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
+3已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-14 16:12 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-14 15:09各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-13 17:07 — 2026-11-14 17:07(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:2026-11-14 16:12最近发现新增版本:2026-11-14 15:09库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-13 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。

23,348 已收录论文19,580 AI 相关6,729 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 2026-11-14 16:11(北京时间)
首次观测 · 记录 #1CVF · CVPR 2026:cvf:c286294e3c7ea0c01a13a24c616d82f9CVF · CVPR 2026

When Robots Should Say ''I Don't Know'': Benchmarking Abstention in Embodied Question Answering

Wu, Tao, Zhou, Chuhao, Zhao, Guangyu, Cao, Haozhi, Pu, Yewen, Yang, Jianfei

原文摘要

Embodied Question Answering (EQA) requires an agent to interpret language, perceive its environment, and navigate within 3D scenes to produce responses. Existing EQA benchmarks assume that every question must be answered, but embodied agents should know when they do not have sufficient information to answer. In this work, we focus on a minimal requirement for EQA agents, abstention: knowing when to withhold an answer. From an initial study of 500 human queries, we find that 32.4% contain missing or underspecified context. Drawing on this initial study and cognitive theories of human communication errors, we derive five representative categories requiring abstention: actionability limitation, referential underspecification, preference dependence, information unavailability, and false presupposition. We augment OpenEQA by having annotators transform well-posed questions into ambiguous variants outlined by these categories. The resulting dataset, AbstainEQA, comprises 1,636 annotated abstention cases paired with 1,636 original OpenEQA instances for balanced evaluation. Evaluating on AbstainEQA, we find that even the best frontier model only attains 42.79% abstention recall, while humans achieve 91.17%. We also find that scaling, prompting, and reasoning only yield marginal gains, and that fine-tuned models overfit to textual cues. Together, these results position abstention as a fundamental prerequisite for reliable interaction in embodied settings and as a necessary basis for effective clarification.

cs.CV

Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · 2026 · 正式发表