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
+0已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-09 06:10 · 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 06:25 — 2026-11-09 06:25(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:2026-11-09 06:10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 3 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-09 06:08(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.02956

Specification-Aware Predictive Uncertainty Decomposition

Roman Vashurin, Mikhail Seleznyov, Assel Yermekova, Fedor Chernogorskii, Danila Zykov, Elena Tutubalina, Alexander Panchenko, Preslav Nakov 等 10 位作者

原文摘要

Classical decompositions of predictive uncertainty, such as the information-theoretic one, are defined for a fixed representation $x$ of the input object. They do not consider that $x$ may be incomplete, nor do they measure how much the missing information can affect the prediction. In Large Language Models, users can clarify an underspecified input without any retraining. The clarified input can describe the user's unobserved intent $z^*$ more accurately and change the predictive uncertainty about the outcome. In this paper, we formalize this setting probabilistically and derive a three-term decomposition of prediction risk into specification, residual aleatoric, and epistemic uncertainties. We show that at the original information level, when only $x$ is available, the aleatoric uncertainty, represented by a Bayes risk, has two components. The first, which we call specification uncertainty, is the expected reduction in this Bayes risk from revealing the intent. The second is the residual aleatoric uncertainty, i.e., the Bayes risk that remains once the intent is known, averaged over its possible values $z$ given $x$. The distinction is important, as specification uncertainty informs the decision to request clarification before making a prediction. We build approximations of these components and connect them to existing uncertainty measures. Our experiments across different domains and modalities show distinct roles for the three components. Specification uncertainty is the most informative for detecting underspecified inputs, while residual aleatoric uncertainty is the most informative for detecting in-distribution prediction errors.

stat.ML · cs.AI · cs.CL · cs.LG

首次观测 · 记录 #1ACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.1770ACL Anthology · ACL 2026

Emergent Misalignment via In-Context Learning: Narrow in-context examples can produce broadly misaligned LLMs

Nikita Afonin, Nikita Andriianov, Vahagn Hovhannisyan, Nikhil Bageshpura, Kyle Liu Algoverse AI Research, Kevin Zhu Algoverse AI Research, Sunishchal Dev RAND Corporation and Algoverse Coding Academy LLC, Ashwinee Panda TogetherAI and University of Maryland, College Park 等 12 位作者

原文摘要

Recent work has shown that narrow finetuning can produce broadly misaligned LLMs, a phenomenon termed emergent misalignment (EM). While concerning, these findings were limited to finetuning and activation steering, leaving out in-context learning (ICL). We therefore ask: does EM emerge in ICL? We find that it does: across four model families (Gemini, Kimi-K2, Grok, and Qwen), narrow in-context examples cause models to produce misaligned responses to benign, unrelated queries. With 16 in-context examples, EM rates range from 1% to 24% depending on model and domain, appearing with as few as 2 examples. Neither larger model scale nor explicit reasoning provides reliable protection, and larger models are typically even more susceptible. Next, we formulate and test a hypothesis, which explains in-context EM as conflict between safety objectives and context-following behavior. Consistent with this, instructing models to prioritize safety reduces EM while prioritizing context-following increases it. These findings establish ICL as a previously underappreciated vector for emergent misalignment that resists simple scaling-based solutions.

cs.CL

Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表

首次观测 · 记录 #1ACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-srw.115ACL Anthology · ACL 2026

Evolutionary Search for Automated Design of Uncertainty Quantification Methods

Mikhail Seleznyov AXXX, Daniil Korbut Amazon, Viktor Moskvoretskii EPFL - EPF Lausanne, Oleg Somov DS-NLP Group, Moscow Independent Research Institute of Artificial Intelligence and AXXX, Alexander Panchenko S-NLP group, Elena Tutubalina

原文摘要

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) methods for large language models are predominantly designed by hand based on domain knowledge and heuristics, limiting their scalability and generality. We apply LLM-powered evolutionary search to automatically discover unsupervised UQ methods represented as Python programs. On the task of atomic claim verification, our evolved methods outperform strong manually-designed baselines, achieving up to 6.7% relative ROC-AUC improvement across 9 datasets while generalizing robustly out-of-distribution. Qualitative analysis reveals that different LLMs employ qualitatively distinct evolutionary strategies: Claude models consistently design high-feature-count linear estimators, while Gpt-oss-120B gravitates toward simpler and more interpretable positional weighting schemes. Surprisingly, only Sonnet 4.5 and Opus 4.5 reliably leverage increased method complexity to improve performance – Opus 4.6 shows an unexpected regression relative to its predecessor. Overall, our results hint that LLM-powered evolutionary search is a promising paradigm for automated, interpretable hallucination detector design.

cs.CL

Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 4: Student Research Workshop) · 2026 · 正式发表