What makes great scientists great? Even as AI systems start to make progress on open problems, scientists remain far ahead of them at sensing which prior idea, buried in an ever-growing archive of research, a new problem needs. To study this skill, we draw on researchers who know firsthand which earlier work advanced their completed projects, with papers serving as pointers to the ideas within. Using our automated pipeline that makes author annotation scalable, we build ScholarCatalyst by having 184 lead authors of 207 recent computer science papers label which candidates did or could have advanced their project, each with a detailed rationale. We introduce a retrieval task with author-provided judgments: given an initial research question, retrieve these papers from only the literature available when the project began. Agentic search does no better than embedding retrieval (0.42 vs. 0.48 Recall@20) despite calling that same retriever as a tool. Even an agent built on Claude Fable 5.1, which may have seen the completed papers during training, reaches only 0.51 R@20. These results highlight the need for new training recipes that equip models with expert intuition for searching broad corpora. We envision ScholarCatalyst as a step toward scientific agents that can take a half-formed idea and point to the prior research it needs.
Translation pending · showing the source descriptionThe chart will appear after repeat observations. The current metric comes from the source.
1 source votesReal observations only. History before source connection is not reconstructed.
The paper investigates the scaling properties of on-policy distillation (OPD) in reinforcement learning, focusing on how capabilities transfer between different model scales. It identifies a useful-transfer regime where held-out accuracy increases linearly with the reverse KL divergence from the student's initialization, and finds that smaller teachers can outperform larger ones in capability transfer.
6 days agoDaily PapersThe paper introduces VisionHOPE, a novel visual backbone that functions as a self-modifying learning system, allowing the model to co-evolve what it remembers and how it learns within an image. It uses five coupled memories and a stability-matched step-size control scheme to ensure stable learning dynamics, achieving competitive results on benchmark datasets like ImageNet-1K, COCO, and ADE20K.
5 days agoDaily PapersThe paper explores phase sensitivity in models using chunked KV-cache compression, where retrieval performance varies systematically across different phases of compressed token windows. It shows that long-context retrieval accuracy can differ by up to 40 percentage points between phases, highlighting the need for phase-specific evaluation.
4 days agoDaily PapersThe paper explores test-time AI-for-AI, focusing on how a Builder can create better execution environments for a Target while keeping both models' weights fixed. It introduces Meta-Skill, principles derived from Target's execution feedback, which improve performance in tasks like Harness-Bench and NewtonBench.
3 days agoLessWrongThe text discusses a scenario where an AI must respond to the question 'What's the date?' without access to real-time data. It explores the challenge of providing an accurate date without hallucinating, considering OpenAI's training focus on avoiding false information. The text speculates on potential model versions and knowledge cutoff dates but acknowledges uncertainty due to lack of explicit information.
yesterdayLessWrongFrontier models show different decision theory preferences based on the perceived user background, favoring FDT/UDT when not influenced by academic philosophy cues and CDT when prompted to adopt an academic perspective. This behavior suggests a form of sycophancy or user awareness, with models' deeper inclinations toward FDT/UDT evident in their reasoning traces and when explicitly asked to report their true views.
2 days ago