Financial agents must form forecasts and investment judgments from decision-time evidence, with predictions evaluated against subsequent outcomes. Existing benchmarks assess financial knowledge, research workflows, or forecasting, but evaluating the full research process requires a strictly frozen information set and professional evaluation criteria. We introduce Investor's Last Exam (ILE), an equity-research benchmark led by experienced buy-side investors and fund managers. Its three components are a versioned financial database spanning 3.43 million document versions and nine source categories, supplemented by structured market data, with validated timestamps governing retrieval and computation; a task taxonomy organized around professional analyst deliverables; and an expert-led framework linking scoring criteria to sources, calculations, and assumptions through financial dependency graphs. Evaluation spans 86 assignments and jointly assesses research quality, forecast accuracy, and simulated investment performance. GPT-6 Astra and Claude Opus 5.5 lead overall at 68.1 and 66.9 out of 100, yet even Astra scores only 52.5 on Forecast & Model. Our results show that even state-of-the-art models fail to translate overall research capability into predictive performance. ILE shifts the evaluation unit from isolated capabilities to the evidence--assumption--judgment chain, allowing researchers to locate where analytical advantages fail to translate into forecasts and investment judgments, and providing a traceable, diagnostic foundation for training and evaluating financial agents.
Generative recommendation (GR) models for ranking typically adopt a fast-thinking direct prediction paradigm with strong practical efficiency. However, ranking requires fine-grained scoring across multiple candidate items, while existing GR models still mainly rely on one-shot prediction. This raises the question whether additional inference-time computation can further improve ranking quality. Recently, inspired by Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning in large language models (LLMs), some work has begun to introduce reasoning into recommendation systems. Some of these methods rely on LLM reasoning frameworks to perform explicit reasoning in textual space, but such designs are not suitable for more widely deployed non-textual recommendation models. A more relevant direction is to introduce latent reasoning into ID-based recommendation models. Although recent work has extended latent reasoning to industrial ranking, how successive reasoning steps should improve fine-grained candidate scores remains less explored. To address this problem, we propose Refiner, a latent residual reasoning framework with parameter-efficient fine-tuning for generative ranking. Our approach introduces three key components: (1) a residual reasoning mechanism that progressively refines ranking scores through cumulative additive corrections, (2) history queries that provide condensed user behavior representations to enhance candidate-specific reasoning, and (3) a parameter-efficient fine-tuning strategy that leverages LoRA modules to adapt pre-trained models for latent reasoning. Extensive experiments on two public benchmarks, an offline industrial dataset, and an online A/B test demonstrate that Refiner consistently improves over direct prediction, validating its effectiveness and practical utility.
Song Jin, Juntian Zhang, Xun Zhang, Zeying Tian, Fei Jiang Meituan, Guojun Yin Meituan, Wei Lin, Yong Liu Renmin University of China 等 9 位作者
Recent advancements in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have revolutionized general visual understanding. However, their application in the food domain remains constrained by benchmarks that rely on coarse-grained categories, single-view imagery, and inaccurate metadata. To bridge this gap, we introduce DiningBench, a hierarchical, multi-view benchmark designed to evaluate VLMs across three levels of cognitive complexity: Fine-Grained Classification, Nutrition Estimation, and Visual Question Answering. Unlike previous datasets, DiningBench comprises 3,021 distinct dishes with an average of 5.27 images per entry, incorporating fine-grained “hard” negatives from identical menus and rigorous, verification-based nutritional data. We conduct an extensive evaluation of 29 state-of-the-art open-source and proprietary models. Our experiments reveal that while current VLMs excel at general reasoning, they struggle significantly with fine-grained visual discrimination and precise nutritional reasoning. Furthermore, we systematically investigate the impact of multi-view inputs and Chain-of-Thought reasoning, identifying five primary failure modes. DiningBench serves as a challenging testbed to drive the next generation of food-centric VLM research. All codes are released in https://github.com/meituan/DiningBench.
尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要
cs.CL · cs.CV
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表
Hao Cui, Zahra Shamsi, Gowoon Cheon, Xuejian Ma, Shutong Li, Maria Tikhanovskaya, Peter Norgaard, Nayantara Mudur 等 34 位作者
Scientific problem-solving involves synthesizing information while applying expert knowledge. We introduce CURIE, a scientific long-Context Understanding,Reasoning and Information Extraction benchmark to measure the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs) in scientific problem-solving and assisting scientists in realistic workflows. This benchmark introduces ten challenging tasks with a total of 580 problems and solution pairs curated by experts in six disciplines - materials science, condensed matter physics, quantum computing, geospatial analysis, biodiversity, and proteins - covering both experimental and theoretical work-flows in science. We evaluate a range of closed and open LLMs on tasks in CURIE which requires domain expertise, comprehension of long in-context information,and multi-step reasoning. While Gemini Flash 2.0 and Claude-3 show consistent high comprehension across domains, the popular GPT-4o and command-R+ fail dramatically on protein sequencing tasks. With the best performance at 32% there is much room for improvement for all models. We hope that insights gained from CURIE can guide the future development of LLMs in sciences. Evaluation code and data are in https://github.com/google/curie