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

+1087新增论文
+800其中 AI 相关
+64已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-06 10:06 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-06 10:05各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-05 10:45 — 2026-11-06 10:45(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:2026-11-06 10:06最近发现新增版本:2026-11-06 10:05库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-05 12:54

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。

16,167 已收录论文13,917 AI 相关3,571 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 2026-11-06 10:04(北京时间)
版本更新 · v5arXiv:2608.06621

NxN E-valuation: Hypothesis Certification via a Conformal CRT Null

Bin Wang, Yan Zhong, Zhengyu Zhang, Liang Luo, Buyun Zhang, Ellie Wen

Language models now propose hypotheses faster than anyone can check them, so the step that certifies them must need nothing from the proposer but the hypothesis. We state three requirements for such a step -- per-hypothesis automatable, attributable and diagnostic -- and introduce NxN e-valuation, which meets them. A hypothesis names a scope, the units it is about, and gives each of them a restriction that scores its outcome. The units of one scope serve as nulls for one another, so no resampling model is written per hypothesis; the algorithm certifies a stable, scope-level association and reports whether the scope, the restriction, or which unit receives which restriction carries the prediction. For independently drawn units, betting e-values bound the chance of a false certificate for each hypothesis in finite samples, under stated nulls. A betting lower bound on the share of units that carry the association gates every certificate, and an asymptotically valid equivalence test calls the restrictions shared only when it rejects differences between them above a declared noise ceiling. We test it on planted data, on randomized intervention data, and on real purchase data with 285 hypotheses that language models wrote without knowing our method or our classes, labeled by human experts. Meeting all three requirements costs no accuracy: NxN makes 692 correct decisions in 693 with one false certificate, against 659 with four for a composite of CRT tests that returns our verdicts but needs a resampling model per hypothesis, and 224 with 468 for held-out validation. Removing any of our statistics merges a verdict that certifies with one that rejects. The certificates concern predictive association, not causality.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.AI
arXiv ↗PDF ↗