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 15:23 — 2026-11-04 15:23(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 4 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序等待首次采集
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2608.09802

SWE-Bench ProMax: Benchmarking Agents on Large-Scale Multilingual Code Refactoring

Yuling Shi, Jinghan Xu, Kelin Fu, Wenhao Zeng, Shilin He, Lei Zhang, Yue Liu, Zelin Zhao 等 15 位作者

As AI coding agents take on increasingly complex, long-horizon software engineering tasks, existing benchmarks are rapidly saturating and their evaluation quality has come under serious scrutiny: a recent audit found that nearly 60% of unsolved SWE-bench Verified instances contain flawed tests -- either overly narrow tests that reject correct solutions or overly broad tests that check unstated requirements -- and that frontier models can verbatim reproduce gold patches from training data. Code refactoring, which requires coordinated, behavior-preserving changes across many files, offers a substantially harder and more realistic test of agent capability, yet remains underserved by current benchmarks. We introduce SWE-Bench ProMax, an expert-curated, multilingual code refactoring benchmark of 170 instances drawn from real commits across seven programming languages (Python, Java, TypeScript, Go, C, C++, and Rust). Every instance undergoes rigorous, multi-stage curation that directly addresses the quality problems identified in prior benchmarks: issue descriptions are rewritten from scratch to provide precise, unambiguous specifications, and test suites are manually reviewed to remove overly narrow and overly broad tests. Tasks with insufficient complexity or limited cross-file scope are filtered out, yielding a benchmark of challenging, large-scale refactoring tasks that average 11.5 modified files and 261.6 lines of code per instance, substantially exceeding the scale of existing benchmarks. Experiments with frontier models under two agent scaffolds show that the best model achieves only 41.2% resolve rate, confirming that SWE-Bench ProMax presents a meaningful and unsaturated challenge for current AI coding agents. Our benchmark is available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/swe-bench-promax/SWE-Bench-ProMax.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CL · cs.SE
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2604.23813

ShredBench: Evaluating the Semantic Reasoning Capabilities of Multimodal LLMs in Document Reconstruction

Zichun Guo, Yuling Shi, Wenhao Zeng, Chao Hu, Haotian Lin, Terry Yue Zhuo, Jiawei Chen, Xiaodong Gu 等 9 位作者

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have achieved remarkable performance in Visually Rich Document Understanding (VRDU) tasks, but their capabilities are mainly evaluated on pristine, well-structured document images. We consider content restoration from shredded fragments, a challenging VRDU setting that requires integrating visual pattern recognition with semantic reasoning under significant content discontinuities. To facilitate systematic evaluation of complex VRDU tasks, we introduce ShredBench, a benchmark supported by an automated generation pipeline that renders fragmented documents directly from Markdown. The proposed pipeline ensures evaluation validity by allowing the flexible integration of latest or unseen textual sources to prevent training data contamination. ShredBench assesses four scenarios (English, Chinese, Code, Table) with three fragmentation granularities (8, 12, 16 pieces). Empirical evaluations on state-of-the-art MLLMs reveal a significant performance gap: The method is effective on intact documents; however, once the document is shredded, restoration becomes a significant challenge, with NED dropping sharply as fragmentation increases. Our findings highlight that current MLLMs lack the fine-grained cross-modal reasoning required to bridge visual discontinuities, identifying a critical gap in robust VRDU research.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CV · cs.CL
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2605.30058

HEART-Bench: Do LLMs Make Persona-Consistent Decisions?

Weihan Peng, Chenxu Zhang, Qianao Wang, Yuling Shi, Heng Lian, Qihong Mao, Jiahao Pang, Chunliang Feng 等 10 位作者

LLM agents in interactive entertainment and social applications, including companions, role-play characters, and persona clones, need decisions grounded in personality and past experiences. We introduce HEART-Bench to evaluate memory-grounded persona-consistent response selection. The benchmark combines 11 Big Five-anchored synthetic characters, each with 1,000 autobiographical memories, and 64 DIAMONDS-guided decision scenarios into 673 multiple-choice questions. Domain experts independently compare candidate responses, with a senior expert resolving disagreements and revising responses when needed; other characters' adjudicated responses to the same scenario serve as distractors. In the main evaluation, models receive character IDs and occupations, scenarios, and options, with retrieved memories added in memory-augmented settings. Detailed personality-and-value profiles are withheld. We evaluate 16 LLMs under No-Retrieval, Naive-RAG, Mem0, and PersonaDB. Accuracy without memories stays near the 25% chance level, and the best memory-augmented configuration reaches 64.9%. On a matched 150-item subset, human annotators reach 80.8%, compared with 64.0% for the best model. Memory-content ablations show the importance of retrieving experiences that match both the target character and the decision context.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CL
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.34943

Reasoning Patterns for Efficient AI Coding: An Empirical Study

Zhe Yin, Yuling Shi, Xiaodong Gu, Beijun Shen

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) generate long reasoning traces that expose intermediate inference behavior, offering opportunities to study and control reasoning in AI coding. However, the underlying patterns in these traces and their potential for analyzing and guiding coding models remain poorly understood, limiting systematic characterization and inference-time control of LRM reasoning. We conduct an empirical study of reasoning patterns across four representative coding tasks. We transform reasoning traces into structured action sequences and mine recurring fragments using within-task support, cross-task contrasts, and valid--invalid support contrasts. We characterize four general reasoning patterns by coding agents: design-to-implementation for code generation, state tracing for execution reasoning, evidence--fix--recheck for debugging, and semantic mapping for translation. We further identify positive and negative patterns associated with valid and invalid reasoning traces, respectively. Positive patterns reflect verification-driven convergence, whereas negative patterns reflect repeated design revision, reflection, and knowledge recall without closure. To demonstrate their practical utility, we evaluate three pattern-based applications: task identification, pattern-guided prompting, and pattern-aware early stopping. Features capturing general reasoning patterns enable accurate task identification from reasoning traces without accessing task descriptions or final answers. Prompting guided by positive and negative patterns improves the overall accuracy of downstream tasks, while negative pattern-aware early stopping substantially reduces API-reported token usage with only a modest decrease in pass@1. All three applications also generalize to previously unseen models, showing that reasoning patterns can support both the analysis and control of LRM behavior in AI coding.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.SE · cs.AI
arXiv ↗PDF ↗