❌

Normal view

Received β€” 27 May 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

Rethinking Weak Supervision in Anomaly Detection: A Comprehensive Benchmark

arXiv:2605.26068v2 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Weakly supervised anomaly detection (WSAD) has developed in three primary directions: incomplete, inexact, and inaccurate supervision. However, these directions remain isolated, lacking a unified framework to assess whether they address unique challenges or share fundamental mechanics. This paper introduces WSADBench, the first benchmark that unifies evaluation across distinct weakly supervised scenarios, benchmarking diverse approaches from specialized WSAD methods to advanced tabular foundation models. WSADBench establishes standardized protocols to evaluate 36 algorithms across 4 modalities by systematically varying label quantity, granularity, and quality, revealing the performance boundaries of various methods. Based on over 700K experiments, WSADBench reveals four critical insights: (i) Strong intrinsic correlations exist between these weak supervision scenarios, challenging the isolation of current research directions. (ii) Specialized WSAD algorithms excel only in extreme label-scarcity regimes but are quickly dominated by tabular foundation models and general classification methods as supervision increases or in OOD scenarios. (iii) Unlabeled data shows inconsistent utility across settings, with marginal gains compared to label refinement. (iv) Models exhibit asymmetric sensitivity to different types of label noise. We release WSADBench as an open-source benchmark with code and datasets to facilitate future WSAD research: https://github.com/SUFE-AILAB/WSADBench.
Received β€” 5 March 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

APRES: An Agentic Paper Revision and Evaluation System

arXiv:2603.03142v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Scientific discoveries must be communicated clearly to realize their full potential. Without effective communication, even the most groundbreaking findings risk being overlooked or misunderstood. The primary way scientists communicate their work and receive feedback from the community is through peer review. However, the current system often provides inconsistent feedback between reviewers, ultimately hindering the improvement of a manuscript and limiting its potential impact. In this paper, we introduce a novel method APRES powered by Large Language Models (LLMs) to update a scientific papers text based on an evaluation rubric. Our automated method discovers a rubric that is highly predictive of future citation counts, and integrate it with APRES in an automated system that revises papers to enhance their quality and impact. Crucially, this objective should be met without altering the core scientific content. We demonstrate the success of APRES, which improves future citation prediction by 19.6% in mean averaged error over the next best baseline, and show that our paper revision process yields papers that are preferred over the originals by human expert evaluators 79% of the time. Our findings provide strong empirical support for using LLMs as a tool to help authors stress-test their manuscripts before submission. Ultimately, our work seeks to augment, not replace, the essential role of human expert reviewers, for it should be humans who discern which discoveries truly matter, guiding science toward advancing knowledge and enriching lives.
Received β€” 25 February 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

Asking the Right Questions: Improving Reasoning with Generated Stepping Stones

arXiv:2602.19069v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent years have witnessed tremendous progress in enabling LLMs to solve complex reasoning tasks such as math and coding. As we start to apply LLMs to harder tasks that they may not be able to solve in one shot, it is worth paying attention to their ability to construct intermediate stepping stones that prepare them to better solve the tasks. Examples of stepping stones include simplifications, alternative framings, or subproblems. We study properties and benefits of stepping stones in the context of modern reasoning LLMs via ARQ (\textbf{A}king the \textbf{R}ight \textbf{Q}uestions), our simple framework which introduces a question generator to the default reasoning pipeline. We first show that good stepping stone questions exist and are transferrable, meaning that good questions can be generated, and they substantially help LLMs of various capabilities in solving the target tasks. We next frame stepping stone generation as a post-training task and show that we can fine-tune LLMs to generate more useful stepping stones by SFT and RL on synthetic data.
❌