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

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+1已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-08 23:55 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-08 06:02各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-08 00:09 — 2026-11-09 00:09(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:2026-11-08 23:55最近发现新增版本:2026-11-08 06:02库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-06 02:59

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。

17,100 已收录论文14,661 AI 相关4,057 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 2 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-08 23:54(北京时间)
版本更新 · v7arXiv:2606.03371

See, Foresee, Act: Intent-Aware World Modeling for Proactive Retail Assistance

Honghui Zhang, Anna Min, Chenmeinian Guo, Yujia Zhang, Zezhou Zhang, Yichen Yu, Guanyu Liu, Yongming Qin 等 12 位作者

原文摘要

World models allow agents to anticipate action consequences, but proactive assistance also requires interpreting incomplete observations and deciding whether to intervene before a user asks for help. We propose See-Foresee-Act and instantiate it as the Proactive Intent World Model (PIWM) for retail assistance. See preserves role-relevant observable evidence alongside AIDA-BDI customer states; Foresee predicts one-step consequences for candidate actions; Act explicitly compares those consequences, including non-intervention. GuidanceSalesBench supplies predominantly synthetic supervision linking observations, states, candidate outcomes, and decisions. On 509 Full test examples, consequence-based selection achieves 63.65% decision accuracy, compared with 45.38% for direct decision output, an improvement of 18.27 percentage points. These results support candidate-consequence comparison for decision reasoning in this retail task. Code and data will be released after consent verification and upon publication.

cs.CL

首次观测 · 记录 #1ACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.163ACL Anthology · ACL 2026

A Comprehensive Survey of Process Reward Models: Data Generation, Model Construction, and Usage

Congmin Zheng, Jiachen Zhu, Zhuoying Ou, Yuxiang Chen, Kangning Zhang, Rong Shan Shanghai Jiaotong University, Zeyu Zheng Carnegie Mellon University, Mengyue Yang University of Bristol 等 11 位作者

原文摘要

Large Language Models (LLMs) have advanced reasoning ability, yet conventional alignment remains dominated by outcome reward models (ORMs) that judge only final answers. Process Reward Models(PRMs) address this gap by evaluating and guiding reasoning at the step or trajectory level. This survey provides a systematic overview of PRMs through the full loop: how to generate process data, build PRMs, and use PRMs for test-time scaling and reinforcement learning. We summarize applications across math, code, text, multimodal reasoning, robotics, and agents, and review emerging benchmarks. Our goal is to clarify design spaces, reveal open challenges, and guide future research toward fine-grained, robust reasoning alignment.

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