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
+2已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-08 16:36 · 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 2026-11-07 17:31 — 2026-11-08 17:31(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 16:36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 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-08 16:33(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.04395

Correct Labels Are Not Enough: Reliable Metadata Can Silently Control Model Behavior

Renee Jia, Jinzhou Wu

原文摘要

Fine-tuning data can include metadata that predicts the correct answer, such as a reward-model score or a quality label. We ask whether a model learns to rely on this metadata even when every training label is correct. We fine-tune 7-9B open-weight models from three families on multiple-choice questions in which (Reward: 5) always marks the correct option; when this annotation is moved to a wrong option at test time, models select that option on 97-100% of CommonsenseQA items. Removing it leaves most answers correct, so evaluation without it misses the dependence. Cue-following rises sharply with training-time reliability and develops even with neutral or nonsense annotation words, although test-time wording affects its strength. A Qwen3 experiment also finds cue dependence in option-letter scores after direct preference optimization. Audits can test for this dependence by moving or removing visible annotations while holding the task and correct answer fixed.

cs.AI