Sign in

Category: Other

  • Empowering Edge Agents: A Systematic Analysis of Edge-Cloud Collaboration in LLM Agent Execution

    Empowering Edge Agents: A Systematic Analysis of Edge-Cloud Collaboration in LLM Agent Execution

    Empowering Edge Agents: A Systematic Analysis of Edge-Cloud Collaboration in LLM Agent Execution

    arXiv:2610.17816v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Edge-cloud collaboration combines the lower inference overhead and greater data locality of edge-side execution with the stronger capabilities of cloud-hosted models. However, as LLM agents increasingly operate in long-horizon scenarios, cloud participation becomes interleaved throughout execution rather than a one-shot decision for each query. Such interleaved participation introduces trajectory-level effects that remain insufficiently understood. To address this gap, we introduce EC2-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating edge-cloud collaboration in long-horizon agent execution. It provides executable digital-workspace agent tasks and a unified evaluation framework covering task performance, resource usage, and privacy exposure. Using this benchmark, we empirically study diverse forms of edge-cloud collaboration. Our study reveals three findings. First, collaboration achieves a favorable balance among task performance, resource usage, and privacy exposure compared with edge-only and cloud-only execution. Second, as edge models become stronger, collaborative execution approaches cloud-only performance, and performance differences across strategies shrink, while privacy exposure remains strongly strategy-dependent. Third, stronger edge capability shifts preferred collaboration from externally controlled cloud participation and direct cloud execution toward more edge-controlled collaboration. Further analyses identify cloud-invocation decision-making and instruction following as important edge-side abilities for effective collaboration. These findings provide a systematic understanding of edge-cloud collaboration in long-horizon agent execution and insights for designing future edge agents that effectively collaborate with cloud models. Code and resources are available at https://github.com/OpenBMB/EC2-Bench.

    Fallback brief based on the available RSS feed; no unsupported details have been added.

    Source: arXiv
    Original article: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17816

  • Benchmarking and Training Reward Models for Cross-Source Evidence Grounding in Search Agents

    Benchmarking and Training Reward Models for Cross-Source Evidence Grounding in Search Agents

    Benchmarking and Training Reward Models for Cross-Source Evidence Grounding in Search Agents

    arXiv:2610.17827v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Existing approaches to training and evaluating search agents focus heavily on final-answer quality, largely neglecting how generated answers map back to retrieved evidence. Recent methods track citations to enforce grounding, but citation support alone does not establish source independence or whether an answer appropriately handles conflicting evidence. We argue that credibility in open-web retrieval depends on principled cross-source evidence grounding that accounts for source independence and systematically attributes and adjudicates conflicting evidence, while hierarchical judgments of these grounding decisions provide a unified signal for training and evaluation. To this end, we propose an evaluation framework, Cross-Source Evidence Grounding (CSEG), that employs a fine-grained, six-layer decision tree over the complete search trajectory. We introduce CSEG-Bench and trainable reward models to provide targeted supervision following this framework. Our approach helps eliminating the severe data skew of natural trajectories by providing targeted coverage over complex, deep-layer decision paths, such as cross-source conflict resolution and nuanced attribution, that standard rollouts fail to capture. Specifically, (1) we define the hierarchy at label, node, and path levels; (2) we construct 1,160 verified trajectories over nine canonical paths by rewriting answers on real retrieved document pools, with independent frontier judges reproducing the entire gold path and human experts deciding inclusion; (3) we train CSEG-RM, which reaches 83.9% exact accuracy on our benchmark while lying on the performance-token efficiency Pareto frontier. Experiments that use this reward alone to supervise a frozen-retrieval answer policy raise the independently judged mean label from 2.83 to 4.19, and show that learning the hierarchy generalizes across layers at a fraction of frontier-judge cost.

    Fallback brief based on the available RSS feed; no unsupported details have been added.

    Source: arXiv
    Original article: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17827

  • Instructions Are Evidence, Not Objectives: Measuring Outcome Alignment of Agents

    Instructions Are Evidence, Not Objectives: Measuring Outcome Alignment of Agents

    Instructions Are Evidence, Not Objectives: Measuring Outcome Alignment of Agents

    arXiv:2610.17757v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model agents can follow complex human instructions to solve real-world tasks. In practice, however, initial instructions are often incomplete. In our analysis of 100 user-agent trajectories from SWE-chat, 56\% of initial instructions omit requirements that later emerge as necessary, and 52\% of the useful follow-up requirements could have been inferred from the project. A user states requirements from their own understanding of the task, and these \textbf{stated requirements} often differ from the \textbf{true requirements} that completing the task imposes. An agent should therefore treat the instruction as evidence rather than as the objective, inferring the true requirements from the instruction and the environment and satisfying them even when the user is not yet aware of all of them. We call this ability \textbf{outcome alignment}. In this work, we construct \textbf{TiGanEval}, a benchmark of software engineering and research tasks. In every task the user genuinely lacks part of the requirements, each requirement stays discoverable from the code and runtime behaviour of the environment, and requirements the agent infers are separated from those the user adds after observing delivered work. These properties together make outcome alignment measurable. Evaluating eight frontier models including GPT-5.6-Sol, we find outcome alignment broadly missing: the models lose 53 to 67 points of success rate when moving from the full specification to the partial instruction, and consequence feedback across four submissions does not close the gap. Furthermore, a plan-mode harness cannot compensate for the missing ability of the model itself, which places outcome alignment among the abilities the next generation of models should be developed for.

    Fallback brief based on the available RSS feed; no unsupported details have been added.

    Source: arXiv
    Original article: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17757

  • Autonomous 3D Visual-Thermal Inspection for Utility-Scale Solar Farms

    Autonomous 3D Visual-Thermal Inspection for Utility-Scale Solar Farms

    Autonomous 3D Visual-Thermal Inspection for Utility-Scale Solar Farms

    arXiv:2610.17762v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Utility-scale photovoltaic (PV) inspection is dominated by aerial surveys, which are effective for identifying module-level hot cells but provide limited visibility of critical components located under the array, including connectors, cabling, fasteners and structural elements. These assets are difficult to inspect consistently at scale, and their defects are often spatially small, partially occluded and difficult to localise from isolated images. We present an automated 3D visual-thermal inspection system (Tricorder) for under-panel PV asset inspection. The approach combines LiDAR-inertial Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) with geometrically calibrated RGB and thermal imagery and machine-learning-based object detection and segmentation. Detected assets are associated with the reconstructed 3D environment, allowing visual and thermal observations from multiple viewpoints to be spatially fused and localised. We demonstrate the approach on utility-scale PV data for MC4 connector detection and connection-state recognition, thermal anomaly identification, and detection of structural components including bolts, nuts and torque tubes. The results demonstrate a pathway from image-based inspection toward spatially grounded autonomous inspection, where defects are detected and linked to specific assets and their 3D locations within the solar farm.

    Fallback brief based on the available RSS feed; no unsupported details have been added.

    Source: arXiv
    Original article: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17762

  • Memory Echo in Single-Agent Long-Term Memory: Lifecycle Evaluation and Provenance-Guided Mitigation

    Memory Echo in Single-Agent Long-Term Memory: Lifecycle Evaluation and Provenance-Guided Mitigation

    Memory Echo in Single-Agent Long-Term Memory: Lifecycle Evaluation and Provenance-Guided Mitigation

    arXiv:2610.17763v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Long-term memory supports agents across sessions. Repeated retrieval and write-back can let one historical claim occupy multiple retrieval positions and influence current answers without independent evidence. Existing work examines retrieval, updating, and question answering, leaving same-source record accumulation and post-correction persistence underexplored. Motivated by research in social cognition and memory psychology on repeated exposure, retrieval, and revision, we define \emph{Memory Echo} as the excess retrieval exposure gained by historical information from the same source without additional independent evidence, and introduce MEchoBench to evaluate its emergence, correction resistance, persistence, and effect on answers. To address this phenomenon, we introduce the Family–Provenance–Authority framework (FPA). Specifically, FPA selects one representative per source family, conditions the eligibility of old records for the answer context on verified corrections, and constrains final answers with authoritative evidence. In paired replay on 190 fixed questions across four memory frameworks, FPA raises accuracy from 0.825 to 0.920 with DeepSeek V4 Flash and from 0.782 to 0.916 with Kimi K2.6; mean Decision Contamination Effect falls from 0.106 to 0.030 and from 0.109 to 0.038, respectively. These results show that agent memory can preserve traceable history without allowing repeated historical information to govern current decisions. The code is available at https://github.com/OrcasSam/memory-echo-benchmark.

    Fallback brief based on the available RSS feed; no unsupported details have been added.

    Source: arXiv
    Original article: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17763

  • Safety for Whom? Benchmarking Understanding Beyond Refusal in Egocentric Multimodal Assistants

    Safety for Whom? Benchmarking Understanding Beyond Refusal in Egocentric Multimodal Assistants

    Safety for Whom? Benchmarking Understanding Beyond Refusal in Egocentric Multimodal Assistants

    arXiv:2610.17728v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Egocentric multimodal assistants see through the user's eyes and guide what the user does next, so their outputs directly shape physical actions, including those that affect bystanders. Yet existing safety evaluations do not distinguish whom a response would harm, and score only whether a model refuses. Pooling all harms into one refusal rate hides two failures: a model may protect one target but not another, and it may refuse without understanding the risk, or understand it and comply anyway. We present STOU, a benchmark of 2,902 egocentric video-audio and video-text queries whose potential harm targets the user (Self), co-present individuals (The Others), or society at large (Others). Our evaluation decouples safety understanding from refusal behavior: beyond refusal, we score whether the model recognizes the user's intent, the presence and target of harm, and its downstream consequences. Across 10 open and closed source omnimodal and multimodal LLMs, we find that refusal varies systematically with the harm target, and that models often recognize a harm yet still assist with it. These results show that refusal rates alone cannot certify an assistant as safe, and that safety alignment must account for who would be harmed. Project page: https://onedayoneyeah.github.io/safety-for-whom

    Fallback brief based on the available RSS feed; no unsupported details have been added.

    Source: arXiv
    Original article: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17728

  • DuplexAct: How Interactive Are Frontier Full-Duplex Spoken Language Models?

    DuplexAct: How Interactive Are Frontier Full-Duplex Spoken Language Models?

    DuplexAct: How Interactive Are Frontier Full-Duplex Spoken Language Models?

    arXiv:2610.17738v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: End-to-end (E2E) full-duplex spoken language models (FD-SLMs) enable simutanous listening and speaking continously, requiring models to take appropriate interaction actions as conversations unfold. However, existing benchmarks lack a structured action-level formulation, often evaluate action occurrence rather than success, and provide limited coverage of diverse real-world conversations. We introduce DuplexAct, a benchmark for evaluating interaction action taking in E2E FD-SLMs. DuplexAct defines a three-level action taxonomy spanning eight interaction actions and 24 corresponding interaction conditions. We further characterize successful action-taking through immediate execution and subsequent follow-through, and develop action-specific evaluation metrics for both. DuplexAct contains 4,691 test instances spanning casual conversation, meetings, customer service, and interviews, including 2,531 instances derived from real-world conversational recordings. Together, DuplexAct provides a structured and real-world-grounded framework for systematically assessing how E2E FD-SLMs participate in ongoing spoken interaction.

    Fallback brief based on the available RSS feed; no unsupported details have been added.

    Source: arXiv
    Original article: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17738

  • Coupled Harness–Model Evolution for Scientific Equation Discovery

    Coupled Harness–Model Evolution for Scientific Equation Discovery

    Coupled Harness–Model Evolution for Scientific Equation Discovery

    arXiv:2610.17740v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to discover scientific equations from experimental data. Such a discovery system has two parts that must work together: a library of executable computational tools and the model's tool-use policy. The tools supply the solving capability, from diagnosing structure in the data to fitting candidate equations; the policy plans and orchestrates their use. Yet existing systems adapt only one part, keeping either the toolset or the model fixed, which leaves the corresponding failures uncorrectable. We develop a coupled evolution framework that improves both parts from the same verifiable fit-error signal. In the tool-evolution phase, an agent grows an executable tool library from a small set of generic numerical operations by diagnosing its own failures: it authors a new tool when a capability is missing and revises its selection rules when the right tool went unused. In the policy-evolution phase, a small open model (roughly 3B active parameters) is fine-tuned on successful tool-use trajectories collected with the frozen library, on training formulas screened to be disjoint from all evaluation benchmarks. Ablations show the two phases are complementary: with no tool library at all the same model solves almost nothing, the tools account for most of the gain, and trajectory training adds a further gain that is largest on the most difficult problems. The full system solves 79.1/71.3\% of LSR-Synth problems at fit tolerances $10^{-2}$/$10^{-3}$, reaches 63.8\% pooled accuracy on the distributionally different SRSD-Feynman panel, and obtains a normalized CP3-28 aggregate of $-7.27$. These results suggest a broader recipe for scientific agents: let the model and its instruments improve each other under verifiable feedback.

    Fallback brief based on the available RSS feed; no unsupported details have been added.

    Source: arXiv
    Original article: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17740

  • Keep Your Receipts: Trustworthy Cleanup of Agent-Built Knowledge Graphs

    Keep Your Receipts: Trustworthy Cleanup of Agent-Built Knowledge Graphs

    Keep Your Receipts: Trustworthy Cleanup of Agent-Built Knowledge Graphs

    arXiv:2610.17719v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agents build knowledge graphs as memory, and building them has become easy. Maintaining them has not. When a source is retracted, overruled, or erased, everything built on top of it (entity merges, entailed edges, community summaries) must be re-examined, and the maintainer must choose between deleting too much and too little. Deployed pipelines delete only the directly extracted facts: on our corpus that reduces contaminated queries from 32.2% to 28.0% under a real retraction and changes nothing under predicate revocation. Rebuilding is no repair for a constructor that samples: two builds of the same 300-document corpus differ in 29,475 artifacts, five times the 6,248 that removing the 61 retracted documents changes. PolyGraph instead asks the constructor for receipts: for every artifact, alternative bundles of source evidence, each claimed sufficient on its own, emitted in the call that creates it. Cleanup is then set arithmetic over the receipts, with no model calls. Because receipts are the model's own self-report, a re-derivation audit checks them by deleting the cited evidence and testing whether the constructor still produces the artifact. The audit finds that a receipt is trustworthy when it is shaped like the claim it backs. Merge receipts, each backing one narrow claim, agree with re-derivation 68% and 85% of the time. Summary receipts, elicited per sentence but stored as one flat list for the whole text, are wrong about two thirds of the time, almost always by keeping dead content. One receipt per sentence instead is 100% and 88% faithful and lets cleanup keep 33 of 35 touched summaries. The result holds under a second oracle model, a claim-blind prompt, ten further deletions, a second domain and a second constructor. Distrusting the summary layer cuts contaminated queries to 0.4% and 0.8% at 99.8 to 100% of the recall a perfect maintainer would return.

    Fallback brief based on the available RSS feed; no unsupported details have been added.

    Source: arXiv
    Original article: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17719

  • Upstream Influence, Downstream Re-Anchoring in LLM Agent Chains

    Upstream Influence, Downstream Re-Anchoring in LLM Agent Chains

    Upstream Influence, Downstream Re-Anchoring in LLM Agent Chains

    arXiv:2610.17723v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: People act on evaluative judgments produced by LLM agents, and in multi-agent systems those judgments pass through several agents before reaching a person. We show that a workflow's information architecture—source access, handoff format, and which model reads the untrusted content—governs how much of a coordinated manipulation reaches the end. On 32 Taiwan~2025 recall cases, ten authentic Threads comments shown to one agent move its stance by $+0.171$ toward the injected position, and a mirrored set moves it the other way. Passing that judgment down a chain removes more than half of the shift by the third agent; keeping the comments in front of every agent sustains more of it. The reduction is not attrition in transit: each receiver discounts the inherited stance in proportion to how far it sits from its own reading of the evidence, returning to what that evidence implies for the case rather than to neutrality—consistent with partial re-anchoring. Handoff format is a second lever: a stance relayed without its reasoning is largely discounted. Susceptibility at the exposed seat varies fourfold across models, while the chain's arrangement does not matter at all. None of this is visible in the transcripts—the injected claims are almost never restated, so reasoning-trace audits miss the attack.

    Fallback brief based on the available RSS feed; no unsupported details have been added.

    Source: arXiv
    Original article: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17723