sample_id stringlengths 15 15 | arxiv_id stringlengths 10 10 | title stringlengths 29 128 | source_license stringclasses 5
values | prompt stringlengths 583 6.6k | asked listlengths 1 68 | target listlengths 1 68 | meta unknown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2608.08037-s003 | 2608.08037 | SkillSmith: Enhancing Locally Deployed Agents via Automatic Skill Construction and Evolution | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been brainstorming ways to close the gap between the initial Skill produced by the Skill Creation stage and what my frozen Local Agent actually needs. The issue is that Skill Creation gives me an initial Skill $\mathcal{S}_0$, but this Skill is distilled mainly from Cloud Agent executions and may not fully match t... | [
"AppWorld-Normal PR (Pass Rate %) (in %)",
"AppWorld-Challenge PR (Pass Rate %) (in %)",
"WorkBench PR (Pass Rate %) (in %)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "AppWorld-Normal",
"metric": "PR (Pass Rate %)",
"baseline_value": 66.3,
"method_value": 78.6,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "AppWorld-Challenge",
"metric": "PR (Pass Rate %)",
"baseline_value": 71.6,
"method_value": 74.9,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmar... | {
"base_id": "2608.08037",
"title": "SkillSmith: Enhancing Locally Deployed Agents via Automatic Skill Construction and Evolution",
"area": "agents",
"component": "Skill Evolution stage",
"setting": "Local Agent backbone Qwen3.6-27B (SLM) within SkillSmith; Skill Evolution applied after Skill Creation stage c... |
2608.08245-s007 | 2608.08245 | Privacy-Preserving Data Drift Detection and Recovery for Large-Scale LLM Applications via Proxy Representations | cc-by-4.0 | I've been thinking about a gap between how we evaluate our production ProxyDrift deployment for the Excel document generation scenario and how that evaluation set was actually constructed. My setup uses an LLM-as-a-judge to score each (query, generated document) pair on a 1-5 scale across five rubric dimensions: Accura... | [
"Excel document generation scenario (LLM-judge evaluation) Accuracy (in 1-5 LLM-judge score)",
"Excel document generation scenario (LLM-judge evaluation) Reliability (in 1-5 LLM-judge score)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "Excel document generation scenario (LLM-judge evaluation)",
"metric": "Accuracy",
"baseline_value": 4.29,
"method_value": 3.71,
"unit": "1-5 LLM-judge score"
},
{
"benchmark": "Excel document generation scenario (LLM-judge evaluation)",
"metric": "Reliability",
"b... | {
"base_id": "2608.08245",
"title": "Privacy-Preserving Data Drift Detection and Recovery for Large-Scale LLM Applications via Proxy Representations",
"area": "llm-eval",
"component": "Evaluating on distribution-aligned synthetic dataset vs legacy offline set (downstream LLM-judge quality scores)",
"setting":... |
2608.08446-s005 | 2608.08446 | TRACE-Memory: Public-Conditioned Retrieval and Utility-Aware Evidence Admission for Personalized Generation | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been ideating on whether a small, trained policy for memory querying and evidence selection can hold up against just using a frontier LLM to do that same querying and selection work. The setup I have in mind separates the pipeline into two stages: Stage 1 maps $(q,p)$ to public-conditioned queries $Z$ that describ... | [
"Controlled (Goodreads) / DeepSeek-V4-Flash Adv (in signed preference advantage)",
"Controlled (Goodreads) / Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite Adv (in signed preference advantage)",
"Controlled (Goodreads) / GPT-5.4 Adv (in signed preference advantage)",
"Natural (Goodreads, Amazon Reviews, Reddit) / DeepSeek-V4-Flash Ad... | [
{
"benchmark": "Controlled (Goodreads) / DeepSeek-V4-Flash",
"metric": "Adv",
"baseline_value": 0,
"method_value": -0.02,
"unit": "signed preference advantage"
},
{
"benchmark": "Controlled (Goodreads) / Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite",
"metric": "Adv",
"baseline_value": 0,
"method_va... | {
"base_id": "2608.08446",
"title": "TRACE-Memory: Public-Conditioned Retrieval and Utility-Aware Evidence Admission for Personalized Generation",
"area": "agents",
"component": "trained small-policy query/evidence governance vs frontier-LLM query and selection",
"setting": "Frozen response generator (DeepSee... |
2608.08605-s006 | 2608.08605 | ForestBench: A Unified Graph Framework for Evaluating Multi-Agent Collaboration | cc-by-4.0 | I've been brainstorming about how to properly compare multi-agent orchestration frameworks against a plain single-agent chain-of-thought baseline, since accuracy numbers reported for orchestration are usually collected under different backbones and different query pools, which makes the marginal contribution of the col... | [
"60-query intersection (DS-V4) Mean Δacc (in accuracy)",
"60-query intersection (DS-V4) Best Δacc (in accuracy)",
"60-query intersection (DS-V4) Worst Δacc (in accuracy)",
"60-query intersection (GPT-5.5) Mean Δacc (in accuracy)",
"60-query intersection (GPT-5.5) Best Δacc (in accuracy)",
"60-query inters... | [
{
"benchmark": "60-query intersection (DS-V4)",
"metric": "Mean Δacc",
"baseline_value": 0,
"method_value": -0.002,
"unit": "accuracy"
},
{
"benchmark": "60-query intersection (DS-V4)",
"metric": "Best Δacc",
"baseline_value": 0,
"method_value": 0.042,
"unit": "accuracy"
... | {
"base_id": "2608.08605",
"title": "ForestBench: A Unified Graph Framework for Evaluating Multi-Agent Collaboration",
"area": "agents",
"component": "multi-agent orchestration vs single-agent CoT baseline",
"setting": "Six MAS frameworks run on three backbones (DS-V4, GPT-5.5, Claude-S4.6) restricted to a 60... |
2608.08853-s012 | 2608.08853 | Beyond Routing: Decoupling Expert Dispatch and Aggregation in Sparse Mixture-of-Experts | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been brainstorming a mixed-domain variant of my Feature-Derived Aggregation Adjustment (FDAA) idea, testing it against native router aggregation on OLMoE-1B-7B-0924. The setup: I train a layer-15 head with deterministic 50/50 WikiText+C4 microbatches, using the same hyperparameters across seeds. The final score la... | [
"WikiText-103 test Delta cross-entropy (in nats)",
"C4 validation Delta cross-entropy (in nats)",
"PTB test Delta cross-entropy (in nats)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "WikiText-103 test",
"metric": "Delta cross-entropy",
"baseline_value": 0,
"method_value": -0.19367,
"unit": "nats"
},
{
"benchmark": "C4 validation",
"metric": "Delta cross-entropy",
"baseline_value": 0,
"method_value": -0.00487,
"unit": "nats"
},
{
... | {
"base_id": "2608.08853",
"title": "Beyond Routing: Decoupling Expert Dispatch and Aggregation in Sparse Mixture-of-Experts",
"area": "llm-training",
"component": "mixed-domain (WikiText+C4) FDAA vs native aggregation",
"setting": "Pretrained OLMoE-1B-7B-0924, mixed-domain training, frozen confirmatory evalu... |
2608.08867-s000 | 2608.08867 | Zero-Shot Traffic Accident Detection via a Coarse-to-Fine VLM-Tracking Pipeline | cc-by-4.0 | I've been brainstorming ways to improve on the organizer-provided heuristic/naive baseline for the ACCIDENT @ CVPR zero-shot real-CCTV benchmark, which relies on hidden test-server labels since the real-CCTV ground truth isn't available locally. My idea is to replace that naive baseline with a single-pass VLM call: I r... | [
"ACCIDENT @ CVPR real-CCTV test set (hidden leaderboard) public leaderboard harmonic mean (in HM)",
"ACCIDENT @ CVPR real-CCTV test set (hidden leaderboard) private leaderboard harmonic mean (in HM)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "ACCIDENT @ CVPR real-CCTV test set (hidden leaderboard)",
"metric": "public leaderboard harmonic mean",
"baseline_value": 0.226,
"method_value": 0.469,
"unit": "HM"
},
{
"benchmark": "ACCIDENT @ CVPR real-CCTV test set (hidden leaderboard)",
"metric": "private leaderb... | {
"base_id": "2608.08867",
"title": "Zero-Shot Traffic Accident Detection via a Coarse-to-Fine VLM-Tracking Pipeline",
"area": "vision",
"component": "single-pass VLM call replacing organizer heuristic/naive baseline",
"setting": "Frozen Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct on hidden test server submissions for the ACCIDENT... |
2608.08911-s000 | 2608.08911 | Physics-Informed Learning for Robust Acoustic Localization with Calibrated Uncertainty | cc-by-4.0 | I've been developing an approach to physics-plausibility gating with a learned correction on top of a hyperbolic solver, aimed at bounding the catastrophic tail of localization errors without disturbing the cases where the solver is already reliable. The idea is to keep a TabPFN regression model that predicts source $x... | [
"frozen-lake site real playback recordings (Konnevesi) mean (in m)",
"frozen-lake site real playback recordings (Konnevesi) p50 (in m)",
"frozen-lake site real playback recordings (Konnevesi) p90 (in m)",
"frozen-lake site real playback recordings (Konnevesi) p95 (in m)",
"frozen-lake site real playback rec... | [
{
"benchmark": "frozen-lake site real playback recordings (Konnevesi)",
"metric": "mean",
"baseline_value": 5.13,
"method_value": 4.97,
"unit": "m"
},
{
"benchmark": "frozen-lake site real playback recordings (Konnevesi)",
"metric": "p50",
"baseline_value": 0.41,
"method_valu... | {
"base_id": "2608.08911",
"title": "Physics-Informed Learning for Robust Acoustic Localization with Calibrated Uncertainty",
"area": "applied-sci",
"component": "physics-plausibility gating with learned correction (hybrid gate)",
"setting": "TabPFN regression model over 72 physics-informed tabular features p... |
2608.09052-s010 | 2608.09052 | Triple Expert Learning from Noisy Labels for Semi-Supervised Vision Foundation Model Adaptation | cc-by-4.0 | I've been brainstorming around a semi-supervised adaptation setup where I keep a vision foundation model backbone completely frozen and only fine-tune three LoRA experts plus the classifier head. The three experts are a Positive Expert, an Alignment Expert, and a Negative Expert, and the whole point of the design (TriN... | [
"CIFAR-100 N4 accuracy (in %)",
"FOOD-101 N2 accuracy (in %)",
"Semi-Aves accuracy (in %)",
"ImageNet 1% accuracy (in %)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "CIFAR-100 N4",
"metric": "accuracy",
"baseline_value": 80.51,
"method_value": 80.69,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "FOOD-101 N2",
"metric": "accuracy",
"baseline_value": 87.46,
"method_value": 87.84,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "Semi-Aves",
"... | {
"base_id": "2608.09052",
"title": "Triple Expert Learning from Noisy Labels for Semi-Supervised Vision Foundation Model Adaptation",
"area": "vision",
"component": "confidence-based routing with shared loss vs random routing",
"setting": "Semi-supervised adaptation of a frozen vision foundation model backbo... |
2608.09209-s051 | 2608.09209 | UNMASK: Discovering and Causally Verifying Spurious Shortcuts in Text Classifiers | cc-by-4.0 | I've been spending cycles on isolating how much of the gain in our BERT DFR debiasing pipeline actually comes from the discovery stage versus the downstream recipe. The idea is to hold the debiasing recipe fixed and only vary how candidate features/groups are discovered, comparing a few discovery baselines: PMI (top-10... | [
"CivilComments-WILDS WGA (in %)",
"CivilComments-WILDS avg-acc (in %)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "CivilComments-WILDS",
"metric": "WGA",
"baseline_value": 65.1,
"method_value": 71.84,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "CivilComments-WILDS",
"metric": "avg-acc",
"baseline_value": 89.71,
"method_value": 90.99,
"unit": "%"
}
] | {
"base_id": "2608.09209",
"title": "UNMASK: Discovering and Causally Verifying Spurious Shortcuts in Text Classifiers",
"area": "safety-interp",
"component": "Full UNMASK discovery pipeline vs LLM-only (no statistical/causal validation)",
"setting": "BERT-base-uncased DFR on CivilComments-WILDS, 3 seeds",
... |
2608.09228-s001 | 2608.09228 | Privileged Solutions or Context-Induced Teacher Behavior? Dissecting On-Policy Self-Distillation | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been brainstorming about a subtlety in how the main experiments are set up for the matched non-thinking Qwen3-4B comparison between Base, OPSD, and OP2SD. In the main results, student prompts are right-padded to the longest student prompt in each minibatch, while teacher prompts are padded independently to the lon... | [
"AIME 2024 Avg@12 (OPSD) (in %)",
"AIME 2024 Pass@12 (OPSD) (in %)",
"AIME 2024 Vote@12 (OPSD) (in %)",
"AIME 2024 Avg@12 (OP2SD) (in %)",
"AIME 2024 Pass@12 (OP2SD) (in %)",
"AIME 2024 Vote@12 (OP2SD) (in %)",
"AIME 2025 Avg@12 (OPSD) (in %)",
"AIME 2025 Pass@12 (OPSD) (in %)",
"AIME 2025 Vote@12 (... | [
{
"benchmark": "AIME 2024",
"metric": "Avg@12 (OPSD)",
"baseline_value": 30.76,
"method_value": 27.78,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "AIME 2024",
"metric": "Pass@12 (OPSD)",
"baseline_value": 59.17,
"method_value": 64.17,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "AIME 2024",... | {
"base_id": "2608.09228",
"title": "Privileged Solutions or Context-Induced Teacher Behavior? Dissecting On-Policy Self-Distillation",
"area": "llm-training",
"component": "left-padded loss replay (padding position control)",
"setting": "Qwen3-4B non-thinking model, matched non-thinking teacher/student setti... |
2608.09551-s001 | 2608.09551 | Pragmatic Attack Surface: Vulnerabilities of Implicit Context in Large Language Models | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been brainstorming an attack method that infers the presuppositions behind a harmful request to get at its implicit context, and then enriches that context to generate outputs that are semantically diverse but pragmatically equivalent to the direct harmful request. The idea is to compare this pragmatic implicit-co... | [
"PolyGuard (Claude) Human-judged Attack Success Rate (in proportion)",
"PolyGuard (GPT) Human-judged Attack Success Rate (in proportion)",
"PolyGuard (Gemini) Human-judged Attack Success Rate (in proportion)",
"PolyGuard (Qwen) Human-judged Attack Success Rate (in proportion)",
"Toxicity (Claude) Human-judg... | [
{
"benchmark": "PolyGuard (Claude)",
"metric": "Human-judged Attack Success Rate",
"baseline_value": 0.133,
"method_value": 0.667,
"unit": "proportion"
},
{
"benchmark": "PolyGuard (GPT)",
"metric": "Human-judged Attack Success Rate",
"baseline_value": 0,
"method_value": 0.66... | {
"base_id": "2608.09551",
"title": "Pragmatic Attack Surface: Vulnerabilities of Implicit Context in Large Language Models",
"area": "safety-interp",
"component": "pragmatic implicit-context attack (Ours) vs Direct prompting baseline",
"setting": "Human-annotated evaluation of attacks run against Claude, GPT... |
2608.09577-s007 | 2608.09577 | ElasticBack: Stealthy Conditional Backdoor in LLM-Agent Skills via Coupled Trigger-Rule Optimization | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been brainstorming ways to tighten how an LLM generates the rule conditions used to gate a target behavior. The mechanism I'm working with: an LLM fills only $C$ and $Z$ under three constraints: (1) the condition uses literal-match verbs (e.g. specifies, asks for) to avoid fuzzy self-judging; (2) the marker phrase... | [
"ClawHub-derived skill dataset (InfoDisc) ASR (in %)",
"ClawHub-derived skill dataset (InfoDisc) FPR (in %)",
"ClawHub-derived skill dataset (InfoDisc) Delta_CAC (in %)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "ClawHub-derived skill dataset (InfoDisc)",
"metric": "ASR",
"baseline_value": 80,
"method_value": 98,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "ClawHub-derived skill dataset (InfoDisc)",
"metric": "FPR",
"baseline_value": 42,
"method_value": 0,
"unit": "%"
},
{
... | {
"base_id": "2608.09577",
"title": "ElasticBack: Stealthy Conditional Backdoor in LLM-Agent Skills via Coupled Trigger-Rule Optimization",
"area": "safety-interp",
"component": "Syntactic constraints on rule condition generation",
"setting": "GLM-5.2 victim model, InfoDisc target behavior, component ablation... |
2608.09622-s014 | 2608.09622 | Adaptive Sequential Test Planning for Multi-Mechanism Reliability Qualification via Bayesian Monte Carlo Tree Search | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been brainstorming about how the different pieces of the reward objective in my MCTS-SA planner contribute to avoiding catastrophic failures, and specifically wanted to isolate the effect of the safety barrier (proximity penalty) term. The mechanism is a barrier penalty that discourages the planner from approachin... | [
"Stochastic multi-mechanism reliability simulation (BTI/EM/TDDB) Catastrophe rate (in %)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "Stochastic multi-mechanism reliability simulation (BTI/EM/TDDB)",
"metric": "Catastrophe rate",
"baseline_value": 55.4,
"method_value": 78,
"unit": "%"
}
] | {
"base_id": "2608.09622",
"title": "Adaptive Sequential Test Planning for Multi-Mechanism Reliability Qualification via Bayesian Monte Carlo Tree Search",
"area": "applied-sci",
"component": "Safety barrier (proximity penalty) ablation",
"setting": "MCTS-SA planner with the full multi-component reward as bas... |
2608.09656-s035 | 2608.09656 | EgoHieraLoc: A Cortically Inspired Hierarchical Segmentation-Guided Framework for Egocentric Visual Query Localization | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been brainstorming ways to improve multi-view aggregation for the VQ3D localization task using a GSJC scheme, and part of this involves how we score the quality/reliability of each view's segmentation mask before combining information across views. My formulation computes three probability statistics from a segmen... | [
"Ego4D-VQ3D validation set Succ. (in %)",
"Ego4D-VQ3D validation set Succ.* (in %)",
"Ego4D-VQ3D validation set L2 (in m)",
"Ego4D-VQ3D validation set Ang. (in rad)",
"Ego4D-VQ3D validation set QwP(%) (in %)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "Ego4D-VQ3D validation set",
"metric": "Succ.",
"baseline_value": 78.13,
"method_value": 80.85,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "Ego4D-VQ3D validation set",
"metric": "Succ.*",
"baseline_value": 94.32,
"method_value": 96.78,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmar... | {
"base_id": "2608.09656",
"title": "EgoHieraLoc: A Cortically Inspired Hierarchical Segmentation-Guided Framework for Egocentric Visual Query Localization",
"area": "vision",
"component": "combined semantic proxies (P_thr+P_max) in GSJC",
"setting": "Ego4D-VQ3D validation set, GSJC-based multi-view aggregati... |
2608.09703-s005 | 2608.09703 | Matryoshka Language Model Suites | cc-by-sa-4.0 | I've been ideating on how a Matryoshka-style nested training setup compares to just training independent models at matched compute. The core idea: instead of a conventional suite of $M$ models with $M$ independent parameter sets $\{(\theta_m, W_m)\}_{m=1}^M$, we enforce a strict nesting of parameters (aside from the LM... | [
"500M Avg acc. (in %)",
"500M OOD PPL (in byte perplexity)",
"1.5B Avg acc. (in %)",
"1.5B OOD PPL (in byte perplexity)",
"3B Avg acc. (in %)",
"3B OOD PPL (in byte perplexity)",
"500M WikiText-103 WikiText byte PPL (in byte perplexity)",
"500M C4 C4 byte PPL (in byte perplexity)",
"500M PG-19 PG-19... | [
{
"benchmark": "500M",
"metric": "Avg acc.",
"baseline_value": 46.1,
"method_value": 46.5,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "500M",
"metric": "OOD PPL",
"baseline_value": 2.295,
"method_value": 2.265,
"unit": "byte perplexity"
},
{
"benchmark": "1.5B",
"metric": ... | {
"base_id": "2608.09703",
"title": "Matryoshka Language Model Suites",
"area": "llm-training",
"component": "Matryoshka nested training vs FLOPs-matched independent training",
"setting": "3B Matryoshka suite (500M/1.5B/3B nested sub-models, 39 total layers, depth triplet 24/10/5) vs Vanilla suite of independ... |
2608.10166-s002 | 2608.10166 | MarkNull: Model-Agnostic Watermark Removal in AI-Generated Images via On-Manifold Latent Manipulation | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been brainstorming about whether MarkNull (the iterative optimization attack) and MarkNull-A (the amortized WRN-based version) generalize across image resolutions, given that all my main experiments were run at 512x512. My reasoning is that these attacks aren't inherently tied to a specific resolution because Mark... | [
"PRC (128×128) BA (in %)",
"PRC (128×128) LPIPS",
"SS (128×128) BA (in %)",
"SS (128×128) LPIPS",
"PRC (256×256) BA (in %)",
"PRC (256×256) LPIPS",
"SS (256×256) BA (in %)",
"SS (256×256) LPIPS",
"PRC (768×768) BA (in %)",
"PRC (768×768) LPIPS",
"SS (768×768) BA (in %)",
"SS (768×768) LPIPS"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "PRC (128×128)",
"metric": "BA",
"baseline_value": 51.56,
"method_value": 49.24,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "PRC (128×128)",
"metric": "LPIPS",
"baseline_value": 0.28,
"method_value": 0.31,
"unit": ""
},
{
"benchmark": "SS (128×128)",
"metric... | {
"base_id": "2608.10166",
"title": "MarkNull: Model-Agnostic Watermark Removal in AI-Generated Images via On-Manifold Latent Manipulation",
"area": "safety-interp",
"component": "image resolution generalization of MarkNull and MarkNull-A",
"setting": "MarkNull (iterative optimization) and MarkNull-A (amortiz... |
2608.10171-s000 | 2608.10171 | Generating Attacks for LLMs with GFlowNets | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been brainstorming an idea around adding GFlowNet-based exploration plus an MLE stabilization stage on top of SFT for training an attack-generation model. The overall pipeline works like this: SFT is used first to shape the model's general language capability into an "attack specialist" persona, so the model learn... | [
"attack generation (Qwen3-1.7b attacker, Gemma3-4b target, Qwen3Guard-8b evaluator) Similarity Score (in cosine similarity)",
"attack generation (Qwen3-1.7b attacker, Gemma3-4b target, Qwen3Guard-8b evaluator) Toxicity Score (in score)",
"attack generation (Qwen3-1.7b attacker, Gemma3-4b target, Qwen3Guard-8b e... | [
{
"benchmark": "attack generation (Qwen3-1.7b attacker, Gemma3-4b target, Qwen3Guard-8b evaluator)",
"metric": "Similarity Score",
"baseline_value": 0.62,
"method_value": 0.54,
"unit": "cosine similarity"
},
{
"benchmark": "attack generation (Qwen3-1.7b attacker, Gemma3-4b target, Qwen3G... | {
"base_id": "2608.10171",
"title": "Generating Attacks for LLMs with GFlowNets",
"area": "safety-interp",
"component": "GFlowNet + MLE training stages added after SFT",
"setting": "Qwen3-1.7b as attacker model, Gemma3-4b as target/victim model, Qwen3Guard-8b as evaluator/classifier model; expanded dataset us... |
2608.10447-s016 | 2608.10447 | Towards Efficient Reasoning in LLM-Based Recommender Systems via Model Merging | cc-by-4.0 | I've been ideating on how to merge a slow-thinking recommendation reasoner with a fast-thinking direct-prediction model without any additional training, using ACM combined with TA as the merging technique. My setup involves the slow-thinking model theta_S, which is RecZero, fine-tuned from Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct for struc... | [
"Amazon Book MAE (in lower is better)",
"Amazon Book RMSE (in lower is better)",
"Amazon Book Tok (in lower is better)",
"Yelp MAE (in lower is better)",
"Yelp RMSE (in lower is better)",
"Yelp Tok (in lower is better)",
"Amazon Music MAE (in lower is better)",
"Amazon Music RMSE (in lower is better)"... | [
{
"benchmark": "Amazon Book",
"metric": "MAE",
"baseline_value": 0.665,
"method_value": 0.6932,
"unit": "lower is better"
},
{
"benchmark": "Amazon Book",
"metric": "RMSE",
"baseline_value": 0.9331,
"method_value": 0.9162,
"unit": "lower is better"
},
{
"benchmark... | {
"base_id": "2608.10447",
"title": "Towards Efficient Reasoning in LLM-Based Recommender Systems via Model Merging",
"area": "applied-sci",
"component": "ACM + TA",
"setting": "Merging RecZero (theta_S) with adapted TALLRec (theta_F) using Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct as shared base; training-free merge with recommen... |
2608.10475-s018 | 2608.10475 | Evaluating Rational Contracting in Natural Language | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been brainstorming around a setup where I evaluate LLM agents acting in a Supplier role against rational, non-LLM baseline policies, specifically looking at how a Supplier fares against an RE counterparty. RE here is approximated as non-engagement -- i.e. the counterparty either doesn't pay or doesn't deliver anyt... | [
"ContractSim synthetic performance-game (Supplier-side, RE counterparty) Utility (in mean)",
"ContractSim synthetic performance-game (Supplier-side, RE counterparty) Compliance-adjusted Utility (in mean)",
"ContractSim synthetic performance-game (Supplier-side, RE counterparty) (Ex-Post) Regret (in mean)",
"C... | [
{
"benchmark": "ContractSim synthetic performance-game (Supplier-side, RE counterparty)",
"metric": "Utility",
"baseline_value": 0,
"method_value": -0.4,
"unit": "mean"
},
{
"benchmark": "ContractSim synthetic performance-game (Supplier-side, RE counterparty)",
"metric": "Compliance-... | {
"base_id": "2608.10475",
"title": "Evaluating Rational Contracting in Natural Language",
"area": "agents",
"component": "LLM agent (Supplier role) versus RE baseline policy, when facing an RE (non-engaging) customer counterparty",
"setting": "Synthetic performance-game evaluation using structured contracts ... |
2608.10544-s013 | 2608.10544 | Flow Straight to Reality: Perceptually Consistent Flow Matching for Efficient Image Restoration | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been brainstorming ways to handle the conflict between the reconstruction objective (LCFM) and the perceptual objective (LCPL) when training PCFlow, which uses a latent consistency flow matching backbone for super-resolution. My idea is a conflict-free gradient update, inspired by multi-task gradient surgery but a... | [
"super-resolution FID",
"super-resolution PSNR (in dB)",
"super-resolution SSIM",
"super-resolution LPIPS"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "super-resolution",
"metric": "FID",
"baseline_value": 46.4,
"method_value": 46.26,
"unit": ""
},
{
"benchmark": "super-resolution",
"metric": "PSNR",
"baseline_value": 23.32,
"method_value": 23.31,
"unit": "dB"
},
{
"benchmark": "super-resolution",... | {
"base_id": "2608.10544",
"title": "Flow Straight to Reality: Perceptually Consistent Flow Matching for Efficient Image Restoration",
"area": "vision",
"component": "Conflict-free gradient alignment applied from epoch 0 (without preheating) vs standard joint optimization without gradient alignment",
"setting... |
2608.10553-s000 | 2608.10553 | Retrieval-Corrected Conformal Prediction for Time Series | cc-by-4.0 | I've been ideating on a retrieval-based correction mechanism for conformal prediction in time series, and I want to lay out the setup and where the baselines currently stand. The core idea is to split the interval construction into a retrieval stage and a correction stage. In the retrieval stage, each prediction contex... | [
"Air (α=0.05) Delta Cov (in percentage points)",
"Air (α=0.05) PI-Width (in avg interval length)",
"Air (α=0.05) Winkler (in score)",
"Air (α=0.05) Time (in seconds)",
"Solar (α=0.05) Delta Cov (in percentage points)",
"Solar (α=0.05) PI-Width (in avg interval length)",
"Solar (α=0.05) Winkler (in score... | [
{
"benchmark": "Air (α=0.05)",
"metric": "Delta Cov",
"baseline_value": 0.12,
"method_value": 0.18,
"unit": "percentage points"
},
{
"benchmark": "Air (α=0.05)",
"metric": "PI-Width",
"baseline_value": 89.99,
"method_value": 80.57,
"unit": "avg interval length"
},
{
... | {
"base_id": "2608.10553",
"title": "Retrieval-Corrected Conformal Prediction for Time Series",
"area": "applied-sci",
"component": "retrieval-corrected conformal prediction (RCCP) vs baseline conformal prediction methods (SCP, EnbPI, SPCI, NexCP, HopCPT, ResCP)",
"setting": "Global LSTM forecaster trained on... |
2608.10566-s037 | 2608.10566 | Iterative Erasure Count Is Not an Affine-Invariant Concept Dimension | cc-by-4.0 | I've been brainstorming about how sensitive concept-erasure audits are to the choice of intervention geometry, specifically comparing Euclidean intervention geometry against covariance-based maps (empirical, Oracle Approximating Shrinkage (OAS), and Ledoit-Wolf), where eigenvalues are floored at $10^{-4}\lambda_{\max}$... | [
"100DOH rank 1 orientation-fixed concordance (AUROC) (in AUROC)",
"100DOH rank 10 orientation-fixed concordance (AUROC) (in AUROC)",
"TouchMoment rank 1 orientation-fixed concordance (AUROC) (in AUROC)",
"TouchMoment rank 10 orientation-fixed concordance (AUROC) (in AUROC)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "100DOH rank 1",
"metric": "orientation-fixed concordance (AUROC)",
"baseline_value": 0.827,
"method_value": 0.586,
"unit": "AUROC"
},
{
"benchmark": "100DOH rank 10",
"metric": "orientation-fixed concordance (AUROC)",
"baseline_value": 0.598,
"method_value": 0... | {
"base_id": "2608.10566",
"title": "Iterative Erasure Count Is Not an Affine-Invariant Concept Dimension",
"area": "safety-interp",
"component": "metric choice (Euclidean vs OAS) in per-rank fresh-attacker audit",
"setting": "Group-disjoint validation-half retuning, five seeds with swapped halves, V-JEPA2 fe... |
2608.10627-s016 | 2608.10627 | Decomposition-Induced Context-Memory Conflict: When Fact-Checking Pipelines Contradict Their Own Source Text | cc-by-4.0 | I've been brainstorming about whether the H0 mechanistic probe finding I've been working with actually generalizes across model families, rather than being specific to the one family I've used for all my primary work so far. All my primary results have used a single model family, Qwen2.5, and a single NLI model (DeBERT... | [
"self-generated biography DI-CC (DI-CC vs. legit) AUC (in AUC)",
"self-generated biography DI-CC (DI-CC vs. DI-UE) AUC (in AUC)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "self-generated biography DI-CC (DI-CC vs. legit)",
"metric": "AUC",
"baseline_value": 0.881,
"method_value": 0.397,
"unit": "AUC"
},
{
"benchmark": "self-generated biography DI-CC (DI-CC vs. DI-UE)",
"metric": "AUC",
"baseline_value": 0.863,
"method_value": 0.... | {
"base_id": "2608.10627",
"title": "Decomposition-Induced Context-Memory Conflict: When Fact-Checking Pipelines Contradict Their Own Source Text",
"area": "safety-interp",
"component": "Cross-model-family generalization of the H0 mechanistic probe (Qwen2.5 vs Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.3)",
"setting": "Single-mo... |
2608.10657-s012 | 2608.10657 | Retrieval-Augmented Vision Foundation Models for Robust Leukemia Cell Classification across Multiple Microscopy Datasets | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been working on a two-stage pipeline for leukemia cell classification, where Stage 2 performs subtype classification (ALL vs. AML), applied conditionally to the samples predicted as leukemic by Stage 1. For this stage I'm testing three encoders — DinoBloom, BiomedCLIP, and CLIP — cross-dataset trained on 69,400 si... | [
"Stage 2 held-out, DinoBloom linear probe Accuracy (in proportion)",
"Stage 2 held-out, DinoBloom linear probe Recall (in proportion)",
"Stage 2 held-out, DinoBloom linear probe F1-score (in proportion)",
"Stage 2 held-out, DinoBloom LoRA Accuracy (in proportion)",
"Stage 2 held-out, DinoBloom LoRA Recall (... | [
{
"benchmark": "Stage 2 held-out, DinoBloom linear probe",
"metric": "Accuracy",
"baseline_value": 0.962,
"method_value": 0.962,
"unit": "proportion"
},
{
"benchmark": "Stage 2 held-out, DinoBloom linear probe",
"metric": "Recall",
"baseline_value": 0.5,
"method_value": 0.5,
... | {
"base_id": "2608.10657",
"title": "Retrieval-Augmented Vision Foundation Models for Robust Leukemia Cell Classification across Multiple Microscopy Datasets",
"area": "vision",
"component": "Retrieval-Augmented Classification (RAC) for Stage 2 subtype classification",
"setting": "Stage 2 subtype classificati... |
2608.10715-s004 | 2608.10715 | Most biomedical publications show signs of LLM-assisted writing | cc-by-sa-4.0 | I've been brainstorming about how to use LLM marker-word frequencies in PMC full-text papers to estimate LLM usage rates across different countries, and specifically whether the picture changes when grouping countries by whether they are majority native-English-speaking or not. My setup uses full-paper text (Introducti... | [
"PMC full papers grouped by country (Majority native English vs Other countries) 2022 marker word frequency (in frequency)",
"PMC full papers grouped by country (Majority native English vs Other countries) 2025 marker word frequency (in frequency)",
"PMC full papers grouped by country (Majority native English v... | [
{
"benchmark": "PMC full papers grouped by country (Majority native English vs Other countries)",
"metric": "2022 marker word frequency",
"baseline_value": 0.92,
"method_value": 0.79,
"unit": "frequency"
},
{
"benchmark": "PMC full papers grouped by country (Majority native English vs Ot... | {
"base_id": "2608.10715",
"title": "Most biomedical publications show signs of LLM-assisted writing",
"area": "llm-eval",
"component": "native-English-speaking-country affiliation vs other countries",
"setting": "Full-paper text (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion concatenated), fixed marker-word set... |
2608.10775-s000 | 2608.10775 | SkillLens: Visual Skill Cards for Retrieval-Augmented GUI Action Prediction and On-Policy Distillation | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been developing a way to give a frozen computer-using agent a form of reusable visual procedural memory, rather than touching any model weights. The idea is that prior interaction experience gets converted (via a Trace-to-VSC process) into Visual Skill Cards that pair a procedure with state cues and visual evidenc... | [
"Multimodal-Mind2Web (GPT-5.4-mini) Step SR (in %)",
"WebLINX-BG (GPT-5.4-mini) Overall (in %)",
"OSWorld-G (GPT-5.4-mini) Grounding Acc. (in %)",
"Multimodal-Mind2Web (Qwen3-VL-2B) Step SR (in %)",
"WebLINX-BG (Qwen3-VL-2B) Overall (in %)",
"OSWorld-G (Qwen3-VL-2B) Grounding Acc. (in %)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "Multimodal-Mind2Web (GPT-5.4-mini)",
"metric": "Step SR",
"baseline_value": 77.2,
"method_value": 88.8,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "WebLINX-BG (GPT-5.4-mini)",
"metric": "Overall",
"baseline_value": 12.8,
"method_value": 15.7,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"... | {
"base_id": "2608.10775",
"title": "SkillLens: Visual Skill Cards for Retrieval-Augmented GUI Action Prediction and On-Policy Distillation",
"area": "agents",
"component": "retrieved VSC evidence (SkillLens runtime augmentation)",
"setting": "Frozen VLM executors (GPT-5.4-mini, GPT-4o, Gemini models, Qwen3-V... |
2608.10777-s004 | 2608.10777 | Path Integral Value Matching for Linear Quadratic Stochastic Optimal Control | cc-by-4.0 | I've been working on a value-based approach to stochastic optimal control that I'm calling Path Integral Value Matching (PI-VM). The core idea builds on the observation that the path integral representation of the optimal value function has a recursive structure: for any $0 < t < s$, \begin{equation}\exp\left( - V(X_t,... | [
"OU Linear Control L2 error",
"OU Linear Time (in ms)",
"OU Quadratic (easy) Control L2 error",
"OU Quadratic (easy) Time (in ms)",
"OU Quadratic (hard) Control L2 error",
"OU Quadratic (hard) Time (in ms)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "OU Linear",
"metric": "Control L2 error",
"baseline_value": 0,
"method_value": 0,
"unit": ""
},
{
"benchmark": "OU Linear",
"metric": "Time",
"baseline_value": 41,
"method_value": 8,
"unit": "ms"
},
{
"benchmark": "OU Quadratic (easy)",
"metric... | {
"base_id": "2608.10777",
"title": "Path Integral Value Matching for Linear Quadratic Stochastic Optimal Control",
"area": "applied-sci",
"component": "PI-VM (recursive path integral value matching via TD learning)",
"setting": "Neural network value/policy models trained on linear-quadratic SOC benchmark tas... |
2608.10941-s018 | 2608.10941 | Physics-informed Diffusion Generative Model for Time-Series Data Synthesis in Dynamic Systems | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been working on evaluating how well generative models capture the true underlying data distribution, using a combination of t-SNE visualizations and kernel density estimation (KDE) plots to compare generated versus real data. The idea is to assess distributional overlap both visually and quantitatively: the t-SNE ... | [
"turbofan engine RUL prediction Maximum Mean Discrepancy (MMD) (in MMD (lower is better))",
"turbofan engine RUL prediction Pearson correlation coefficient (R) (in R (higher is better))"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "turbofan engine RUL prediction",
"metric": "Maximum Mean Discrepancy (MMD)",
"baseline_value": 0.056,
"method_value": 0.04,
"unit": "MMD (lower is better)"
},
{
"benchmark": "turbofan engine RUL prediction",
"metric": "Pearson correlation coefficient (R)",
"baseli... | {
"base_id": "2608.10941",
"title": "Physics-informed Diffusion Generative Model for Time-Series Data Synthesis in Dynamic Systems",
"area": "applied-sci",
"component": "t-SNE/KDE distributional overlap of PhysDGM-generated data vs baseline (DiT)",
"setting": "Turbofan engine RUL prediction dataset (with addi... |
2608.10986-s001 | 2608.10986 | What Iterated Self-Feeding Probes of Language Models Measure, and a test that separates the construction from the model | cc-by-4.0 | I've been brainstorming about whether the branching behavior I see in the autoregressive windowed construction depends on the full vocabulary being available at each step, or whether it's really something about how semantically coherent the token sub-alphabet is. My setup is the same coupled-draw disagreement construct... | [
"coupled-draw disagreement (far position, r=2, autoregressive) far-position contribution (in probability)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "coupled-draw disagreement (far position, r=2, autoregressive)",
"metric": "far-position contribution",
"baseline_value": 0.579,
"method_value": 0.061,
"unit": "probability"
}
] | {
"base_id": "2608.10986",
"title": "What Iterated Self-Feeding Probes of Language Models Measure, and a test that separates the construction from the model",
"area": "safety-interp",
"component": "semantically coherent token sub-alphabet restriction",
"setting": "Autoregressive windowed construction restrict... |
2608.10989-s023 | 2608.10989 | Putting Registers to Work: Task Registers for Token Pruning in Vision Transformers | cc-by-4.0 | I've been brainstorming about how to evaluate token-pruning criteria in a controlled, isolated way, separate from any retraining or recovery mechanism. The idea is to use a single-layer controlled probe: I freeze the backbone and head of a no-pruning checkpoint for a given task, then modify just one eligible layer, kee... | [
"ImageNet-1K (classification, mean single-layer drop) top-1 accuracy drop (percentage points) (in percentage points)",
"ADE20K (segmentation, mean single-layer drop) mIoU drop (percentage points) (in percentage points)",
"COCO (detection, mean single-layer drop) box AP drop (percentage points) (in percentage po... | [
{
"benchmark": "ImageNet-1K (classification, mean single-layer drop)",
"metric": "top-1 accuracy drop (percentage points)",
"baseline_value": 2.2,
"method_value": 3.9,
"unit": "percentage points"
},
{
"benchmark": "ADE20K (segmentation, mean single-layer drop)",
"metric": "mIoU drop ... | {
"base_id": "2608.10989",
"title": "Putting Registers to Work: Task Registers for Token Pruning in Vision Transformers",
"area": "vision",
"component": "attention mean criterion vs random baseline (single-layer controlled probe)",
"setting": "Frozen no-pruning ViT-B (MAE-pretrained) checkpoints per task; sin... |
2608.13940-s001 | 2608.13940 | AI Research Preference Models | cc-by-4.0 | I've been sketching out a research agent that prototypes before it commits. The expensive step in machine-learning research is executing a candidate to train and measure a model, so an agent proposes far more candidates than it can run and progress hinges on which ones get GPU time. Rather than asking a language model ... | [
"AIRS-Bench, 20 public text and tabular tasks, 10 seeds, 24 h on one H200 per task final Average Normalized Score at 24 h (in normalized score)",
"AIRS-Bench, 20 public text and tabular tasks, 10 seeds, 24 h on one H200 per task wall-clock hours to reach an Average Normalized Score of 0.684 (the No-RPM final scor... | [
{
"benchmark": "AIRS-Bench, 20 public text and tabular tasks, 10 seeds, 24 h on one H200 per task",
"metric": "final Average Normalized Score at 24 h",
"baseline_value": 0.684,
"method_value": 0.729,
"unit": "normalized score"
},
{
"benchmark": "AIRS-Bench, 20 public text and tabular tas... | {
"base_id": "2608.13940",
"title": "AI Research Preference Models",
"area": "agents",
"component": "Agentic RPM for child candidate selection",
"setting": "AIRA-dojo on 20 public text/tabular AIRS-Bench tasks, 24 h H200, 10 seeds, Hidden Consistent Evaluation, Qwen3.6-27B backbone, 5-minute pilot budget per ... |
2608.17941-s010 | 2608.17941 | Efficient RLVR Scheduling via Graph-Structured Online Difficulty Estimation | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been ideating on a windowed forgetting mechanism for the state-level rollout statistics in the graph-structured difficulty estimator. Right now, the online inference procedure accumulates rollout feedback across training steps by inheriting the state-level Beta posterior, i.e. \(a_{k,t}^{\mathrm{hist}}=a_{k,t-1}\)... | [
"MATH training split (Qwen-2.5-Math-1.5B) MAE",
"MATH training split (Qwen-2.5-Math-1.5B) r",
"MATH training split (Llama-3.2-1B-Instruct) MAE",
"MATH training split (Llama-3.2-1B-Instruct) r"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "MATH training split (Qwen-2.5-Math-1.5B)",
"metric": "MAE",
"baseline_value": 0.183,
"method_value": 0.127,
"unit": ""
},
{
"benchmark": "MATH training split (Qwen-2.5-Math-1.5B)",
"metric": "r",
"baseline_value": 0.836,
"method_value": 0.712,
"unit": ""
... | {
"base_id": "2608.17941",
"title": "Efficient RLVR Scheduling via Graph-Structured Online Difficulty Estimation",
"area": "llm-training",
"component": "windowed forgetting mechanism for state-level rollout statistics",
"setting": "Replay of full GRPO training logs for the graph-structured difficulty estimato... |
2608.18050-s006 | 2608.18050 | StagedWorkspace: A Versioned Workspace for Knowledge-Work Agents | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been mulling over how much the choice of document parser matters for the parsed-only view in our fixed-harness setup on OfficeQA Pro. The benchmark's own release evaluates agents on a pre-exported .txt corpus, built from Databricks ai_parse_document output with parsed elements concatenated in reading order and fig... | [
"OfficeQA Pro (GPT-5.4) Accuracy (in %)",
"OfficeQA Pro (GPT-5.4) Latency (min) (in min)",
"OfficeQA Pro (GPT-5.4) Cost ($) (in $)",
"OfficeQA Pro (GPT-5.4) Tools (in count)",
"OfficeQA Pro (Gemini 3 Flash) Accuracy (in %)",
"OfficeQA Pro (Gemini 3 Flash) Latency (min) (in min)",
"OfficeQA Pro (Gemini 3... | [
{
"benchmark": "OfficeQA Pro (GPT-5.4)",
"metric": "Accuracy",
"baseline_value": 58.6,
"method_value": 60.2,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "OfficeQA Pro (GPT-5.4)",
"metric": "Latency (min)",
"baseline_value": 17.3,
"method_value": 7.9,
"unit": "min"
},
{
"benchma... | {
"base_id": "2608.18050",
"title": "StagedWorkspace: A Versioned Workspace for Knowledge-Work Agents",
"area": "agents",
"component": "parser choice for parsed-only view (Reducto vs Databricks export)",
"setting": "Fixed-harness ablation on OfficeQA Pro across multiple LLM backends (GPT-5.4, Gemini 3 Flash, ... |
2608.18450-s004 | 2608.18450 | Adaptive Multi-Agent Feature Selection for Personalized Fall Risk Prevention | cc-by-4.0 | I've been developing PAFIR, a hierarchical reinforcement-learning-based feature selection approach, and I'm testing it against GraphGPS+HDSE as a baseline on fall-risk factor identification. My setup uses longitudinal, multimodal data from the PEER fall prevention study collected in real-world settings, with 341 commun... | [
"PEER study fall-risk factor selection (feature-level) Precision",
"PEER study fall-risk factor selection (feature-level) Recall",
"PEER study fall-risk factor selection (feature-level) F1 Score",
"PEER study fall-risk factor selection (group-level) Precision",
"PEER study fall-risk factor selection (group-... | [
{
"benchmark": "PEER study fall-risk factor selection (feature-level)",
"metric": "Precision",
"baseline_value": 0.891,
"method_value": 0.887,
"unit": ""
},
{
"benchmark": "PEER study fall-risk factor selection (feature-level)",
"metric": "Recall",
"baseline_value": 0.874,
"m... | {
"base_id": "2608.18450",
"title": "Adaptive Multi-Agent Feature Selection for Personalized Fall Risk Prevention",
"area": "applied-sci",
"component": "PAFIR vs GraphGPS+HDSE",
"setting": "PEER cluster-randomized trial data; feature- and group-level selection evaluated against predefined reference sets, aver... |
2608.18569-s000 | 2608.18569 | The Role of Grid Cells in Reducing Spatial Aliasing in Hippocampal Place Representations | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been working on integrating grid cells into a place cell representation to see how they interact with boundary vector cell (BVC) inputs when disambiguating spatially similar locations. The core idea is that place cells integrate two input streams: BVCs provide geometric constraints from environmental boundaries, w... | [
"Open environment MSAI (in ×10⁻⁴)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "Open environment",
"metric": "MSAI",
"baseline_value": 5.7,
"method_value": 0.3,
"unit": "×10⁻⁴"
}
] | {
"base_id": "2608.18569",
"title": "The Role of Grid Cells in Reducing Spatial Aliasing in Hippocampal Place Representations",
"area": "applied-sci",
"component": "grid cell integration into place cell representations",
"setting": "Analytical grid cell + BVC-driven place cell model (8 HDCs, 400 BVCs, 400 gri... |
2608.19168-s016 | 2608.19168 | Learned, Then Lost: A Measured Single-Example Counterfactual in Pre-training | cc-by-4.0 | I've been working on an idea around attested-subject content injection — basically manipulating truth/attestation status of an injected subject rather than fluency or form, and seeing whether that distinction shows up in downstream training dynamics. The two fluent passages we compare are matched in register and struct... | [
"Interpolation loss barrier vs seed-matched twin Loss barrier (mean displacement from twin) (in barrier units)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "Interpolation loss barrier vs seed-matched twin",
"metric": "Loss barrier (mean displacement from twin)",
"baseline_value": 0.1462,
"method_value": 0.153,
"unit": "barrier units"
}
] | {
"base_id": "2608.19168",
"title": "Learned, Then Lost: A Measured Single-Example Counterfactual in Pre-training",
"area": "llm-training",
"component": "attested-subject content injection (truth/attestation manipulation)",
"setting": "32 GPT-2 (124M parameter) models trained from scratch on OpenWebText, 4 co... |
2608.19338-s000 | 2608.19338 | Mechanistic Tomography: Designed Measurement for Control-Oriented Interpretability | cc-by-4.0 | I've been iterating on ways to extend the response-map formulation used for characterizing refusal behavior in Qwen-2.5-7B-Instruct, specifically by adding lifted pairwise interaction terms on top of the existing additive terms. The core idea I keep coming back to is that the calibrated additive map only contains the d... | [
"Qwen-2.5-7B refusal-response surface (Held-out test) MAE",
"Qwen-2.5-7B refusal-response surface (Held-out test) RMSE",
"Qwen-2.5-7B refusal-response surface (Held-out test) R^2"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "Qwen-2.5-7B refusal-response surface (Held-out test)",
"metric": "MAE",
"baseline_value": 0.00379,
"method_value": 0.003801,
"unit": ""
},
{
"benchmark": "Qwen-2.5-7B refusal-response surface (Held-out test)",
"metric": "RMSE",
"baseline_value": 0.004699,
"met... | {
"base_id": "2608.19338",
"title": "Mechanistic Tomography: Designed Measurement for Control-Oriented Interpretability",
"area": "safety-interp",
"component": "lifted pairwise interaction terms in the response map",
"setting": "Qwen-2.5-7B-Instruct with a fixed intervention basis of eight layerwise harmful-v... |
2608.20204-s003 | 2608.20204 | ContractScrub: A benchmark for final review of legal contracts | cc-by-nc-sa-4.0 | I've been mulling over how much the reasoning mode in these frontier LLMs is actually pulling weight on the contract scrubbing task, versus just adding latency and cost. The intuition is that a lot of the nine error categories we scrub for might look like they only need shallow pattern-matching rather than deep legal i... | [
"ContractScrub (GPT-5.5) R (in score)",
"ContractScrub (GPT-5.5) P (in score)",
"ContractScrub (GPT-5.5) F1 (in score)",
"ContractScrub (GPT-5.5) Cost (in $ per contract)",
"ContractScrub (GPT-5.5) Latency (in s per contract)",
"ContractScrub (Claude Opus 4.7) R (in score)",
"ContractScrub (Claude Opus ... | [
{
"benchmark": "ContractScrub (GPT-5.5)",
"metric": "R",
"baseline_value": 0.643,
"method_value": 0.75,
"unit": "score"
},
{
"benchmark": "ContractScrub (GPT-5.5)",
"metric": "P",
"baseline_value": 0.463,
"method_value": 0.58,
"unit": "score"
},
{
"benchmark": "Co... | {
"base_id": "2608.20204",
"title": "ContractScrub: A benchmark for final review of legal contracts",
"area": "llm-eval",
"component": "reasoning mode (extended reasoning/thinking enabled)",
"setting": "Frontier LLMs (GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.7) prompted to scrub contracts across nine error categories, with per... |
2608.20263-s032 | 2608.20263 | Ultra-High-Definition Restoration Transformers with Correlation Matching Transformation | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been ideating on a module for balancing channel-wise feature importance when fusing multi-level high-resolution features before they inform the low-resolution branch. The idea is an Adaptive Channel Modulator (ACM) that adaptively modulates high-resolution features so that more representative information gets pass... | [
"UHD-LL PSNR (dB) (in dB)",
"UHD-LL SSIM",
"UHD-LL LPIPS",
"UHD-LL Params. (M) (in M)",
"UHD-LL FLOPs (G) (in G)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "UHD-LL",
"metric": "PSNR (dB)",
"baseline_value": 26.953,
"method_value": 27.256,
"unit": "dB"
},
{
"benchmark": "UHD-LL",
"metric": "SSIM",
"baseline_value": 0.9289,
"method_value": 0.9308,
"unit": ""
},
{
"benchmark": "UHD-LL",
"metric": "LPI... | {
"base_id": "2608.20263",
"title": "Ultra-High-Definition Restoration Transformers with Correlation Matching Transformation",
"area": "vision",
"component": "Adaptive Channel Modulator (ACM)",
"setting": "UHDformer++ trained/ablated on the UHD-LL low-light enhancement dataset",
"flagged": false
} |
2608.20621-s017 | 2608.20621 | RECOUNT: Reference-guided Counting with Synthetic Visual Exemplars | arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 | I've been mulling over how to make zero-shot counters actually respect the category they're told to count, rather than just detecting all salient objects regardless of label. The idea I keep coming back to is image-guided exemplars: instead of specifying a category through text, the data engine specifies it from one re... | [
"PrACo (Negative Test) NMN",
"PrACo (Negative Test) PCCN (in %)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "PrACo (Negative Test)",
"metric": "NMN",
"baseline_value": 0.07,
"method_value": 0.02,
"unit": ""
},
{
"benchmark": "PrACo (Negative Test)",
"metric": "PCCN",
"baseline_value": 97.99,
"method_value": 98.15,
"unit": "%"
}
] | {
"base_id": "2608.20621",
"title": "RECOUNT: Reference-guided Counting with Synthetic Visual Exemplars",
"area": "vision",
"component": "RECOUNT image-guided exemplars for category adherence (Negative Test)",
"setting": "Zero-shot counters evaluated on the PrACo benchmark's Negative Test protocol, prompting ... |
2608.21690-s010 | 2608.21690 | Context as an Environment: Programmatic Context Management for Long-Horizon Agents | cc-by-4.0 | I've been ideating on how long-horizon LLM agents manage their accumulated interaction history, and specifically whether it makes sense to keep serializing that history into the model's prompt at all versus treating it as an external environment the model interacts with programmatically. The idea I'm working through, S... | [
"LOCA_128K accuracy (in %)",
"LOCA_256K accuracy (in %)",
"LOCA absolute drop from 128K to 256K (in Δ)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "LOCA_128K",
"metric": "accuracy",
"baseline_value": 86.7,
"method_value": 89.3,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "LOCA_256K",
"metric": "accuracy",
"baseline_value": 65.3,
"method_value": 86.7,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "LOCA",
"metric": "abso... | {
"base_id": "2608.21690",
"title": "Context as an Environment: Programmatic Context Management for Long-Horizon Agents",
"area": "agents",
"component": "Scroll programmatic context management (Event Log + persistent kernel) vs summarization-based context management",
"setting": "All agent loops use Qwen3.8-M... |
2608.22132-s041 | 2608.22132 | SSE-Bio: A Structured Self-Evolving Agent with Agentic Retrieval Policy for Multi-Hop Biomedical Reasoning | cc-by-4.0 | I've been brainstorming about how to fairly account for the inference cost of the full SSE-Bio agent relative to the strongest prior self-evolving and agentic baselines, Biomni and STELLA, especially since SSE-Bio incorporates a local Proxy module alongside the Manager, Dev, Critic, and retrieval components. The Proxy ... | [
"BioHopR Tokens / Ex. (in K tokens)",
"BioHopR LLM Calls / Ex. (in calls)",
"BioHopR Latency / Ex. (in seconds)",
"BioHopR API Cost / Ex. (in USD)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "BioHopR",
"metric": "Tokens / Ex.",
"baseline_value": 9.3,
"method_value": 12.4,
"unit": "K tokens"
},
{
"benchmark": "BioHopR",
"metric": "LLM Calls / Ex.",
"baseline_value": 4.9,
"method_value": 6.7,
"unit": "calls"
},
{
"benchmark": "BioHopR",
... | {
"base_id": "2608.22132",
"title": "SSE-Bio: A Structured Self-Evolving Agent with Agentic Retrieval Policy for Multi-Hop Biomedical Reasoning",
"area": "agents",
"component": "SSE-Bio full agent vs prior self-evolving/agentic baselines (Biomni, STELLA) inference cost",
"setting": "BioHopR test split evaluat... |
2608.23143-s006 | 2608.23143 | An end-to-end-trained vision-language model for native-language prostate pathology report generation | cc-by-nc-nd-4.0 | I've been iterating on whether a specialized, native-language report generation model trained from scratch on our own institutional data can hold up against a large pan-cancer vision-language foundation model used off the shelf. The comparison point here is PRISM, a publicly available baseline trained on a massive data... | [
"Munich test cohort - Malignancy Accuracy (in %)",
"Munich test cohort - Malignancy F1-score (in %)",
"Munich test cohort - Grading Accuracy (in %)",
"Munich test cohort - Grading Precision (in %)",
"Munich test cohort - Grading Recall (in %)",
"Munich test cohort - Grading F1-score (in %)"
] | [
{
"benchmark": "Munich test cohort - Malignancy",
"metric": "Accuracy",
"baseline_value": 96.8,
"method_value": 97.6,
"unit": "%"
},
{
"benchmark": "Munich test cohort - Malignancy",
"metric": "F1-score",
"baseline_value": 94.5,
"method_value": 96.2,
"unit": "%"
},
{
... | {
"base_id": "2608.23143",
"title": "An end-to-end-trained vision-language model for native-language prostate pathology report generation",
"area": "vision",
"component": "specialized native-language report generation model vs pan-cancer vision-language model (PRISM)",
"setting": "Slide-level vision-language ... |
ForesightBench
A model is given a researcher-voiced description of an experiment from a recent arXiv ML preprint, including the baseline numbers, and must predict the numeric outcome of the technique or ablation. The results are withheld; the answer key is read directly off the paper's own tables.
Every sample is one controlled, within-paper comparison: same codebase, same compute, same authors. One preprint yields several samples, one per ablated component, introduced technique, or experimental setting.
The 71 source papers were submitted to arXiv after the latest published training cutoff (June 2026) of every model evaluated in the paper: 43 between 8 and 24 August 2026 and 28 between 5 and 21 October 2026. This submission window is the contamination control.
This dataset mirrors github.com/ruhzi/benchmark file for file. The construction pipeline lives at github.com/ruhzi/autoresearchrl.
Configs
| config | split | rows | contents |
|---|---|---|---|
eval (default) |
test |
71 | the evaluation set: one sample drawn per paper (split seed 20260815) |
corpus |
train |
457 | every sample in the corpus, over 71 papers, 3,343 graded slots |
Every eval row is also in the corpus; in_eval_set on each corpus row marks it.
The corpus split is named train only because Hugging Face requires a split
name. It was not used to train anything.
from datasets import load_dataset
eval_set = load_dataset("ruhzi/foresightbench", "eval", split="test")
corpus = load_dataset("ruhzi/foresightbench", "corpus", split="train")
Record format
| field | meaning |
|---|---|
sample_id |
<arxiv_id>-s<nnn> |
arxiv_id, title |
source paper |
source_license |
the license the source paper carries on arXiv (see License) |
prompt |
the question given to the model; baseline values are stated, outcome values are withheld |
asked |
the metrics to predict, in order |
target |
answer key, positionally aligned with asked. Each entry has benchmark, metric, unit, baseline_value (appears in the prompt) and method_value (the hidden outcome) |
meta |
base_id, title, area (research-area tag, see below), component ablated, experimental setting, and a flagged review bit |
in_eval_set |
corpus only: whether the row is in the eval config |
The model is asked only for values. Direction (helps / hurts) is derivable from a predicted value and the metric's polarity and is deliberately not a graded target.
Research areas
meta.area is a per-paper tag, assigned by hand from the paper's title and
abstract and applied to every sample of that paper. It is the area split used
in the paper's per-area results. Six values:
area |
meaning | papers | corpus rows | eval rows |
|---|---|---|---|---|
vision |
Vision & multimodal | 16 | 135 | 16 |
safety-interp |
Safety, attacks, interpretability & auditing | 12 | 78 | 12 |
agents |
LLM agents, memory & context systems | 15 | 56 | 15 |
applied-sci |
Applied & scientific ML (time series, control, neuro, audio & speech, reliability, recsys) | 17 | 108 | 17 |
llm-training |
LLM pre-/post-training & architecture | 6 | 71 | 6 |
llm-eval |
LLM evaluation & measurement studies | 5 | 9 | 5 |
Scoring
Per predicted slot, capped relative error:
slot_error = min(|pred - true| / max(|true|, 1e-6), 1.0)
true is method_value. A slot the model leaves blank scores 1.0. A sample's
score is the mean over its slots, and a model's score is the mean over samples.
Lower is better. Provider or harness failures are excluded from the mean rather
than penalised.
Reference points under this metric on the eval set: copying the baseline value into every slot scores 0.327.
License
ForesightBench has mixed licensing; LICENSE has the full terms.
- The dataset author's contribution is licensed CC BY 4.0. This covers
the sample selection and decomposition, the question framing, the schema,
the
asked/target/metaannotations and the area tags. - Material from the source papers stays under the license its authors
chose on arXiv. Each
promptadapts passages of one paper, andtitleis that paper's title. The license is recorded per sample insource_license:
source_license |
papers | corpus rows | eval rows |
|---|---|---|---|
cc-by-4.0 |
34 | 227 | 34 |
cc-by-sa-4.0 |
2 | 7 | 2 |
cc-by-nc-sa-4.0 |
1 | 2 | 1 |
cc-by-nc-nd-4.0 |
3 | 7 | 3 |
arxiv-nonexclusive-distrib-1.0 |
31 | 214 | 31 |
If you use a sample, you are responsible for respecting its source license. To keep only material whose source is CC BY 4.0:
cc_by = corpus.filter(lambda r: r["source_license"] == "cc-by-4.0")
Authors of a source paper who want its samples removed can email ruhaanchopra2005@gmail.com with the arXiv id. When you use ForesightBench, please also cite the source papers listed in the paper's Appendix D.
Citation
@misc{foresightbench2026,
title = {ForesightBench},
author = {Chopra, Ruhaan},
year = {2026},
url = {https://github.com/ruhzi/benchmark}
}
- Downloads last month
- 95