guides the selection and design of controlled variables, with the expectation that maintaining the controlled variables at constant values can achieve optimization effects, translating the process optimization problem into a process control problem. Currently, self-optimizing control is widely applied to steady-state optimization problems. However, the development of process systems exhibits a trend towards refinement, highlighting the importance of optimizing dynamic processes such as batch processes and grade transitions. This paper formally introduces the self-optimizing control problem for dynamic optimization, termed the dynamic self-optimizing control problem, extending the original definition of self-optimizing control. A novel concept, “dynamic controlled variables” (DCVs), is proposed, and an implicit control policy is presented based on this concept. The paper theoretically analyzes the advantages and generality of DCVs compared to explicit control strategies and elucidates the relationship between DCVs and traditional controllers. Moreover, this paper puts forth a data-driven approach to designing self-optimizing DCVs, which considers DCV design as a mapping identification problem and employs deep neural networks to parameterize the variables. Three case studies validate the efficacy and superiority of DCVs in approximating multi-valued and discontinuous functions, as well as their application to dynamic optimization problems with non-fixed horizons, which traditional self-optimizing control methods are unable to address.
297. ❌ No Triangulation Without Representation: Generalization in Topological Deep Learning
作者: Johannes S. Schmidt, Martin Carrasco, Ernst Röell, Guy Wolf, Nello Blaser, Bastian Rieck 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06467v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 an ever-increasing interest in topological deep learning models that target higher-order datasets, there is no consensus on how to evaluate such models. This is exacerbated by the fact that topological objects permit operations, such as structural refinements, that are not appropriate for graph data. In this work, we extend MANTRA, a benchmark dataset containing manifold triangulations, to a larger class of manifolds with more diverse homeomorphism types. We show that, unlike prior claims, both graph neural networks (GNNs) and higher-order message passing (HOMP) methods can saturate the benchmark. However, we find that this is contingent on the right representation and feature assignment, emphasizing their importance in baseline models. We thus provide a novel evaluation protocol based on representational diversity and triangulation refinement. Surprisingly, we find no indication that existing models are capable of generalizing beyond the combinatorial structure of the data. This points towards a research gap in developing models that understand topological structure independent of scale. Our work thus provides the necessary scaffolding to evaluate future models and enable the development of topology-aware inductive biases.
298. ❌ Diversity Curves for Graph Representation Learning
作者: Katharina Limbeck, Nadja Häusermann, Martin Carrasco, Guy Wolf, Bastian Rieck 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06466v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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-level representations are crucial tools for characterising structural differences between graphs. However, comparing graphs with different cardinalities, even when sampled from the same underlying distribution, remains challenging. Unsupervised tasks in particular require interpretable, scalable, and reliable size-aware graph representations. Our work addresses these issues by tracking the structural diversity of a graph across coarsening levels. The resulting graph embeddings, which we denote diversity curves, are interpretable by construction, efficient, and directly comparable across coarsening hierarchies. Specifically, we track the spread of graphs, a novel isometry invariant that is inherently well-suited for encoding the metric diversity and geometry of graphs. We utilise edge contraction coarsening and prove that this improves expressivity, thus leading to more powerful graph-level representations than structural descriptors alone. Demonstrating their utility over a range of baseline methods in practice, we use diversity curves to (i) cluster and visualise simulated graphs across varying sizes, (ii) distinguish the geometry of single-cell graphs, (iii) compare the structure of molecular graph datasets, and (iv) characterise geometric shapes.
299. ❌ Invariant-Based Diagnostics for Graph Benchmarks
作者: Richard von Moos, Mathieu Alain, Bastian Rieck 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06462v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Progress on graph foundation models is hindered by benchmark practices that conflate the contributions of node features and graph structure, making it hard to tell whether a model actually learns from connectivity, or whether it even needs to. We propose addressing this using graph invariants, i.e., permutation-invariant, task-agnostic structural descriptors that serve as a diagnostic framework for graph benchmarks. We show that (i) invariants are more expressive than standard GNNs, (ii) invariants characterize structural heterogeneity within and across benchmark datasets, (iii) invariants predict multi-task performance, and (iv) simple invariant-based models are competitive with, and sometimes exceed, transformer and message-passing baselines across 26 datasets. Our results suggest that expressivity is not the main driver of predictive performance, and that on tasks where structure matters, a non-trainable structural proxy often matches trained message-passing models. We thus posit that invariant baselines should become a standard for evaluating whether structure is required for a task and whether a model picks up on it, serving as a stepping stone towards graph foundation models.
300. ❌ MINER: Mining Multimodal Internal Representation for Efficient Retrieval
作者: Weien Li, Rui Song, Zeyu Li, Haochen Liu, Gonghao Zhang, Difan Jiao, Zhenwei Tang, Bowei He, Haolun Wu, Xue Liu, Ye Yuan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06460v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Visual document retrieval has become essential for accessing information in visually rich documents. Existing approaches fall into two camps. Late-interaction retrievers achieve strong quality through fine-grained token-level matching but store hundreds of vectors per page, incurring large index footprints and high serving costs. By contrast, dense single-vector retrievers retain storage and latency advantages but consistently lag in quality because they compress all information into a single final-layer embedding. In this work, we first conduct a layerwise diagnostic on single-vector retrievers, revealing that retrieval-relevant signal resides in internal representations. Motivated by these findings, we propose MINER (Mining Multimodal Internal RepreseNtation for Efficient Retrieval), a lightweight plug-in module that probes and fuses internal signals across transformer layers into a single compact embedding without modifying the backbone or sacrificing single-vector efficiency. The first Retrieval-Aligned Layer Probing stage attaches a lightweight probe at each layer, surfacing which dimensions carry retrieval-relevant information. The subsequent Adaptive Sparse Multi-Layer Fusion stage applies performance-adaptive neuron-level masking to the selected layers and fuses the surviving signals into the final dense vector. Across ViDoRe V1/V2/V3, MINER outperforms existing dense single-vector retrievers on the majority of benchmarks, with up to 4.5% nDCG@5 improvement over its corresponding backbone. Compared to strong late-interaction baselines, in some settings MINER substantially narrows the nDCG@$5$ gap to $0.2$ while preserving the storage and serving advantages of dense retrieval.
301. ❌ Scene-Adaptive Continual Learning for CSI-based Human Activity Recognition with Mixture of Experts
作者: Wenhan Zheng, Yuyi Mao, Ivan Wang-Hei Ho 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06447v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Channel state information (CSI)-based human activity recognition (HAR) is vulnerable to performance degradation under domain shifts across varying physical environments. Continual learning (CL) offers a principled way to learn new domains sequentially while preserving past knowledge, but existing CL solutions for CSI-based HAR scale poorly with accumulating domains, rely on a large replay buffer, or incur linearly growing inference cost. In this letter, we propose Scene-Adaptive Mixture of Experts with Clustered Specialists (SAMoE-C), which formulates cross-domain CSI-based HAR as a mixture-of-experts system that enables scene-specific adaptation, via an attention-based semantic router that activates only selected experts for each input. Moreover, we develop a novel training protocol, which requires only a tiny replay buffer for stabilizing domain discrimination of the router. Experimental results on a four-scene CSI dataset demonstrate that SAMoE-C approaches the state-of-the-art accuracy, while maintaining a significantly lower inference cost. By jointly combining modular experts, selective activation with router and a lightweight training protocol, SAMoE-C enables scalable cross-domain CSI-based HAR deployment with low training overhead and high computational efficiency in real-world settings.
302. ❌ FedFrozen: Two-Stage Federated Optimization via Attention Kernel Freezing
作者: Junye Du, Zhenghao Li, Yushi Feng, Long Feng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06446v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 with heterogeneous clients remains a significant challenge for deep learning, primarily due to client drift arising from inconsistent local updates. Existing federated optimization methods typically address this issue through objective-level regularization or update-correction mechanisms. Recent studies, however, suggest that Transformer-based architectures may be inherently more robust than conventional models under heterogeneous federated training. Motivated by this observation, we investigate how different parameter components within the attention mechanism influence federated optimization. Specifically, we decompose the attention module into a query/key block, which determines the attention kernel, and a value block, which performs semantic transformation under the induced kernel. Based on this perspective, we propose FedFrozen, a two-stage federated optimization framework that first performs full-model warm-up training and then freezes the query/key block while continuing to optimize the value block. Under a linear-attention formulation, we show that the warm-up stage can be interpreted as an inexact descent procedure on a regularized kernel-profile objective, while the frozen stage reduces to a restricted value-block optimization problem under a fixed attention kernel. Our analysis further reveals an explicit trade-off that governs the choice of warm-up length. Simulations validate the predicted bias-drift behavior, and real-data experiments demonstrate that FedFrozen improves both the stability and effectiveness of Transformer models in heterogeneous federated learning.
303. ❌ Neural-Actuarial Longevity Forecasting: Anchoring LSTMs for Explainable Risk Management
作者: Davide Rindori 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06438v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 multi-population models, such as the Li-Lee framework, rely on the assumption of mean-reverting country-specific deviations. However, recent data from high-longevity clusters suggest a systemic break in this paradigm. We identify a stationarity paradox where mortality residuals in countries like Sweden and West Germany exhibit persistent unit roots, leading to a systematic mispricing of longevity risk in linear models. To address these non-linearities, we propose Hybrid-Lift, a neural-actuarial framework that combines Hierarchical LSTM networks with a Mean-Bias Correction (MBC) anchoring mechanism. Positioned as a governance-friendly model challenger rather than a replacement of classical approaches, the framework exhibits selective superiority on out-of-sample validation (2012-2020): it outperforms Li-Lee by 17.40% in Sweden and 12.57% in West Germany, while remaining comparable for near-linear regimes such as Switzerland and Japan. We complement the predictive model with an integrated governance suite comprising SHAP-based cross-country influence mapping, a dual uncertainty framework for regulatory capital calibration (Swiss ES 99.0% of +1.153 years), and a reverse stress test identifying the critical shock threshold for solvency buffer exhaustion. This research provides evidence that neural networks, when properly anchored by actuarial principles, can serve as effective model challengers for longevity risk management under the SST and Solvency II standards.
304. ❌ Federated Cross-Client Subgraph Pattern Detection
作者: Selin Ceydeli, Rui Wang, Kubilay Atasu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06433v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Subgraph pattern detection aims to uncover complex interaction structures in graphs. However, state-of-the-art graph neural network (GNN)-based solutions assume centralized access to the entire graph. When graphs are instead distributed across multiple parties, client-local GNN computations diverge from those of a centralized model, resulting in a representation-equivalence gap. We formalize this as a structural observability problem, where subgraph patterns crossing partition boundaries become locally unidentifiable. To bridge this gap, we propose a per-step, layer-wise embedding exchange framework in which clients synchronize intermediate node representations at each layer of the forward pass, without exposing raw features or labels. Under an extended-subgraph assumption and shared model parameters across clients, this framework recovers the same node representations as a centralized GNN over the full graph. Experiments on synthetic directed multigraphs with cycles, bicliques, and scatter-gather patterns show that embedding exchange and federated parameter aggregation are complementary rather than interchangeable: their combination recovers most of the representation gap, provided exchanged embeddings are fresh per-step rather than stale per-epoch.
305. ❌ Decoupled PFNs: Identifiable Epistemic-Aleatoric Decomposition via Structured Synthetic Priors
作者: Richard Bergna, Stefan Depeweg, José Miguel Hernández-Lobato 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06413v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Prior-Fitted Networks (PFNs) amortize Bayesian prediction by meta-learning over a synthetic task prior, but their standard output is a posterior predictive distribution over noisy observations. For sequential decision-making, such as active learning and Bayesian optimization, acquisition should prioritize epistemic uncertainty about the latent signal rather than irreducible aleatoric observation noise. We show that this epistemic–aleatoric split is not identifiable in general from the posterior predictive distribution alone, even when that distribution is known exactly. We then exploit a distinctive advantage of PFNs: because the synthetic data-generating process is under our control, each task can contain an explicit latent signal and noise function, and the generator can provide query-level labels for both the noiseless target and the observation-noise variance. We use these labels to train a decoupled PFN with separate latent-signal and aleatoric heads. The observation-level predictive is induced by convolving the latent signal distribution with the learned noise model. Empirically, epistemic-only acquisition mitigates the failure mode of total-variance exploration in noisy and heteroscedastic settings. In matched comparisons, decoupled models usually improve over tuned observation-level baselines, with the clearest gains in HPO; in broader sweeps, a decoupled model obtains the best average rank in both HPO and synthetic BO.
306. ❌ FRInGe: Distribution-Space Integrated Gradients with Fisher–Rao Geometry
作者: Gabriele Martino, Sebastian Tschiatschek 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06404v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Gradient-based attribution methods are model-faithful and scalable, but Integrated Gradients (IG) can be brittle because explanations depend on heuristic baselines, straight-line paths, discretization, and saturation. We propose Fisher–Rao Integrated Gradients (FRInGe), which defines both the reference and interpolation schedule in predictive distribution space. FRInGe replaces input baselines with a maximum-entropy predictive reference and follows a Fisher-Rao geodesic on the probability simplex. The corresponding input-space trajectory is realized through the pullback Fisher metric and stabilized by KL and Euclidean trust regions; attributions are obtained by integrating input gradients along this trajectory. Across six ImageNet architectures, FRInGe most clearly improves calibration-oriented attribution metrics, especially MAS scores, while remaining competitive on perturbation AUC and infidelity.
307. ❌ SparseForge: Efficient Semi-Structured LLM Sparsification via Annealing of Hessian-Guided Soft-Mask
作者: Liu Hanzuo, Chaofan Lin, Weixuan Sun, Yulong Wang, Key, Rayying, Mingyu Gao 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06402v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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-structured sparsity provides a practical path to accelerate large language models (LLMs) with native hardware support, but post-training semi-structured pruning often suffers from substantial quality degradation due to strong structural coupling. Existing methods rely on large-scale sparse retraining to recover accuracy, resulting in high computational cost. We propose SparseForge, a post-training framework that improves recovery efficiency by directly optimizing the sparsity mask rather than scaling up retraining tokens. SparseForge combines Hessian-aware importance estimation with progressive annealing of soft masks into hardware-executable structured sparsity, enabling stable and efficient sparse recovery. On LLaMA-2-7B under 2:4 sparsity, SparseForge achieves 57.27% average zero-shot accuracy with only $\textbf{5B}$ retraining tokens, surpassing the dense model’s 56.43% accuracy and approaching the 57.52% result of a state-of-the-art method using $\textbf{40B}$ tokens. Such improvements on the accuracy-efficiency trade-off from SparseForge are shown to be consistent across model families.
308. ❌ Covariate Balancing and Riesz Regression Should Be Guided by the Neyman Orthogonal Score in Debiased Machine Learning
作者: Masahiro Kato 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06386v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 position paper argues that, in debiased machine learning, balancing functions should be derived from the Neyman orthogonal score, not chosen only as functions of covariates. Covariate balancing is effective when the regression error entering the score can be represented by functions of covariates alone, and it is the natural finite-dimensional approximation for targets such as ATT counterfactual means. For ATE estimation under treatment effect heterogeneity, however, the score error generally contains treatment-specific components because the outcome regression is a function of the full regressor $X=(D,Z)$. In that case, balancing common functions of $Z$ can leave the treatment-specific component unbalanced. We therefore advocate regressor balancing, implemented by Riesz regression with basis functions of $X$, as the general balancing principle for DML. The position is not that covariate balancing is invalid, but that covariate balancing should be understood as the special case that is appropriate when the score-relevant regression error is a function of covariates alone.
309. ❌ Data-Driven Covariate Selection for Nonparametric and Cycle-Agnostic Causal Effect Estimation
作者: Ana Leticia Garcez Vicente, Gijs van Seeventer, Saber Salehkaleybar 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06385v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 causal effects from observational data requires identifying valid adjustment sets. This task is especially challenging in realistic settings where latent confounding and feedback loops are present. Existing approaches typically assume acyclicity or rely on global causal structure learning, limiting applicability and computational efficiency. In this work, we study a local, data-driven method for covariate selection based on conditional independence information. While this method is known to be sound and complete in acyclic causal models, its validity in the presence of cycles has remained unclear. Our main contribution is to show that these guarantees extend to cyclic causal models. In particular, our result relies on the invariance of conditional independence assertions under $σ$-acyclification. These findings establish a unified, cycle-agnostic perspective on covariate selection and causal effect estimation, showing that the method applies across cyclic and acyclic settings without modification. Empirically, we validate this on extensive synthetic data, showing reliable performance in cyclic causal models.
310. ❌ Independent Learning of Nash Equilibria in Partially Observable Markov Potential Games with Decoupled Dynamics
作者: Philip Jordan, Maryam Kamgarpour 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06377v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 Nash equilibrium learning in partially observable Markov games (POMGs), a multi-agent reinforcement learning framework in which agents cannot fully observe the underlying state. Prior work in this setting relies on centralization or information sharing, and suffers from sample and computational complexity that scales exponentially in the number of players. We focus on a subclass of POMGs with independent state transitions, where agents remain coupled through their rewards, and assume that the underlying fully observed Markov game is a Markov potential game. For this class, we present an independent learning algorithm in which players, observing only their own actions and observations and without communication, jointly converge to an approximate Nash equilibrium. Due to partial observability, optimal policies may in general depend on the full action-observation history. Under a filter stability assumption, we show that policies based on finite history windows provide sufficient approximation guarantees. This enables us to approximate the POMG by a surrogate Markov game that is near-potential, leading to quasi-polynomial sample and computational complexity for independent Nash equilibrium learning in the underlying POMG.
311. ❌ A Unified Pair-GRPO Family: From Implicit to Explicit Preference Constraints for Stable and General RL Alignment
作者: Hao Yu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06375v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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) alignment via reinforcement learning from human preferences (RLHF) suffers from unstable policy updates, ambiguous gradient directions, poor interpretability, and high gradient variance in mainstream pairwise preference learning paradigms. To systematically address these limitations, we establish a unified theoretical framework for preference-based RL optimization centered on the Pair-GRPO family, comprising two tightly coupled variants: Soft-Pair-GRPO and Hard-Pair-GRPO. Soft-Pair-GRPO is a minimal modification of Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) that replaces group-normalized scalar rewards with binary pairwise preference rewards, retaining GRPO’s clipped surrogate and KL-regularized structure. We prove a critical gradient equivalence theorem: under first-order Taylor expansion around the current policy, Soft-Pair-GRPO’s gradient is a positive scalar multiple of standard GRPO’s gradient, explaining its empirical stability despite discarding continuous reward magnitudes. Building on this foundation, we propose Hard-Pair-GRPO, an advanced variant introducing explicit local probability constraints and constrained KL-fitting optimization to further suppress gradient noise and global policy drift. We provide comprehensive theoretical guarantees for both variants–including monotonic policy improvement, deterministic gradient direction, gradient-variance reduction, and dynamic step-size convergence. Extensive experiments on standard LLM alignment benchmarks (HH-RLHF,UltraFeedback) and the MuJoCo continuous control task HalfCheetah-v4 demonstrate that our Pair-GRPO family consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in alignment quality, human preference win rate, training stability, and generalization to general reinforcement learning. Ablation studies validate the critical contributions of each core component.
312. ❌ Beyond the Independence Assumption: Finite-Sample Guarantees for Deep Q-Learning under $τ$-Mixing
作者: Leon Halgryn, Sophie Langer, Janusz M. Meylahn, E. Moritz Hahn 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06373v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Finite-sample analyses of deep Q-learning typically treat replayed data as independent, even though it is sampled from temporally dependent state-action trajectories. We study the Deep Q-networks (DQN) algorithm under explicit dependence by modelling the minibatches used for updating the network as $τ$-mixing. We show that this assumption holds under certain dependence conditions on the underlying trajectories and the mechanism used to sample minibatches. Building on this observation, we extend statistical analyses of DQN with fully connected ReLU architectures to dependent data. We formulate each update as a nonparametric regression problem with $τ$-mixing observations and derive finite-sample risk bounds under this dependence structure. Our results show that temporal dependence leads to a degradation in the statistical rate by inducing an additional dimensionality penalty in the rate exponent, reflecting the reduced effective sample size of $τ$-mixing data. Moreover, we derive the sample complexity of DQN under $tau$-mixing from these risk bounds. Finally, we empirically demonstrate on standard Gymnasium environments that the independence assumption is systematically violated and that replay sampling yields approximately exponentially decaying correlations, supporting our theoretical framework.
313. ❌ The Interplay of Data Structure and Imbalance in the Learning Dynamics of Diffusion Models
作者: Flavio Nicoletti, Chenxiao Ma, Enrico Ventura, Luca Saglietti, Stefano Sarao Mannelli 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06367v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 datasets are inherently heterogeneous, yet how per-class structural differences and sampling imbalance shape the training dynamics of diffusion models-and potentially exacerbate disparities-remains poorly understood. While models typically transition from an initial phase of generalization to memorizing the training set, existing theory assumes homogeneous data, leaving open how class imbalance and heterogeneity reshape these dynamics. In this work, we develop a high-dimensional analytical framework to study class-dependent learning in score-based diffusion models. Analyzing a random-features model trained on Gaussian mixtures, we derive the feature-covariance spectrum to characterize per-class generalization and memorization times. We reveal the explicit hierarchy governing these dynamics: class variance is the primary determinant of learning order-consistently favoring higher-variance classes-while centroid geometry plays a secondary role. Sampling imbalance acts as a modulator that can reverse this ordering and, under strong imbalance, forces minority classes to acquire distinct, delayed speciation times during backward diffusion. Together, these results suggest that diffusion models can memorize some classes while others remain insufficiently learned. We validate our theoretical predictions empirically using U-Net models trained on Fashion MNIST.
314. ❌ Layer Collapse in Diffusion Language Models
作者: Alexander Conzelmann, Albert Catalan-Tatjer, Shiwei Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06366v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 language models (DLMs) have recently emerged as competitive alternatives to autoregressive (AR) language models, yet differences in their activation dynamics remain poorly understood. We characterize these dynamics in LLaDA-8B and identify a striking layer-collapse property: a few early layers exhibit highly similar, collapsed activation patterns dominated by a single large super-outlier persisting over a long token range. Despite its apparent redundancy, this outlier is critical: pruning it causes outputs to degrade into repetitive random token loops. Paradoxically, layers in LLaDA contain more redundant representations overall, with redundancy most pronounced in earlier layers – the reverse of AR models, where deeper layers grow redundant due to undertraining. Our analysis indicates that layer collapse in DLMs is not driven by undertraining but by overtraining: a dominant outlier becomes an indispensable information carrier while remaining representations collapse into redundant structure. These findings have strong practical implications, verified through controlled pre-training experiments. DLMs are surprisingly robust to compression: LLaDA under 3-bit GPTQ quantization drops only -1.8% on GSM8K, whereas Llama-3.1-8B drops -64.7%. Optimal sparsity allocation also reverses between families: at 50% average sparsity, allocating more to early layers in LLaDA yields +8.4% over the reverse strategy, while the same allocation costs Llama -8.4%. Our findings reveal that the DLM training objective fundamentally reshapes layer dynamics relative to AR models, with direct consequences for compression and deployment. Code: github.com/Conzel/super-outlier-dlm.
315. ❌ Preliminary Insights in Chronos Frequency Data Understanding and Reconstruction
作者: Alessandro Pagani, Marco Cominelli, Liying Han, Gaofeng Dong, Sergio Benini, Francesco Gringoli, Mattia Savardi, Mani B. Srivastava, Trevor Bihl, Erik P. Blasch, Daniel O. Brigham, Kara Combs, Lance M. Kaplan, Federico Cerutti 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06361v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 preliminary analysis of the ability of Chronos foundation model to process and internally represent frequency domain information. Foundation models that process time-series data offer practitioners a unified architecture capable of learning generic temporal representations across diverse tasks and domains, reducing the need for task-specific feature engineering and enabling transfer across signal modalities. Despite their growing adoption, the extent to which such models encode fundamental signal properties remains insufficiently characterised. We address this gap by analysing Chronos under controlled conditions, starting from the simplest class of signals: discrete sinusoids generated at fixed frequencies. Using lightweight online minimum description length probes applied to the decoder architecture, we test for the presence and separability of frequency information in the model’s internal representations. The results provide insight into how frequential content is captured across the frequency spectrum and highlight regimes in which representation quality may degrade or require particular care. These findings offer practical guidance for users of Chronos in signal processing and information fusion contexts, and contribute to ongoing efforts to improve the interpretability and evaluation of foundation models for temporal data.
316. ❌ Order-Agnostic Autoregressive Modelling with Missing Data
作者: Ignacio Peis, Pablo M. Olmos, Jes Frellsen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06355v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Order-Agnostic autoregressive models have demonstrated strong performance in deep generative modeling, yet their use in settings with incomplete data remains largely unexplored. In this work, we reinterpret them through the lens of missing data. First, we show that their standard training procedure on fully observed data implicitly performs imputation under a missing completely at random mechanism, resulting in robust out-of-sample imputation performance in settings with high missingness. Second, we introduce the first principled framework for training them directly on incomplete datasets under general missingness mechanisms. Third, we leverage their amortized conditional density estimation to perform active information acquisition, i.e., sequentially selecting the most informative missing variables for downstream prediction or inference. Across a suite of real-world benchmarks, our Missingness-Aware Order-Agnostic Autoregressive Model (MO-ARM) consistently outperforms established imputation baselines.
317. ❌ A Benchmark for Strategic Auditee Gaming Under Continuous Compliance Monitoring
作者: Florian A. D. Burnat, Brittany I. Davidson 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06340v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Continuous post-deployment compliance audits, mandated by emerging regulations such as the EU AI Act and Digital Services Act, create a class of strategic gaming distinct from the one-shot input/output gaming studied in prior work. Regulated systems can delay outcome reporting, drift their reports within plausible noise envelopes, exploit longitudinal sample attrition, and cherry-pick among ambiguous metric definitions. We formalize continuous auditing as a $T$-round Stackelberg game between an auditor that commits to a temporal policy and an adaptive auditee, and identify a structural feature of any noise-aware static-auditor design: a cover regime in which coverage gaps and granularity gaps cannot be closed simultaneously. We make this formal as Observation 1 and show that two minimal extension policies, each derived from the observation, close the regime along orthogonal axes: a sample-size-aware static rule (Periodic-with-floor) closes the granularity-failure case, while a history-conditioned suspicion-escalation policy closes the coverage-failure case for the naive Drift strategy – and neither closes both, exactly as the observation predicts; an audit-aware OffAuditDrift strategy that exploits Stackelberg commitment defeats both. To support empirical study we contribute a non-additive harm decomposition (welfare loss $W$, coverage loss $C$) that exposes how attrition shifts harm from the regulator-accountable surface to a regulator-invisible one; an initial library of five auditee strategies (Delay, Drift, Cherry-pick, Attrition, OffAuditDrift) and five auditor policies, calibrated to summary statistics from published audits of the DSA Transparency Database; and a reproducible simulator with a small, extensible Python interface.
318. ❌ Eliciting associations between clinical variables from LLMs via comparison questions across populations
作者: Fabian Kabus, Kian Kordtomeikel, Thomas Brox, Heinz Wiendl, Daiana Stolz, Harald Binder 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06335v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 training data of large language models (LLMs) comprises a wide range of biomedical literature, reflecting data from many different patient populations. We investigate how it might be possible to recover information on correlation and causal links between patient characteristics, as a key building block for medical decision making. To avoid the pitfalls of direct elicitation, we propose an approach based on structured comparison questions, specifically patient comparison triplet questions. This is combined with a statistical model for the LLM representation that provides estimates of correlations without access to activations or model internals. Intuitively, we consider how similarity decisions of LLMs based on a first variable are affected by providing information on a second variable for one of the patients being assessed. We then induce prompt-level environment shifts to obtain correlation estimates for different subpopulations, which enables an invariant causal prediction (ICP) approach to obtain conservative candidate parent links. We demonstrate the method in two clinical domains, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and multiple sclerosis (MS). Across prompted environments, the elicited correlations are smooth, stable, and clinically interpretable, yet vary in a statistically significant way that supports downstream invariance testing, such that ICP provides a small set of candidate invariant parent links. These results show that indirect elicitation via triplet comparisons can recover meaningful association structure from LLMs and offer a cautious route from implicit correlations to causal statements that are congruent with LLM answering patterns.
319. ❌ Mathematical Modeling of Early Embryonic Cell Cycles of Drosophila melanogaster
作者: Meskerem Abebaw Mebratie, Benedikt Drebes, Katja Kapp, Arno Müller, Werner M. Seiler 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06598v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 the early stages of development, Drosophila melanogaster embryos possess very fast and well-coordinated cell cycles. In the cell cycle, CDK activity is essentially regulated by binding CDK and CycB to form an active complex and by phosphorylating CDK via CDC25 and dephosphorylating it via Wee1. We develop a mathematical model for the embryonic cell cycle which is biochemically sound and which can be rigorously analysed after a model reduction. We show that there exists a region in the parameter space where the model describes oscillations. We then focus on the role of two parameters: the CycB synthesis and the activation coefficient of APC. Our main biological hypothesis is that the first one is responsible for the period lengthening over the first 14 cycles which can be experimentally observed and this hypothesis is supported by numerical simulations of our model: if the CycB synthesis is made time-dependent with a prescribed dynamics, then our simulations show qualitatively a very similar behavior to experimental data reported in the literature.
320. ❌ BioResearcher: Scenario-Guided Multi-Agent for Translational Medicine
作者: Remigiusz Kinas, Joanna Krawczyk, Rafał Powalski, Przemysław Pietrzak, Agnieszka Kowalewska, Krzysztof Kolmus, Maciej Sypetkowski, Łukasz Smoliński, Tomasz Jetka 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05985v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Translational medicine turns underspecified development goals into evidence synthesis that must combine literature, trials, patents, and quantitative multi-omics analysis while preserving identifiers, uncertainty, and retrievable provenance. General-purpose foundation models and off-the-shelf tool-augmented or multi-agent systems are not built for this: they tend to produce single-shot answers or run open-endedly, and fall short on the auditable, scenario-specific workflows that heterogeneous biomedical sources demand. This paper introduces Ingenix BioResearcher, a scenario-guided multi-agent system that maps queries to versioned research playbooks, delegates to specialized subagents over 30+ tools and machine-learning endpoints, mixes structured database access with sandboxed code for genome-scale analyses, and applies claim-level multi-model reconciliation before editorial assembly. We evaluate BioResearcher across unit-level capabilities, open-ended biomedical reasoning, and end-to-end clinical discovery. It leads evaluated baselines on 109 single-step tests (83.49% pass rate; 0.892 average score), achieves strong biomedical benchmark performance (89.33% on BixBench-Verified-50 and the top 0.758 mean score on BaisBench Scientific Discovery), and leads on a 30-query clinical end-to-end benchmark with the highest positive hit rate (74.7% $\pm$ 3.3%) and negative clear rate (96.8% $\pm$ 0.2%). These results show broad, competitive performance across unit-level, open-ended, and end-to-end clinical evaluations.
321. ❌ Planar morphometry via functional shape data analysis and quasi-conformal mappings
作者: Hangyu Li, Gary P. T. Choi 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05778v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 study of shapes is one of the most fundamental problems in life sciences. Although numerous methods have been developed for the morphometry of planar biological shapes over the past several decades, most of them focus solely on either the outer silhouettes or the interior features of the shapes without capturing the coupling between them. Moreover, many existing shape mapping techniques are limited to establishing correspondence between planar structures without further allowing for the quantitative analysis or modelling of shape changes. In this work, we introduce FDA-QC, a novel planar morphometry method that combines functional shape data analysis (FDA) techniques and quasi-conformal (QC) mappings, taking both the boundary and interior of the planar shapes into consideration. Specifically, closed planar curves are represented by their square-root velocity functions and registered by elastic matching in the function space. The induced boundary correspondence is then extended to the entire planar domains by a quasi-conformal map, optionally with landmark constraints. Moreover, the proposed FDA-QC method can naturally lead to a unified framework for shape morphing and shape variation quantification. We apply the FDA-QC method to various leaf and insect wing datasets, and the experimental results show that the proposed combined approach captures morphological variation more effectively than purely boundary-based or interior-based descriptions. Altogether, our work paves a new way for understanding the growth and form of planar biological shapes.
322. ❌ Direct From Darwin: Deriving Advanced Optimizers From Evolutionary First Principles
作者: Daniel Grimmer 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-06 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05284v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Evolutionary computation has long promised to deliver both high-performance optimization tools as well as rigorous scientific simulations of Darwinian evolution. However, modern algorithms frequently abandon evolutionary fidelity for physics-inspired heuristics or superficial biological metaphors. This paper derives a suite of advanced gradient-based optimization algorithms directly from evolutionary first principles. We introduce Darwinian Lineage Simulations (DLS) to prove that, in an asexual context, Fisher’s and Wright’s historically opposed views of evolution are actually formally equivalent. This unification requires carefully partitioning Fisher’s deterministically-evolving total population into Wright’s randomly-drifting sub-populations. We prove that proper bookkeeping requires introducing a specific kind of structured noise (the DLS noise relation). Crucially, however, any bookkeeping choices which satisfy this relation will result in a faithful simulation of evolution. Using this vast representational freedom, we prove that a broad family of battle-tested optimization algorithms are already perfectly compatible with evolutionary dynamics. These include: Stochastic Gradient Descent, Natural Gradient Descent, and the Damped Newton’s method among many others. By simply adding DLS noise (i.e., evolutionarily faithful genetic drift), these algorithms become scientifically valid in silico simulations of Darwinian evolution. Finally, we demonstrate that even the state-of-the-art Adam optimizer can be brought into evolutionary compliance through a minor mathematical surgery.
323. ❌ Resolving the bias-precision paradox with stochastic causal representation learning for personalized medicine
作者: Peisong Zhang, Manqiang Peng, Yuxuan Wu, Pawit Phadungsaksawasdi, Wesley Yeung, Ye Zhang, Trang Nguyen, Qiang Zhang, Nan Liu, Meng Wang, Kee Yuan Ngiam, Yih-Chung Tham, Ching-Yu Cheng, Tianfan Fu, Qingyu Chen, Rosemary Ke, Chang Li, Wenzhuo Yang, Zhenghao Lu, Chunyou Lai, Yu Zhang, Sheng Zhong, Hao Deng, Dianbo Liu 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05706v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 individualized treatment effects from longitudinal observational data is central to data-driven medicine, yet existing methods face a fundamental limitation: reducing confounding bias often suppresses clinically informative heterogeneity, degrading patient-specific predictions. Here, we identify this tension as a bias-precision paradox in causal representation learning and introduce sampling-based maximum mean discrepancy (sMMD), a stochastic alignment strategy that replaces global adversarial balancing with subset-level matching. We instantiate this approach in a framework for counterfactual outcome prediction with attribution-grounded interpretability. Across two large-scale ICU cohorts (n = 27,783), our framework improves accuracy under distribution shift, reducing error by up to 11.5% and substantially increasing recall in high-risk tasks. Mechanistic analyses show that sMMD selectively preserves clinically decisive variables. In human-AI evaluation, our method outperforms clinicians-in-training and large language models, and improves clinician accuracy by 14.7% while reducing decision time, enabling interpretable, real-time clinical decision support.
324. ❌ Enhancing Cryo-EM Density Map Segmentation in Phenix for Improved Atomic Model Building
作者: Chenwei Zhang 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-06 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05259v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 PhenixCraft, a fully automated pipeline for building atomic models from cryo-EM density maps. By integrating AlphaFold predictions, we enhance the map-segmentation step in Phenix during model building, addressing challenges posed by noise and artifacts that traditionally hinder this step. Our results demonstrate PhenixCraft’s superior performance in TM-scores and sequence accuracy, significantly improving upon the limitations and inefficiencies of traditional model building using Phenix.
325. ❌ Modularity Emerges from Action-Functional Constraints in Marine Metabolic Networks: A Biology-Scale Validation of the Network-Weighted Action Principle
作者: Martin G. Frasch 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-05 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05254v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Biological systems operate under simultaneous energetic and informational constraints, yet direct evidence that such constraints shape real metabolic networks is limited. The Network-Weighted Action Principle predicts that networks under these constraints should organize toward high modularity. We tested this prediction in marine microbiome metabolic networks reconstructed from Tara Oceans metagenomes using two complementary approaches. Composite metrics of protein-deployment efficiency and functional-repertoire complexity (n=10) failed under causal-inference diagnostics, with apparent structure dominated by shared-component bias. In contrast, network modularity (n=7) was high (Q ~ 0.987), but this value was shown to arise from sparsity alone. The biologically meaningful signal is the excess over null models: modularity exceeded configuration-model, label-permutation, and bipartite-incidence nulls by Delta Q ~ 0.15-0.40 (p < 0.001), with the largest effect under the bipartite-incidence control. Fine-grained communities recovered by the network partition are not arbitrary: 25% recur across samples, and the most consistent modules map to known functional units, including enzyme subunits, biosynthetic sequences, and transporter complexes. Together, these results show that modularity excess - rather than absolute modularity - is the appropriate signature of biological organization, and that such excess is consistent with cost-minimization principles operating at the scale of natural metabolic networks.
326. ❌ TDDFT Gradients and Nonadiabatic Couplings with Minimal Auxiliary Basis Set Approximation for Fewest-Switches Surface Hopping Dynamics
作者: Cheng Fan, Zhichen Pu, Zehao Zhou, Yuanheng Wang, Yi Qin Gao, Qiming Sun 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06489v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 electronic structure calculations remain a major bottleneck in ab initio nonadiabatic molecular dynamics. We develop an efficient TDDFT-based FSSH implementation in the GPU4PySCF package for medium-sized molecular systems. Our approach combines density fitting, TDDFT with minimal auxiliary basis sets (TDDFT-ris), and an approximate Z-vector solver to reduce the computational cost of TDDFT excited states and derivative coupling calculations. These approximations introduce negligible errors in realistic FSSH workloads while maintaining high computational efficiency. Benchmark results show that, for 73-atom systems with a triple-$ζ$ basis set, individual electronic structure calculations are completed within one minute on a single NVIDIA A100 GPU.
327. ❌ Solvent-induced memory effects in a model electrolyte
作者: Sleeba Varghese, Benjamin Rotenberg, Pierre Illien 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06293v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 fluctuations of ions in polar solvents remain poorly understood theoretically due to the complex coupling between ionic motion and solvent polarization. Indeed, while all-atom resolution can be achieved in numerical simulations, analytical approaches require suitable levels of coarse-graining. In this work, we describe ions and solvent molecules as interacting Brownian particles and use stochastic density functional theory to derive a generalized Langevin equation for the ionic charge density, explicitly accounting for solvent-mediated memory effects. In the regime where there is a clear timescale separation between fast solvent and slow ion dynamics, we obtain simple expressions for dynamical charge structure factors, which are validated by BD simulations. For slow solvents, we predict an emerging two-step relaxation in ionic dynamics. These results provide a mesoscopic approach for ion-solvent dynamics and open pathways to study fluctuation-induced phenomena in electrolytes.
328. ❌ FunctionalAgent: Towards end-to-end on-top functional design
作者: Yuhao Chen, Donald G. Truhlar, Xiao He 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06215v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Multiconfiguration pair-density functional theory (MC-PDFT) offers an efficient and accurate framework for computing electronic energies in strongly correlated molecular systems, with the quality of the on-top functional being a key determinant of its predictive accuracy. Here we introduce FunctionalAgent, an agentic system for fully automated functional development. FunctionalAgent orchestrates a team of specialized sub-agents to decompose the development process into dataset construction, active-space generation, MCSCF calculation and descriptor generation, loss-function construction, and functional fitting, optimization, and evaluation, thereby linking all stages into a closed-loop automated workflow. Using FunctionalAgent, we developed MC26, a hybrid meta-GGA on-top functional that achieves improved overall accuracy on the training set compared with other methods evaluated on the same benchmark dataset. We further introduce COF26, a new functional form that, owing to the optimized training process, achieves the best performance on both the training and test sets.
329. ❌ Variationally Compressing Quantum Circuits to Approximate Nonadiabatic Molecular Quantum Dynamics
作者: Joshua M. Courtney, P. C. Stancil 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06122v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 simulation has begun to penetrate the field of quantum chemistry in hopes of efficiently calculating ground state energies and approximating real-time evolution. With modern research highlighting nonadiabatic dynamics, tunably approximating deep circuits representing potential landscapes becomes crucial for simulating real quantum systems. Variationally approximating unitaries allows for shallower circuits and accuracy tunable to hardware fidelity, so long as the observable quantities are preserved. We show the variational compression of Trotter terms preserve reaction rate coefficients via classical emulation of a hybrid quantum-classical optimization method, as well as fast-forwarded adiabatic dynamics on quantum hardware. Compressed circuits can be incorporated with product-formula-based time evolution to approximate dynamics of a particle in two coupled harmonic potentials, allowing tunability when removing high-cost qubit interactions. Approximate rate coefficients are recovered after substituting terms in a nonadiabatic dynamic process, giving proof-of-principle for observable preservation under variational optimization. Attention is paid to minimizing qubit and gate-count resources.
330. ❌ Assessing excited-state geometry optimization strategies for adiabatic photophysical energies
作者: Amrita Bera, Atreyee Majumdar, Raghunathan Ramakrishnan 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06013v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 prediction of adiabatic $0$-$0$ excited-state energies is crucial for modeling molecular photophysical processes. Here, we benchmark computational strategies for evaluating excited-state energies and singlet-triplet gaps obtained using different geometry-optimization strategies, including time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT), spin-unrestricted Kohn-Sham (UKS) DFT for triplet states (${\rm T}_1$), and state-specific orbital-optimized UKS (ssUKS) DFT for singlet excited states (${\rm S}_1$). Zero-point vibrational energy corrections are evaluated consistently at the optimized geometries and combined with ADC(2) excitation energies for comparison with experimental anion photoelectron spectroscopy data for a representative set of molecules. Among the protocols considered, adiabatic $0$-$0$ energies evaluated at TDDFT-optimized ${\rm S}_1$ and ${\rm T}_1$ geometries show the best agreement with experiment, with a mean absolute error below 0.1 eV. Replacing these geometries with UKS-optimized ${\rm T}_1$ and ssUKS-optimized ${\rm S}_1$ structures yields comparable accuracy. Vertical excitation energies are substantially more sensitive to the choice of geometry than the corresponding ${\rm S}_1$-${\rm T}_1$ gaps, which are comparatively more robust because of partial error cancellation. As a larger case study, we examine rubrene and find that UKS/ssUKS-based geometries remain useful for evaluating singlet-fission energetics. Overall, UKS/ssUKS-based workflows provide an efficient and accurate route to excited-state geometry optimization and to the evaluation of adiabatic $0$-$0$ energies for states with dominant single-determinant character.
331. ❌ Toward Reliable Spectroscopic Analysis of Reaction Kinetics in Polaritonic Chemistry
作者: Robrecht M. A. Vergauwe, J. Jussi Toppari, Gerrit Groenhof 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06002v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 reports suggest that chemical reaction rates can change when reactants are placed inside an optical cavity. These effects have been attributed to the hybridization of molecular vibrational modes with cavity modes into polaritons, but the underlying mechanism remains debated. Recently, attempts to reproduce the key experiments have sometimes failed, which poses also ambiguity and impedes the determination of the possible mechanism. Without a reliable theoretical framework, polaritonic chemistry – which seeks to use optical resonators as catalysts to control reactions – has reached a pivotal stage. Standardized protocols for reproducible cavity experiments are therefore urgently needed. Here, we identify pitfalls in approaches that monitor reaction progress with UV/Vis spectroscopy. Using the Transfer Matrix Method, we analyze a model pseudo-first-order reaction and assess how transient cavity thickness variations, cavity inhomogeneity, and fitting protocols influence the extracted rate constant. We find that changes in cavity thickness upon reactant introduction can strongly distort apparent kinetics when monitoring at a single wavelength, an artifact that can be mitigated by spectral smoothing. Additionally, we demonstrate that, unlike in many previous studies, the asymptotic extinction should be treated as a fitting parameter rather than fixed to the final experimental value. By identifying these pitfalls, our work lays the foundation for more robust analyses and reliable measurements in polaritonic chemistry.
332. ❌ Emergent conserved quantities via irreversibility
作者: Alex Blokhuis, Martijn van Kuppeveld, Daan van de Weem, Robert Pollice 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05934v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Conserved quantities increasingly underpin the inference of physical models. Recently new conserved quantities have been found in this context, that currently lack an interpretation. Here, we show that irreversible reactions in CRNs and Markov Chains lead to emergent conservation laws and broken cycles. Linearly dependent currents - characterized by the “co-production index” - arise due to irreversible reactions. We derive a law relating conserved quantities, broken cycles, and co-production. This resolves a recent conundrum posed by a machine-discovered candidate for a non-integer conservation law. Our findings introduce heretofore overlooked extensions to a widely used index law for CRNs and Markov Chains that undercounts conservation laws. This furnishes new tools and immediate applications for the inference and analysis of models based on conservation laws.
333. ❌ Polarizable atomic multipoles for learning long-range electrostatics
作者: Dongjin Kim, Daniel S. King, Yoonjae Park, Roya Savoj, Sebastien Hamel, Xiaoyu Wang, Bingqing Cheng 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05746v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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-range electrostatics and polarization remain central obstacles to extending machine learning interatomic potentials (MLIPs) to ionic, polar, and interfacial systems. Here, we introduce a semi-local framework for learning electrostatics from energies and forces using polarizable atomic multipoles. Local equivariant descriptors predict environment-dependent latent monopoles, dipoles, and quadrupoles, while residual non-local charge transfer and polarization are captured by non-self-consistent linear response in induced charges and dipoles. Across four diverse benchmarks and four short-range MLIP architectures, the multipole hierarchy and response terms systematically improve potential energy surface accuracy, with the largest gains in systems where long-range effects are essential. More importantly, the learned latent variables recover physically meaningful electrical responses: accurate Born effective charge tensors, emergent polarizabilities, infrared spectra in close agreement with experiments, and semi-quantitative Raman spectra for bulk water and hybrid MAPbI$_3$ perovskite. This systematically improvable, physically transparent framework enables MLIPs trained on standard energy and force labels to predict polarization-sensitive observables.
334. ❌ Density diversity in training data governs thermodynamic transferability of machine learning interatomic potentials
作者: Minwoo Kim, Seungtae Kim, Je-Yeon Jung, Min Young Ha, Won Bo Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05733v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Machine learning interatomic potentials (MLIPs) offer first-principles accuracy with reduced computational cost, but their transferability across different thermodynamic states remains questionable, particularly for fluid systems where molecules experience local environments far from crystalline equilibrium. Here, we demonstrate that diversifying the density of training configurations, rather than temperature, is the most effective strategy for building thermodynamically transferable MLIPs within a fixed computational budget. We first show that foundation MLIPs trained on solid-state databases accurately describe liquid-like densities but fail at gas-like conditions, while molecular-database-trained models exhibit the opposite behavior. Controlled from-scratch training and distillation experiments confirm that density-diverse datasets resolve both failure modes, whereas temperature-diverse datasets cannot compensate for missing density regimes. Coordination number analysis reveals the physical origin of this behavior: local coordination topology is more susceptible to density than temperature, leading to further structural diversity. These results establish density diversity as a design principle for thermodynamically transferable MLIPs and provide a validation framework for assessing the thermodynamic coverage of both foundation and from-scratch models, enabling reliable atomistic simulation of fluid-phase processes across diverse operating conditions.
335. ❌ Theoretical Study of Iridium-based PDT Photosensitizers for Improving Two-Photon Absorption, Triplet Lifetime and Lipophilicity through Ligand Tuning
作者: Aynur Matyusup, Jia-ying Zhao, Yu-dan Zhang, Qi Zhaoa, Ai-min Ren, Jing-fu Guo 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05719v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
Iridium-based photosensitizers have attracted significant attention in photodynamic therapy (PDT) due to their exceptional photophysical properties and chemical stability, as well as tunable phosphorescence emission spectrum and high triplet state production yields. Photosensitizers with large two-photon absorption (TPA) and mitochondrial targeting capabilities are particularly promising for clinical PDT, as they enable deeper tissue penetration and reduced damage to normal cells. In this study, we theoretically studied photophysical, photodynamic properties and photosensitization reaction mechanism of a series of iridium-based photosensitizers with modified C^N and N^N ligands (a2-a6, b1/b1-r and b2/b2-r) by TDDFT/DFT methods. The photophysical properties, including one- and two-photon absorption spectra, frontier molecular orbitals, and singlet and triplet excitation energies, were calculated. Additionally, rate constants for intersystem crossing, fluorescence, and phosphorescence, along with water solubility and lipophilicity metrics (logP), were determined to assess both efficacy and biocompatibility. The results elucidate the modulation roles of the chelated ligands and ancillary ligands in TP-PDT efficiency, indicating that the asymmetric iso-fused-benzene ring modification to the N^N ligand is a robust design strategy for comprehensively enhancing photosensitization performance. Complexes a2, b2 and b1-r show greater promise as candidates for two-photon PDT photosensitizers, owing to their large TPA cross-sections, extended triplet state lifetimes, and balanced water solubility and lipophilicity. Notably, the b1-r complex can undergo both Type I and Type II PDT photosensitization mechanisms, which will help address the issue of drug resistance arising from the hypoxic environment in deep-seated tumors.
336. ❌ A Scalable Translationally Invariant Variational Theory of Ab Initio Polarons
作者: Moritz K. A. Baumgarten, Hamlin Wu, Tong Jiang, Joonho Lee 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05675v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 scalable, translationally invariant variational theory for ab initio polarons that remains applicable across coupling regimes without resorting to supercells. Our approach combines a momentum-projected Toyozawa-type wavefunction with a low-rank factorization of the electron-phonon kernel, enabling near-linear scaling with the number of $\mathbf{k}$-points while capturing both delocalized and self-trapped carriers. Benchmarks for the Fröhlich model, LiF, and anatase and rutile TiO$_2$ yield accurate polaron binding energies, thermodynamic-limit band structures, and transparent real-space measures of polaron extent. For LiF, comparison with first-principles diagrammatic Monte Carlo (DiagMC) reveals close agreement for the weak-coupling electron-polaron ground state and band structure. However, in the hole-polaron of LiF, which is in the strong-coupling regime, we found a significant bias in DiagMC results. These results establish momentum-projected variational wavefunctions as a systematically improvable route to thermodynamic limit studies of polarons in real materials.
337. ❌ Quantum-classical solvation hydrodynamics: Hamiltonian functionals and dissipation
作者: François Gay-Balmaz, Cesare Tronci 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-07 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05658v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 mixed quantum-classical hydrodynamic framework to model short-time inertial effects in the non-adiabatic evolution of a quantum solute coupled to a classical polar solvent. Drawing upon the work of Burghardt and Bagchi [Chem. Phys. 329 (2006), 343], we employ the Hamiltonian approach to incorporate consistent backreaction and preserve quantum decoherence beyond standard Ehrenfest dynamics. The solvent is treated as an ideal polar fluid and the quantum solute state is correlated to both the position and molecular orientation coordinates of the liquid. This approach retains essential solute-solvent correlations while significantly reducing the computational complexity of previous approaches. We further incorporate dissipative terms to capture both inertial effects and polarization relaxation. After establishing the general setting for non-local dielectric continua, the Marcus local approximation is integrated into the model thereby extending traditional solvation theory to account for collective fluid sloshing on fast timescales.
338. ❌ Agentic Discovery of Exchange-Correlation Density Functionals
作者: Titouan Duston, Jiashu Liang, Yuanheng Wang, Weihao Gao, Xuelan Wen, Nan Sheng, Weiluo Ren, Yang Sun, Yixiao Chen 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-06 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.05460v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘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 development of accurate exchange-correlation (XC) functionals remains a longstanding challenge in density functional theory (DFT). The vast majority of XC functionals have been hand designed by human researchers combining physical insight, exact constraints, and empirical fitting. Recent advances in large language models enable a systematic, automated alternative to this human-driven design loop. This report presents an agentic search system in which an LLM proposes structured functional-form changes guided by evolutionary history. The system attempts to improve functional performance through an iterative plan-execute-summarize loop, where improvements are measurable by optimizing functional parameters against a standard thermochemistry dataset, then evaluating performance on a held-out subset. The strongest discovered functional, SAFS26-a (Seed Agentic Functional Search 2026), improves upon the gold-standard ωB97M-V baseline by ~9%. These results also surface a cautionary lesson for AI-assisted science: models powerful enough to discover genuine improvements are equally capable of exploiting unphysical shortcuts to game the benchmark; domain expertise translated into explicitly enforced constraints remains essential to keeping results scientifically grounded.
339. ❌ CDFCI: High-Performance Parallel Software for Many-Body Large-Scale Eigenvalue Problems
作者: Yuejia Zhang, Zhe Wang, Jianfeng Lu, Yingzhou Li 期刊/来源: arxiv 发布日期: 2026-05-06 arXiv链接: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.04483v1
评分: 0.0 / 26.6 ❌
评分详情
| 关键词 | 权重 | 相关度 | 得分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| “Large Language Models” OR “LLMs” OR “Foundation Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mixture of Experts” OR “MoE” OR “Sparse Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Small Language Models” OR “SLMs” OR “On-device AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Scaling Laws” AND “Data Quality” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Pre-training” OR “Continual Pre-training” OR “Domain Adaptation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Post-training” OR “Supervised Fine-tuning” OR “SFT” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Instruction Tuning” OR “Alignment” OR “Value Alignment” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “RLHF” OR “RLAIF” OR “Direct Preference Optimization” OR “DPO” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “PEFT” OR “LoRA” OR “Parameter-efficient Fine-tuning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Retrieval-Augmented Generation” OR “RAG” OR “Retrieval-Generation” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Context Window Extension” OR “Long Context LLMs” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “KV Cache Compression” OR “Linear Attention” OR “FlashAttention” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Chain of Thought” OR “CoT Reasoning” OR “Multi-step Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “System 2 Thinking” OR “Slow Thinking” OR “In-depth Reasoning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Monte Carlo Tree Search” OR “MCTS” AND “LLM” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Self-Correction” OR “Self-Improvement” OR “Self-Reflection” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “LLM Agents” OR “Autonomous Agents” OR “Agentic Workflow” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Tool Use” OR “Function Calling” OR “API Tool Use” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Multi-agent Systems” OR “Agent Coordination” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Quantization” OR “Model Compression” OR “Low-bit Weights” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Speculative Decoding” OR “Inference Acceleration” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Hallucination Mitigation” OR “Factuality” OR “Truthfulness” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Mechanistic Interpretability” OR “Explainable AI” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “World Models” AND “General World Models” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “Model Merging” OR “Model Soups” OR “Weight Averaging” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “In-context Learning” OR “Many-shot Learning” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
| “AI for Science” OR “Bioinformatics” OR “Cheminformatics” | 1.0 | 0.0/10 | 0.0 |
评分理由: 评分失败: Error code: 402 - {’error’: {‘message’: ‘Insufficient Balance’, ’type’: ‘unknown_error’, ‘param’: None, ‘code’: ‘invalid_request_error’}}
!!! tip deepseek-chat TL;DR
评分失败,无法生成摘要
摘要 (Abstract)
CDFCI is a shared-memory parallel numerical program for computing low-lying eigenpairs of large-scale, non-relativistic fermionic Hamiltonians. The software is designed to handle a broad class of many-body quantum models, including both ab initio electronic structure Hamiltonians and lattice-based Hamiltonians arising in condensed matter physics. CDFCI combines an efficient coordinate-descent-based selected configuration interaction algorithm with dedicated parallelization strategies, achieving high performance on modern multi-core architectures. Benchmark results on representative quantum chemistry and condensed matter test cases demonstrate that CDFCI attains state-of-the-art accuracy with competitive performance compared to established selected configuration interaction (such as CIPSI or SHCI) and DMRG implementations. The software is open-source, extensively documented, and provides a Python interface for seamless integration with PySCF and other many-body simulation workflows.
Token 消耗统计
- 总计: 1,492,449 tokens(输入 1,492,449 / 输出 0)