跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

论文库

检索计算机领域论文,按研究方向、作者或关键词筛选。

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
+0已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-15 17:01 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-14 15:09各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-14 17:46 — 2026-11-15 17:46(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:2026-11-15 17:01最近发现新增版本:2026-11-14 15:09库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-13 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。

23,348 已收录论文19,580 AI 相关6,729 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 4 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-15 16:59(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.15491

What Makes a VLA Reactive? A Study of Execution Strategies for Dynamic Manipulation

Zhuoyue Li, Zhendong Han, Pankhuri Vanjani, Wenting Li, Rudolf Lioutikov

原文摘要

Vision-language-action (VLA) models predict chunks of future actions, and when objects move, those chunks go stale before they are executed. We study what makes a pretrained VLA reactive, using \pihalf{} on two dynamic simulation benchmarks and three real-robot tasks. We vary the prediction and execution horizons, compare synchronous and asynchronous inference, test methods that deliver actions sooner or keep successive chunks continuous, and adapt the policy with motion cues and latent-space reinforcement learning. The best prediction horizon is about one second, and the best execution horizon depends on the checkpoint. Short horizons help more with asynchronous execution, and methods that keep the trajectory continuous outperform those that only reduce latency. Adapting the policy repairs targeted failures, but on the conveyor task changing the execution horizon gained as much. Reactivity depends on the execution pipeline as much as on the policy, so both should be evaluated together.

cs.RO · cs.CV · cs.LG

新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.14382

大语言模型“通过思考学习”机制的认知映射

Cognitive Mapping of Learning by Thinking Mechanisms in Large Language Models

Dong Han, Jin Zhang, Kunyue Yang

AI 速读 基于摘要

该文提出一个认知LbT框架,把四种“通过思考学习”的认知机制映射到大语言模型的计算过程,并讨论其能力边界与结构性失败。

cs.AI

查看原文摘要

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly exhibit capabilities that resemble human Learning by Thinking (LbT), the acquisition of new insight through internal processes such as explanation and reasoning, without new external input. A systematic account of the cognitive mechanisms behind these capabilities, and of their limits, remains underdeveloped. This paper proposes a Cognitive LbT Framework that maps four mechanisms (Reflective Reasoning, Synthetic Memory Formation, Internal Simulation, and Conceptual Self-Organization) onto computational processes in LLMs. Drawing on representative methods, including chain-of-thought prompting, self-consistency, self-reflection, Tree-of-Thoughts search, Self-Instruct, and self-taught reasoning, the analysis argues that selected methods can functionally approximate aspects of these mechanisms and can improve performance on some tasks without additional labeled examples, although this does not always constitute durable learning in model parameters. For example, Self-Instruct generated approximately 52,000 instructions from 175 seed tasks and reported a 33% absolute improvement on Super-NaturalInstructions (Y. Wang et al., 2023). The same mechanisms also produce characteristic failures, including hallucination diffusion, model collapse, concept drift, and high computational cost. These failures are not isolated technical defects but follow from four structural asymmetries between LLMs and human cognition: the identity of generator and monitor, closed learning loops without external grounding, symbolic rather than sensorimotor simulation, and the cost of inference-time computation. The framework yields testable propositions about when LbT in LLMs should succeed or fail and offers a structured basis for designing more reliable autonomous learning systems.

新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.36890

Latent Residual Reasoning for Ranking in Generative Recommendation

Haihan Shi, Ruidong Han, Wenjie Wang, Shangyu Chen, Sunhao Dai, Yongqi Li, Yangyang Li, Fei Jiang 等 11 位作者

原文摘要

Generative recommendation (GR) models for ranking typically adopt a fast-thinking direct prediction paradigm with strong practical efficiency. However, ranking requires fine-grained scoring across multiple candidate items, while existing GR models still mainly rely on one-shot prediction. This raises the question whether additional inference-time computation can further improve ranking quality. Recently, inspired by Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning in large language models (LLMs), some work has begun to introduce reasoning into recommendation systems. Some of these methods rely on LLM reasoning frameworks to perform explicit reasoning in textual space, but such designs are not suitable for more widely deployed non-textual recommendation models. A more relevant direction is to introduce latent reasoning into ID-based recommendation models. Although recent work has extended latent reasoning to industrial ranking, how successive reasoning steps should improve fine-grained candidate scores remains less explored. To address this problem, we propose Refiner, a latent residual reasoning framework with parameter-efficient fine-tuning for generative ranking. Our approach introduces three key components: (1) a residual reasoning mechanism that progressively refines ranking scores through cumulative additive corrections, (2) history queries that provide condensed user behavior representations to enhance candidate-specific reasoning, and (3) a parameter-efficient fine-tuning strategy that leverages LoRA modules to adapt pre-trained models for latent reasoning. Extensive experiments on two public benchmarks, an offline industrial dataset, and an online A/B test demonstrate that Refiner consistently improves over direct prediction, validating its effectiveness and practical utility.

cs.IR

版本更新 · v4arXiv:2609.11115

Benchmark Radar: A Living Database and Search Engine for AI Benchmarks and Evaluation

Koutian Wu, Wenjun Zhang, Junjie Zhou, Pengqian Han, Qiming Bao, Ergan Shang, Jiayu Wang, Junkai Wang 等 16 位作者

原文摘要

Benchmark researchers and developers of large language models (LLMs) and other AI systems need to find relevant evaluations, locate their benchmark datasets and code, and understand the settings behind reported scores. We present Benchmark Radar, a living database and search engine for retrieval and discovery of AI benchmarks, covering LLM evaluation, agentic and tool-use benchmarks, coding, reasoning, safety, and domain-specific evaluations. The system combines daily discovery of benchmark papers, repositories, datasets, and releases with a searchable benchmark catalog, mentions in model cards and technical reports, and score histories. It retains source identities and citations so readers can inspect candidate benchmarks and their evaluation evidence. Daily discovery draws on 37 sources: 13 direct connectors and 24 first-party research and engineering feeds. The catalog contains 1,283 source records drawn from 4 benchmark catalogs and 12,916 numeric observations on 790 records. We describe collection and retrieval, audit the full catalog, and examine benchmark saturation, adoption trends, and the limits of score comparisons. A worked example walks through a complete prior-art search, showing how to query the catalog and inspect benchmark evidence when designing a new evaluation. We release the web dashboard with a benchmark leaderboard, a Pareto frontier view of score against measured use, saturation and trend views, daily feeds, downloadable evidence, a command-line interface (CLI) for offline queries, and reproducible analysis.

cs.AI · cs.IR