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

+4069新增论文
+3686其中 AI 相关
+88已有论文修订
+109新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-05 23:43 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 12:13各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-04 23:50 — 2026-11-05 23:50(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 23:43最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 12:13库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-05 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。

15,949 已收录论文13,765 AI 相关3,571 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 2 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-05 23:41(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.06090

Overview of the NTCIR-19 SciClaimEval Task: Cross-modal Claim Verification in Scientific Papers

Xanh Ho, André Greiner-Petter, Florian Boudin, Yun-Ang Wu, Sunisth Kumar, Tian Cheng Xia, Hiba Akbi, Tim Schopf 等 9 位作者

This paper presents an overview of \emph{SciClaimEval}, a pilot task at NTCIR-19 on verifying scientific claims against the tables and figures of the papers in which they appear. Our dataset pairs authentic claims from 180 papers in machine learning, natural language processing, and medicine with contrastive versions of their tables and figures, one supporting the claim and one minimally modified so that it does not. The task comprises two subtasks: deciding whether a piece of evidence supports a claim, and selecting which of two evidence versions does. Twenty-two teams registered, the highest number among NTCIR-19 tasks, and 14 submitted 177 runs. Most systems built on multimodal large language models, relying on prompting and multi-stage inference rather than task-specific fine-tuning. On the first subtask, the best systems reached 98.1\% pair accuracy, but all six top-ranked systems relied on the contrastive pairs; the best system that judged each claim-evidence pair on its own scored 24.3 points lower. Open-weight models, embedded in carefully designed pipelines, matched proprietary ones. Yet verifying a single claim against its evidence, the setting that matters in practice, remains an open problem.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CL
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
首次观测 · 记录 #1ACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.1430ACL Anthology · ACL 2026

Attribution, Citation, and Quotation: A Survey of Evidence-based Text Generation with Large Language Models

Tobias Schreieder, Tim Schopf, Michael Färber Technische Universität Dresden

The increasing adoption of large language models (LLMs) has raised serious concerns about their reliability and trustworthiness. As a result, a growing body of research focuses on evidence-based text generation with LLMs, aiming to link model outputs to supporting evidence to ensure traceability and verifiability. However, the field is fragmented due to inconsistent terminology, isolated evaluation practices, and a lack of unified benchmarks. To bridge this gap, we systematically analyze 134 papers, introduce a unified taxonomy of evidence-based text generation with LLMs, and investigate 300 evaluation metrics across seven key dimensions. Thereby, we focus on approaches that use citations, attribution, or quotations for evidence-based text generation. Building on this, we examine the distinctive characteristics and representative methods in the field. Finally, we highlight open challenges and outline promising directions for future work.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CL

Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表

ACL Anthology · ACL 2026 ↗PDF ↗