跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

采集已暂停
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+0已有论文修订
+0新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:等待完成 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-02 00:39各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-03 18:01 — 2026-11-04 18:01(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:尚未完成最近发现新增版本:2026-11-02 00:39库内论文最新更新时间:2026-10-30 01:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

8,677 已收录论文7,675 AI 相关1,866 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。

找到 2 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序等待首次采集
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2510.03199

Best-of-Majority: Minimax-Optimal Strategy for Pass@$k$ Inference Scaling

Qiwei Di, Kaixuan Ji, Xuheng Li, Heyang Zhao, Quanquan Gu

LLM inference often generates a batch of candidates for a prompt and selects one via strategies like majority voting or Best-of- N (BoN). For difficult tasks, this single-shot selection often underperforms. Consequently, evaluations commonly report Pass@$k$: the agent may submit up to $k$ responses, and only the best of them is used when computing regret. Motivated by this, we study inference scaling in the more general Pass@$k$ inference setting, and prove that neither majority voting nor BoN exhibits the desirable scaling with $k$ and the sampling budget $N$. Combining the advantages of majority voting and BoN, we propose a new inference strategy called Best-of-Majority (BoM), with a pivotal step that restricts the candidates to the responses with high frequency in the $N$ samples before selecting the top-$k$ rewards. We prove that when the sampling budget is $N=\tildeΩ(C^*)$, the regret of BoM is $O(ε_{\mathrm{opt}}+\sqrt{ε_{\mathrm{RM}}^2C^*/k})$, where $C^*$ is the coverage coefficient, $ε_{\mathrm{RM}}$ is the estimation error of the reward model, and $ε_{\mathrm{opt}}$ is the estimation error of reward at the optimal response. We further establish a matching lower bound, certifying that our algorithm is minimax optimal. Beyond optimality, BoM has a key advantage: unlike majority voting and BoN, its performance does not degrade when increasing $N$. Experimental results of inference on math problems show BoM outperforming both majority voting and BoN.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.LG · stat.ML
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2605.02141

On the Optimal Sample Complexity of Offline Multi-Armed Bandits with KL Regularization

Kaixuan Ji, Qiwei Di, Heyang Zhao, Qingyue Zhao, Quanquan Gu

Kullback-Leibler (KL) regularization is widely used in offline decision-making and offers several benefits, motivating recent work on the sample complexity of offline learning with respect to KL-regularized performance metrics. Nevertheless, the exact sample complexity of KL-regularized offline learning remains largely from fully characterized. In this paper, we study this question in the setting of multi-armed bandits (MABs). We provide a sharp analysis of KL-PCB (Zhao et al., 2026), showing that it achieves a sample complexity of $\tilde{O}(ηSAC^{π^*}/ε)$ under large regularization $η= \tilde{O}(ε^{-1})$, and a sample complexity of $\tildeΩ(SAC^{π^*}/ε^2)$ under small regularization $η= \tildeΩ(ε^{-1})$, where $η$ is the regularization parameter, $S$ is the number of contexts, $A$ is the number of arms, $C^{π^*}$ policy coverage coefficient at the optimal policy $π^*$, $ε$ is the desired sub-optimality, and $\tilde{O}$ and $\tildeΩ$ hide all poly-logarithmic factors. We further provide a pair of sharper sample complexity lower bounds, which matches the upper bounds over the entire range of regularization strengths. Overall, our results provide a nearly complete characterization of offline multi-armed bandits with KL regularization.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.LG · cs.AI · math.ST · stat.ML
arXiv ↗PDF ↗