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 14:03 — 2026-11-04 14:03(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
首次观测 · 记录 #1ACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.11ACL Anthology · ACL 2026

Benchmarking LLM’s Capability in Reasoning over Conflicting Web References

Yizhen Yuan Tsinghua University, Tsinghua University, Rui Kong, Dongze Li Seafile, Yuanchun Li Institute for AI Industry Research, Tsinghua University, Yunxin Liu

Large language models (LLMs) integrated with retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) have become a dominant framework for building intelligent assistants. In real-world applications such as ChatGPT with web search, the retrieved document often comes from diverse, potentially unreliable sources and may contain inconsistent claims. Unlike traditional search engines that rely on users to manually compare information, LLM-based systems typically feed all retrieved content into the model’s context, requiring LLMs to autonomously identify, differentiate, and reason over conflicting viewpoints. Unlike mainstream LLM evaluation tasks like math and code generation that are primarily focused on reasoning with factual context, question-answering with multi-source references requires fundamentally different capabilities to identify and reason over knowledge contradictions. In this paper, we introduce ConfRAG, a benchmark for evaluating LLMs’ reasoning capability over real-world conflicting documents retrieved from the web. It consists of 1,814 real-world questions, each paired with an average of 9.58 retrieved paragraphs from heterogeneous online sources. A total of 57.2% of the questions exhibit explicit contradictions. We further propose three structured evaluation tasks, answer clustering, answer coverage, and reason coverage, to quantify a model’s ability to organize and explain contradictory content. Experiments with state-of-the-art models such as GPT-4.1 and Claude-3-7-Sonnet reveal substantial performance gaps, highlighting the need for more targeted research in contradiction-aware question answering. To the best of our knowledge, ConfRAG is the first benchmark specifically designed to evaluate contradiction-aware reasoning on real-world long web documents.

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 ↗
首次观测 · 记录 #1ACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.1169ACL Anthology · ACL 2026

Enhancing Agentic Textual Graph Retrieval with Synthetic Stepwise Supervision

Ge Chang, Jinbo Su Renmin University of China, Jiacheng Liu, Pengfei Yang, Yuhao Shang, Huiwen Zheng, Hongli Ma GDS, Yan Liang 等 10 位作者

Integrating textual graphs into Large Language Models (LLMs) is promising for complex graph-based QA. However, a key bottleneck is retrieving informative yet compact subgraphs that fit the LLM context. Existing retrievers often struggle, relying either on shallow embedding similarity or costly interactive policies that require excessive supervision.To address these challenges, we introduce Graph-S^3, an agentic textual graph reasoning framework featuring an LLM-based retriever trained with synthetic stepwise supervision. Rather than relying on final answer rewards—which often yield sparse and unstable signals—we optimize the retriever by evaluating each step against offline-extracted golden subgraphs.Our approach distills golden subgraphs via a specialized data synthesis pipeline to formulate dense rewards, facilitating a two-stage training scheme that effectively learns the interactive graph exploration policy.Based on extensive experiments on three common datasets in comparison with seven strong baselines, our approach achieves an average improvement of 15.6% in accuracy and 17.2% in F_1 score. The advantage is even higher in more complicated multi-hop reasoning tasks.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CL · cs.AI

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 ↗