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。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+4458新增论文
+3571其中 AI 相关
+108已有论文修订
+122新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-05 01:50 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 02:05各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-04 02:05 — 2026-11-05 02:05(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:2026-11-05 01:50最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 02:05库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-04 08:00

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。

13,135 已收录论文11,246 AI 相关3,088 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。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-05 01:47(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.03371

EO-Jev: Decision Model for Earth Observation

Mohamed Atef Abouelhadid, Diaa Addeen Abuhani, Muhammad Akhtar Munir, Fahad Shahbaz Khan, Salman Khan

Earth observation (EO) workflows require selecting among known outcomes, estimating confidence, and processing large volumes of imagery. Generative vision-language models can address these tasks, but autoregressive decoding is computationally costly and their confidence estimates are unreliable. Decision models offer an alternative, returning probabilities over candidate answers in a single forward pass. However, their accuracy, calibration, and transfer across EO tasks remain insufficiently understood. We investigate these properties through a diagnostic study of d3-flash (8.4B parameters) across 30 settings from 23 public EO benchmarks. We find that compositional reasoning transfers well and calibration improves over its Qwen3.5-9B backbone on 24 settings, while counting, change quantification, damage grading, and absent-object recognition remain challenging. To address these limitations, we adapt d3-flash through low-rank fine-tuning on public EO training splits, producing EO-Jev. EO-Jev improves significantly over d3-flash on 26 of 30 settings and matches or exceeds specialist references on 20 of 28. It also achieves an average gain of 8.0 points across 12 held-out settings and lower expected calibration error than specialists on 21 of 28 settings. These improvements come at a modest cost of 1.8 points in general decision performance. Our results demonstrate the potential of adapting general decision models into competitive EO generalists while highlighting persistent challenges in quantitative perception, option-order consistency, and calibration under distribution shift.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CV
arXiv ↗PDF ↗