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
+2已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-15 01:33 · 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 02:12 — 2026-11-15 02:12(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 01:33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 3 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-15 01:32(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.16861

Visual Cipher Bench: Benchmarking LLM Agents on Long-Horizon Visual Reasoning

Deyao Hong, Jiayi Jiang, Yuchun Chen, Yixuan Shi, Wenyi Li, Zheng Jiang, Chengxing Xie, Mingyu Su 等 15 位作者

原文摘要

While language-model agents excel at long-horizon coding and terminal tasks, this success relies on two conditions: explicit text specifications and immediate execution feedback. However, neither condition holds in real-world problems where critical information exists only in images, leaving it unclear whether long-horizon capability transfers from text to visual reasoning. In such visual settings, because rules and clues resist text transcription and lack test-case feedback, agents must repeatedly inspect images, simulate spatial transformations, and autonomously cross-check clues. Despite this challenge, existing evaluations fail to capture such capability: visual reasoning benchmarks largely reduce tasks to single-turn, short-chain question answering, whereas agent benchmarks focus on text-based environments or interactive states that permit trial-and-error. To bridge this gap, we introduce Visual Cipher Bench, a collection of 40 original visual puzzles across four categories: spatial manipulation and simulation, logical constraints and planning, rule induction, and knowledge-based decoding. Each puzzle provides only one to three black-and-white line drawings and a minimal submission instruction, requiring agents to discover the underlying solving mechanism entirely from the images. Across 29 reasoning-effort configurations of eight frontier models, even the strongest model, GPT-6 Astra (max), achieves only 26.7% accuracy, while five of the eight models score below 1%. Yet on a ten-task subset, providing a single non-spoiler mechanism hint boosts accuracy from 7.8% to 55.6%. This sharp contrast shows that the primary bottleneck of current agents lies not in executing multi-step plans, but in autonomously discovering rules from visual evidence. Visual Cipher Bench thus provides a rigorous benchmark for measuring long-horizon visual reasoning in agents.

cs.CV

新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.40031

AI Cosmos: An Agentic Infra for Situated Learning

AI Cosmos Team, Jinfeng Zhou, Yuxuan Chen, Fangming Chang, Mingyu Su, Yifan Zhu, Yuan Wang, Bo Zhang 等 35 位作者

原文摘要

Large language models (LLMs) can improve task performance during learning, yet these gains do not necessarily reflect learners' ability to thereafter apply the knowledge and skills independently. We present AI Cosmos, an agentic infrastructure for situated learning that organizes learning around two complementary principles: scenario-based participation and cumulative assets of practice. AI Cosmos organizes learners and role-specialized agents within learning scenarios that integrate task-relevant knowledge and, when needed, executable workbenches. An asset-memory loop preserves the processes and outcomes of practice as reusable assets with explicit provenance and dependencies. We evaluate scenario-based interaction through two preregistered randomized controlled studies examining the acquisition of legal reasoning and programming competence, holding the same underlying LLM across conditions. AI Cosmos achieves greater learning gains than a conventional LLM in legal reasoning and higher mastery of unseen programming problems than an LLM-as-Teacher baseline.

cs.CL

版本更新 · v2arXiv:2610.33178

AOS-Bench: Can LLM Agents Manage Dynamic Workloads?

Erle Zhu, Genrui Zhang, Keyang Hu, Mingyu Su, Hongning Wang

原文摘要

Coding agents are moving from handling one request at a time to serving as persistent assistants to which users hand a stream of work: a build, a data-processing job and a bug fix may all be pending on the same machine at once. Such an agent must decide when to take on new tasks, how to delegate and overlap them, and how to stay within the machine's CPU and memory. Existing benchmarks cannot measure this, because they evaluate each task in isolation. We introduce AOS-Bench, which evaluates an agent system as a workload manager: verified tasks arrive over time and must be delivered under shared CPU and memory limits, and the same tasks run one at a time serve as a per-system reference. Across five model--harness pairs, isolated task success does not carry over evenly. On heavy workloads every system loses 13 to 23 points. On medium workloads, systems span 11 points in isolated success but 26 points in stream success, and two systems 0.6 points apart in isolation deliver 54\% and 68\% of the same tasks. Execution-policy interventions trace much of this gap to task intake: serial dispatch leaves 73\% of heavy-workload tasks unclaimed. Yet more elaborate management does not necessarily help. A fixed concurrency of two comes within four points of the best agent-managed policy on both medium and heavy workloads, and under every policy median CPU use stays below 30\% of the provisioned cores while tasks wait. These results identify workload management as a distinct capability for agents, and AOS-Bench as a way to measure it.

cs.AI