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 17:43 — 2026-11-04 17:43(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 2 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序等待首次采集
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.40289

通过容忍度感知推荐与自适应多样化逆转极化

Reversing Polarization through Tolerance-Aware Recommendation and Adaptive Diversification

Zhanzhan Zhao, Shuqi Zhao, Zichen Fan, Dana Randall

AI 速览:该研究基于意见动力学模型与LLM智能体模拟,探讨容忍度感知推荐结合自适应多样化能否在已极化人群中逆转而非仅减缓极化。

Recommender systems face a tension between broadening exposure to diverse viewpoints and avoiding interactions that reinforce extreme positions. This tension is especially consequential in already polarized populations. Here we investigate whether recommendation strategies can reverse polarization rather than merely slow its development. Building on the Attraction--Repulsion Model of opinion dynamics, we introduce two complementary design principles: Tolerance-aware recommendation, which seeks to learn each individual's tolerance for disagreement and reduces exposure to viewpoints beyond that tolerance, and adaptive diversification, which broadens exposure for agents with more extreme opinions while retaining stronger personalization for moderates. Agent-based experiments show that highly personalized recommendations intensify polarization under polarized initial conditions. Tolerance awareness alone primarily slows polarization, whereas combining it with adaptive diversification can reduce polarization below its initial level and, under suitable conditions, restore consensus. Additional experiments incorporating persistent extreme influencers and a spiral-of-silence mechanism show that the combined strategy can mitigate polarization under social pressure and selective participation. To examine whether these findings extend beyond predefined opinion-update rules, we repeat the experiments on a simulated social platform populated by 100 LLM-driven agents prompted to move toward opinions similar to their own and away from those that differ substantially. Across three runs, the combined strategy is again the only recommendation policy tested that reverses polarization in every run. These findings distinguish polarization prevention from reversal and identify tolerance-aware, adaptive exposure as a promising recommendation design principle for reconnecting divided populations.

cs.SI
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.40259

The Price of a Chance in Artificial Societies

Shuqi Zhao, Boyu Wang, Shuangyue Niu, Chenhao Zhang, Zhanzhan Zhao

Rapid advances in large language models (LLMs) have enabled autonomous agents to interact, coordinate, and pursue individual goals in artificial societies. However, our understanding of how reward structures shape their competitive behavior and collective outcomes remains incomplete. We simulate 200 LLM agents competing over 50 rounds to maximize individual wealth. We define overcompetition and lying flat as population investment above and below a Bayesian adaptive baseline, respectively. At the lowest tested reward, populations lie flat; at the two highest, they overcompete, most strongly at intermediate winner coverage. The investment committed to pursuing an uncertain reward constitutes the price of a chance. Agents near the qualification cutoff can invest heavily yet receive no prize, finishing poorer than nonwinners who invest less. Agents' stated rationales link investment decisions to perceived qualification prospects and expected returns. At the collective level, greater investment does not consistently improve ability selection. With a fixed total prize budget, offering smaller prizes to more winners can reduce investment while preserving selection quality relative to the corresponding top-ability target. Further broadening reward coverage yields additional savings but reduces selection quality. These findings show how reward design shapes overcompetition and lying flat, distributes the costs of pursuing opportunity, and influences what competition collectively achieves.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CY
arXiv ↗PDF ↗