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

+6108新增论文
+5221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 04:57 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 04:38各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-04 05:08 — 2026-11-05 05:08(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 04:57最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 04:38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。

14,785 已收录论文12,896 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 3 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-05 04:55(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.38678HF 社区推荐

AskStream: When and What to Ask Proactively under Uncertainty in Streaming Video Understanding

Lu Wang, Zhuoran Jin, Longxiang Wang, Junhong Chen, Yupu Hao, Yao Xu, Daojian Zeng, Yubo Chen 等 11 位作者

Recent advances in multimodal large language models have increased interest in interaction paradigms for video understanding. The evolution from offline to streaming and proactive interaction has gradually shifted models from passive responders toward more proactive agents that can decide when to answer. However, existing proactive paradigms typically assume that the information required to answer a query is complete, leaving models to only wait or answer. In the real world, however, information is often incomplete due to uncertainty from either the video or the user. In proactive paradigms, such uncertainty can cause the model to wait forever or generate highly hallucinatory responses. We therefore argue that proactive interaction should be redefined with a third action: ask, allowing models to actively ask for missing information. To study when and what models should ask before answering, we introduce AskStream, the first multi-turn benchmark spanning video and user uncertainty for streaming video understanding, with four task categories and eight subtasks. It contains 438 videos with 2,714 manually annotated frame-level time windows across three types: wait, ask, and answer. Across both multiple-choice and open-ended settings, even the strongest model attains only 52.18% on our proposed Ask-F1 metric, highlighting substantial limitations in proactive information seeking under uncertainty.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CV · cs.CL
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.36068HF 社区推荐

Rollback: Experience Backtracking in World Models for Policy Improvement

Jiayi Luo, Yang Zhang, Liliang Chen, Nan Wang, Chen Gao, Boxiang Qiu, Zhuoxuan Li, Baorui Peng 等 16 位作者

Action-conditioned world models offer a scalable alternative to costly real-world interaction for improving robot policies. However, existing world-model-based methods largely treat world models as forward-only surrogates of the physical environment, leaving untapped a capability no physical environment affords: rewinding to past decision points to explore counterfactual futures. We introduce Rollback, a policy improvement paradigm that turns world models from passive simulators into counterfactual engines: it rolls back to critical decision points, branches into alternative actions, and contrasts their outcomes to attribute success to individual decisions. This concentrates imagination where it matters most and distills counterfactual outcomes into fine-grained, action-level supervision without a separately learned value model. We build a scalable training system that unifies distributed world-model search with asynchronous real-robot execution, forming a self-reinforcing cycle: real-world experience continually sharpens the world model, and a sharper world model in turn drives further policy improvement. We term the world-model side of this cycle test-time physics grounding, a capability that hand-built physics simulators lack: while the world model serves as the training environment, real transitions from the policy it trains correct its dynamics through a lightweight LoRA pipeline. Experiments on three challenging real-world tasks show that Rollback improves success rates over the strongest baseline by an absolute 10.67%, 11.11%, and 11.85% on block extraction, ball tossing, and tabletop curling, respectively, while achieving more stable improvement throughout training. Although initialized from teleoperated demonstrations far below human level, Rollback surpasses the average success rate of human players on both ball tossing and tabletop curling within 8 hours of training.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.RO · cs.AI · cs.LG
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.27100HF 社区推荐

LOB-Impact Benchmark: Emergent Market Impact in Generative Limit Order Book Models

George Nigmatulin, Valentin Mohl, Sascha Frey, Kang Li, Aramis Marti-Shahandeh, Mihai Cucuringu, Anisoara Calinescu, Jakob Foerster 等 9 位作者

Realistic market impact is essential for generative limit order book (LOB) models to serve as world models for trading agents. If a simulator misprices this mechanism, agents learn policies that are optimal in the simulator but wrong in the real market. Existing metrics assess generated streams purely through distributional comparison with historical data, leaving counterfactual response to an agent's own orders largely unexplored. Here, we show that market impact emerges naturally in neural LOB generators trained solely for next-token prediction. We inject execution-style metaorders into the generated message flow of five autoregressive models across five NASDAQ stocks and measure the response using estimators from the empirical impact literature, validated on baselines whose physics is known in advance. Our benchmark evaluates any message-level generator in three phases: free generation (reading order-flow persistence against price diffusivity); metaorder injection (yielding the impact law's exponent and amplitude); and a post-execution window (measuring relaxation). In addition, comparing each visible injection to a blind, simulator-only control isolates the model's learned response from standard book mechanics. For every model on every stock, we measure how the impact responds as a function of cumulative metaorder participation. Interestingly, we observe emergent impact in generative models of market data, with exponents in the range of 0.63 to 1.21, slightly above the traditional 0.5 of the square-root law of impact. In the family of models tested, we are so far unable to observe impact decay during relaxation. We tentatively attribute this to the still-short context windows of the models. We release the benchmark as open source to validate future generative models for market data.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

q-fin.TR · cs.LG
arXiv ↗PDF ↗