跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.10501 · v1

Sampling Is Not Curiosity: Why LLM Agents Should Investigate

首次提交 2026-11-07 14:02
版本更新 2026-11-07 14:02
雷达观测 2026-11-10 10:11
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

LLM agents are increasingly used for open-ended tasks, very common in research scenarios where they are required to explore, investigate, or act curiously. At inference time, an LLM is a fixed map from context to next-token distribution, the pretrained weights determine the function, and only its conditioning changes as context accumulates. Mechanisms like temperature, best-of-N, tree search, or RAG vary how the distribution is sampled or what it is conditioned on, but do not update the agent's model of the environment. We argue that current LLM agents do not explore curiously; they explore stochastically. From how curiosity is understood in the RL literature, it requires a predictive structure over how the environment responds to the agent's actions, which improves online from current interaction, drives action selection through its predicted improvement, and persists beyond the context window. Additionally, in its open-ended form, the agent should intrinsically originate what to investigate. Thus, we propose a framework defining curiosity in LLM agents, reserving the term for systems that satisfy it. In doing so, we identify the research directions its implementation opens up.

作者备注:Accepted to the 40th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2026). Position Paper Track

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-07 14:02 · 最新观测版本

Sampling Is Not Curiosity: Why LLM Agents Should Investigate

LLM agents are increasingly used for open-ended tasks, very common in research scenarios where they are required to explore, investigate, or act curiously. At inference time, an LLM is a fixed map from context to next-token distribution, the pretrained weights determine the function, and only its conditioning changes as context accumulates. Mechanisms like temperature, best-of-N, tree search, or RAG vary how the distribution is sampled or what it is conditioned on, but do not update the agent's model of the environment. We argue that current LLM agents do not explore curiously; they explore stochastically. From how curiosity is understood in the RL literature, it requires a predictive structure over how the environment responds to the agent's actions, which improves online from current interaction, drives action selection through its predicted improvement, and persists beyond the context window. Additionally, in its open-ended form, the agent should intrinsically originate what to investigate. Thus, we propose a framework defining curiosity in LLM agents, reserving the term for systems that satisfy it. In doing so, we identify the research directions its implementation opens up.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗