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 15:59 · 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 16:38 — 2026-11-15 16:38(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 15:59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 2 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-15 15:58(北京时间)
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2602.21215

Inference-time Alignment via Sparse Junction Steering

Runyi Hu, Jie Zhang, Shiqian Zhao, Jiale Meng, Jiwei Li, Jason Zeng, Ming Wu, Michael Heinrich 等 10 位作者

原文摘要

Token-level steering has emerged as a pivotal approach for inference-time alignment, enabling fine-grained control over large language models (LLMs) by modulating their output distributions without parameter updates. While effective, existing methods rely on dense intervention at every decoding step. This persistent manipulation not only incurs substantial computational overhead but also risks compromising generation quality by excessively drifting from the model's intrinsic distribution. In this work, we show that dense intervention is unnecessary and propose Sparse Inference-time Alignment (SIA), which performs sparse junction steering, intervening only at critical decision points along the generation trajectory. Our key insight is that high-entropy junctions are empirically consistent with pivotal decision points in the generation trajectory and are particularly susceptible to misalignment, suggesting that these points benefit from alignment-related reward signal. Extensive experiments across different model families and alignment objectives show that steering only 20%-80% of tokens achieves the superior alignment-efficiency trade-offs. For strong base models such as Qwen3, intervening on as few as 20% of tokens matches or even surpasses heavily post-trained instruct models. This sparsity enables stronger guidance while better preserving the model's native distribution, integrates seamlessly with search-based methods (e.g., Best-of-N), and improves efficiency by reducing the required sampling budget while yielding practical wall-clock speedups under matched-quality comparisons.

cs.CL · cs.AI

版本更新 · v2arXiv:2610.34717

VLA-HWBench: Where the Time Goes When VLA Models Run on Edge Hardware

Borui Xu, Hongshi Tan, Wenqi Jiang, Bingsheng He, Ming Wu, Jason Zeng, Michael Heinrich

原文摘要

Vision-language-action (VLA) models increasingly run on edge devices aboard robots, where inference latency constrains closed-loop robot control. However, it remains unclear how to design VLA models, their inference software and edge hardware so that robots can run VLA inference in real time. Most VLA models report only task success, while prior studies cover limited action-generation strategies, divide inference into at most three stages, and lack comparisons of inference optimizations on the same models. Therefore, we introduce VLA-HWBench, a benchmark that measures 18 open VLA models on NVIDIA Jetson AGX Thor and AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395, with a seven-stage inference breakdown. Our study reveals three insights. First, action-generation strategy matters more than model size. It dominates 14 of 19 Jetson configurations, latency varies by $82\times$ on Jetson and $157\times$ on AMD, and parameter count explains at most 15% of latency variance. Models that generate long action chunks in a few flow-matching steps keep up with control, whereas token-by-token decoding does not. Second, kernel fusion with 4-bit weights helps most, running $π_{0.5}$ and GR00T N1.7 2.6-2.9$\times$ faster than PyTorch with torch.compile, but it exists for only these two models and only on the Jetson. Optimization also moves the time to the stages it shortens least, as CPU preprocessing grows from 12% to 39% of the GR00T N1.7 call. Third, after optimization, memory bandwidth limits only the stages that process few tokens on the Jetson, such as the denoising steps, whereas software limits all other stages, from unfused kernels to serial preprocessing on the host CPU. Overall, low-latency edge VLAs should use few action-generation iterations, inference software should extend kernel fusion and low-bit weights to more models and platforms, and edge hardware needs high memory bandwidth and a fast host CPU.

cs.RO · cs.AI