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 01:44 — 2026-11-15 01:44(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)
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2608.04222

TIDE: A Physically Diverse 3D Turbulence Benchmark Dataset for Advancing Scientific Machine Learning

Yilong Dai, Yiming Sun, Yiheng Chen, Shengyu Chen, Peyman Givi, Xiaowei Jia, Runlong Yu

原文摘要

Turbulence is a central testbed for machine learning on physical dynamics because its governing laws are known exactly. However, most existing studies remain in 2D, while 3D turbulence has fundamentally different physics and is far more costly to simulate. Existing 3D resources also typically provide only one realization per configuration, making it difficult to distinguish learning the dynamics from fitting the statistics of a single flow. In this paper, we introduce TIDE (Turbulent Incompressible DNS Ensembles), a 256^3 DNS corpus and benchmark for 3D incompressible turbulence, with 15 configurations on eight controlled axes, independent ensembles, pressure fields, and equation-level verification. The benchmark includes five tasks, standardized learned baselines, controlled generalization splits, and physical-fidelity metrics alongside pointwise error. Across the main forecasting configurations, current learned models trained under a fixed reference recipe barely outperform persistence and still make about twice the error of a spectral solver given the true equations. Moreover, lower pointwise error can coincide with severely distorted small-scale dynamics, showing that accuracy alone does not ensure physical fidelity. Rollout stability depends on the configuration, the training seed, and how densely training samples each trajectory. Joint training across neighboring regimes does not close the transfer gaps we test, and the forced-to-decay contrast bounds a conditioning limit: an estimate of the current forcing state removes 20-41% of the error a spectral solver makes without forcing input, while history or forcing inputs help only some learned architectures. Closing these accuracy, fidelity, and conditioning gaps is the central open problem made measurable by TIDE. https://github.com/Dyloong1/TIDE-dataset-benchmark

physics.flu-dyn · cs.LG

新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.11438

When Coding Agents Get Arms: Safety Risks Across the Digital-Physical Boundary

Yiming Sun, Mi Zhang

原文摘要

Advances in spatial understanding have enabled frontier models to power coding agents that control a real robot arm zero-shot and end-to-end, without task-specific demonstrations or retraining. This brings two new safety challenges. First, the extensive knowledge of frontier models lets these agents perform tasks that earlier VLA and WAM paradigms could not, opening the door to new forms of capability misuse. Second, coding agents can access digital resources such as web pages and emails. Threats in these resources, such as indirect prompt injection, can carry over into the physical world when the agent controls a robot. We therefore introduce ArmedAgent, the first systematic benchmark to evaluate both risks for coding agents performing zero-shot robot control. It covers robustness, malicious use, and indirect injection across 36 tasks in 5 scenarios, evaluated in simulation and validated on a physical robot arm. A distinctive portion of the tasks target harmful behaviors that earlier VLA paradigms could not perform. Testing several frontier models, including GPT-6-Astra, under widely used agent frameworks, we find substantial safety risks in current systems.

cs.RO · cs.CR · cs.MM

新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.35464

EvoBench: An Evolving, Diagnostic Benchmark Framework for Environmental Modeling

Yiming Sun, Yuan Zhang, Qi Cheng, Yingda Fan, Runlong Yu, Yiqun Xie, Xiaowei Jia

原文摘要

Machine learning models are now widely used to predict environmental variable dynamics in domains like hydrology, climate science, agriculture, and ecology. These models are usually compared on fixed benchmark datasets using a single average accuracy score. As models improve, their scores become very close when averaged over large regions and long time periods, so the benchmark can no longer tell them apart, and a single number hides \emph{where} and \emph{when} a model fails. Three failures are common across environmental domains: models get worse as the climate shifts (non-stationarity), models fail at unmonitored sites (spatial extrapolation), and models miss rare but important regimes such as floods and droughts. We present \textbf{EvoBench}, a benchmark framework that shows where a model fails, tracks failures over time, and evolves to focus on model capability gaps. We apply EvoBench to daily streamflow prediction as a case study (\textbf{CAMELS-Evolve}, about 9{,}000 U.S. basins, 1985--2024) and compare an operational physical model (NWM), a conceptual reference (HBV), and several data-driven models. No model wins on every testing scenarios (e.g., in terms of average accuracy, performance at low flows and unmonitored basins). Also we observe that all data-driven models under-predict floods. Additionally, we show that targeted fix based on the reported failures could mitigate weaknesses the benchmark identified in certain scenarios. EvoBench turns model evaluation from a saturated ranking into a moving map of model limitations.

cs.AI · cs.LG