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

+4798新增论文
+3911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 01:50 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 02:32各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-04 02:32 — 2026-11-05 02:32(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 01:50最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 02:32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。

13,475 已收录论文11,586 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 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-05 01:47(北京时间)
版本更新 · v3arXiv:2510.00777

In-Place Feedback: Reliable Refinement for Multi-Turn Expert-LLM Collaboration

Youngbin Choi, Minjong Lee, Saemi Moon, Seunghyuk Cho, Chaehyeon Chung, MoonJeong Park, Dongwoo Kim

LLM-generated drafts often contain subtle factual or logical errors, yet prior work shows that models struggle to reliably integrate multi-turn feedback aimed at fixing them. We propose in-place feedback, an interaction paradigm in which the user directly edits the model's previous response and the model continues generation from the edited context. In-place feedback consistently outperforms standard multi-turn feedback across five reasoning-intensive benchmarks while requiring fewer tokens, and our fine-grained analysis shows that it applies corrections more reliably and propagates them to subsequent reasoning. A user study with domain experts refining LLM-generated summaries corroborates these findings: participants report higher final-output satisfaction and substantially lower fatigue with in-place feedback, and a mixed strategy combining in-place and multi-turn feedback improves every dimension we measure. These results suggest that editing errors in place is a more reliable way to incorporate expert corrections than multi-turn feedback, while combining the two acts complementarily to form a more effective collaboration than either mechanism alone.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.LG
arXiv ↗PDF ↗