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 20:46 — 2026-11-04 20:46(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 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序等待首次采集
首次观测 · 记录 #1ACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.1612ACL Anthology · ACL 2026

TrustTable: A Neuro-Symbolic Auditing Framework for Faithful Table QA

Guangzhen Zhao Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Dechang Kong, Tongyu Wu, Zhenjiang Dong Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications

Large Language Models based Table Question Answering (LLMs-based TableQA) models excel in NLP field, however, they occasionally exhibit an unfaithful behavior where correct answers are derived through erroneous reasoning paths. In this condition, we propose TrustTable, a neuro-symbolic framework designed to ensure reasoning faithfulness by auditing the reasoning processes of LLMs. Unlike monolithic LLM-based auditors, TrustTable decouples the auditing operation into two orthogonal dimensions. It enforces factual grounding by executing neurally generated Pandas code against the table, and ensures logical soundness by verifying reasoning chains through a LLM-synthesized formal solver. By integrating these symbolic checks, TrustTable enables a Label-Free Audit Loop that systematically identifies and rectifies reasoning flaws without human supervision. In addition, we present the TrustTable-Bench, a diagnostic dataset containing diverse error categories that range from calculation discrepancies to schema misalignments. This benchmark allows for a rigorous quantification of reasoning limitations. Experiments demonstrate that our symbolic audit detects reasoning flaws more accurately than advanced baselines. More broadly, the TrustTable outperforms LLM judges in both majority voting with logical weighting and rejection sampling with process supervision.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CL

Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表

ACL Anthology · ACL 2026 ↗PDF ↗