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。

采集已暂停
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
+0新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:等待完成 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-02 00:39各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-03 05:47 — 2026-11-04 05:47(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:尚未完成最近发现新增版本:2026-11-02 00:39库内论文最新更新时间:2026-10-30 01:59

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。

8,677 已收录论文7,675 AI 相关1,866 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。

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序等待首次采集
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.40576

PIVOT:通过在线教师纠正的渐进式干预

PIVOT: Progressive Intervention via Online Teacher Correction

Zhihao Yang, Boyuan Zheng, Puhui Tan, Yukun Chen, Kuan Zhang, Longze Chen, Jiaming Li, Renke Shan 等 10 位作者

AI 速览:PIVOT 将教师生成的纠正片段插入学生 rollout,并对这些片段施加 token 级 KL 监督,与 RLVR 目标联合训练,以缓解困难推理任务中稀疏奖励无学习信号的问题。

Reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR) is limited by sparse outcome-level feedback on hard reasoning tasks: when all rollouts in a group fail, rewards provide no learning signal. Stronger teachers can provide additional guidance, but this raises a central question: how can such signals be incorporated into RLVR to support successful rollouts while remaining learnable for the student? We distinguish two complementary mechanisms: trajectory-level intervention, which improves access to reward-bearing trajectories, and token-level supervision, which provides dense targets to guide student learning. Our controlled experiments show that either mechanism alone can remain insufficient, motivating their combination. We therefore introduce PIVOT, which inserts teacher-generated corrections into student rollouts and applies token-level KL supervision to these segments alongside the RLVR objective. Beyond their combination, we systematically analyze where to intervene and how to supervise, yielding a recipe for effective guidance. Across hard logic games and mathematical reasoning benchmarks, PIVOT consistently outperforms existing methods, nearly doubling mean avg@8 on logic games from 19.5% for the best-performing baseline to 35.6%.

cs.CL
arXiv ↗PDF ↗