#01Nov 4, 2026
cs.CV
Coupled Scene Graph Anticipation: When With-Constraint Recall Hides Structural Inconsistency
Zeno Nongmaithem, Anushttha Srivastava, Anshit Sinha and 4 more
Scene Graph Anticipation (SGA) predicts object relationships in future video frames. Continuous-time SGA models evolve each subject-object pair with an independent Neural ODE, so relationships sharing an entity cannot influence one another during integration, and nothing prevents mutually exclusive predictions, such as "sitting on" and "standing on", for the same pair. We introduce CoupledSGA, which links such relationships through a Relationship Interaction Graph with graph attention inside the ODE vector field, and adds a Structural Consistency Loss ($\mathcal{L}_{SC}$) based on a matrix of mutually exclusive predicates. Developing CoupledSGA revealed a limitation of the evaluation protocol. With-Constraint evaluation keeps one predicate per group for each subject-object pair, so its R@K and mR@K cannot capture the within-group violations targeted by $\mathcal{L}_{SC}$: we prove they are unchanged whenever each group's winning predicate and its score are held fixed. We further show that the gradient of $\mathcal{L}_{SC}$ depends on predicate scores rather than ground-truth labels: for two-predicate rules it amplifies the ordering the model already holds, and when all scores in a group are equal it suppresses predicates in more exclusion rules more strongly, explaining why the penalty can lower recall while improving consistency. On Action Genome, activating $\mathcal{L}_{SC}$ after two warm-up epochs reduces R@20 from 42.21% to 35.18% while lowering the No-Constraint contradiction rate from 45.92% to 4.07% (matched-budget R@20: 40.48% CoupledSGA vs. 44.78% SceneSayerODE). CoupledSGA is a testbed, not a state-of-the-art claim: With-Constraint recall captures the cost of enforcing structural consistency but not the improvement. We recommend reporting No-Constraint results alongside a contradiction rate for methods that constrain predicate co-activation.
#02Nov 4, 2026
cs.LG
Reinforcement Learning Enables Scaling Generalist Robot Policy Improvement
Michal Korniak, Marco Bagatella, Ralf Römer and 21 more
The introduction of generalist robot policies has enabled a single, large model to learn to perform a variety of tasks from a vast pre-training corpus. While these models often exhibit powerful zero-shot generalization capabilities, they typically require an adaptation phase to achieve sufficient performance in deployment. Iterated self-improvement via reinforcement learning (RL) has demonstrated promise in enabling this adaptation, yet such approaches have been largely explored in single-task settings - where the goal is to simply improve on a narrow deployment task - which lies in stark contrast to the multi-task capabilities of the base policy. In this work we ask whether generalist robot policies are capable of multi-task, generalist improvement in deployment - targeting many diverse tasks simultaneously - and what algorithmic recipe enables this. To answer this question, we first develop a set of structured evaluations to test generalist improvement capabilities, and systematically evaluate algorithmic and practical design choices regarding value estimation, policy extraction and resource allocation. We show that not only can generalist policies be improved online across diverse tasks, but that the right recipe can enable generalization and increase performance on tasks not considered during online training. We characterize when this generalization occurs and show that both the training task distribution and the use of value-based RL are critical. To the best of our knowledge, this is among the first evidence for online generalist improvement for robot foundation models.
#03Nov 4, 2026
cs.LG
Continual Classification Beyond the Kernel Regime: Harnessing the Sparsity Bias of L2 Regularization in Diagonal Linear Networks
Gilad Karpel, Itay Evron, Ron Meir and 1 more
We study logistic regression for continual learning with linear predictors in a high-dimensional statistical setting. Existing theoretical work has largely focused on continual linear regression with variants of L2 regularization, motivated by their analytical simplicity and connection to the kernel regime of neural networks. We first derive the optimal L2 regularization strength for continual linear classification and characterize its generalization performance, recovering behavior analogous to prior results for continual linear regression. Next, we examine the effect of L2 regularization in deeper models using a minimal two-layer diagonal linear network. In the single-task setting, L2 regularization on the weights of such models is known to promote sparsity in the resulting predictor, yielding a rich, sparse feature-learning regime beyond the kernel regime (a similar effect arises in two-layer ReLU networks). However, in continual learning, where L2 regularization is typically centered on previous-task weights, this sparsity bias is no longer preserved. We therefore propose a weighted variant of L2 regularization that extends this beneficial sparsity bias to continual learning. We show theoretically and empirically that, for a sufficiently sparse teacher, our variant converges substantially faster than directly learning a linear predictor with conventional continual L2 or L1 regularization, trading some long-horizon bias for markedly improved performance over moderate task horizons.
#04Nov 4, 2026
cs.LG
Navigating Disagreement Among Criteria for Evaluating Explanation Faithfulness
Grant Shanklin, Jiří Němeček, Asia Biega
Faithfulness requires that algorithmic explanations accurately reflect the model's behavior. Yet existing operationalizations of faithfulness can disagree about whether the same explanation is faithful, leaving developers and auditors to choose among conflicting evaluations. In this paper, we investigate disagreement among evaluation criteria and offer a practical path forward for evaluating explanation faithfulness. We first identify how operationalizations of faithfulness differ. We introduce a faithfulness functional that locates their disagreements in what an explanation claims about the model, which comparisons bear on that claim, and how agreement across those comparisons should be aggregated, and we reconstruct existing evaluation criteria within it. We argue these reconstructions support understanding faithfulness as a common though incompletely specified relation between the model and explanation, so the differences reflect choices left open by the general requirement. Justifying an operationalization then comes down to justifying these choices, which, on our view, draws on explanatory, institutional, and normative considerations. We support this argument with a case study of adverse action notices, reconstructing the evaluation implicit in an industry-proposed procedure and identifying which of its choices the setting justifies and which remain open. Our work gives auditors and practitioners a way to navigate disagreeing evaluations of faithfulness. It also explains why the literature should expect multiple operationalizations, while showing how concrete settings can narrow the choice among them. More broadly, our analysis shows how a shared requirement of faithfulness can support contextually justified evaluations despite disagreement among existing metrics.
#05Nov 4, 2026
math.ST
Regularization vs. Convolution in Kernel-Based Hypothesis Testing
Omar Hagrass, Bharath K. Sriperumbudur
The maximum mean discrepancy (MMD) test is a popular nonparametric test on general domains. Two lines of work have studied its optimality through structurally different approaches. The first, a convolution approach on $\mathbb{R}^d$, uses translation-invariant kernels with a shrinking bandwidth and is minimax optimal over Sobolev balls under $L^2$-separation; the second, a regularization approach on general measurable spaces, uses spectral regularization of the kernel covariance operator and is minimax optimal over Hellinger- and $χ^2$-separated alternatives. In this paper, we study the regularization approach over Sobolev balls under $L^2$-separation, which reveals the connection between the two approaches. We show that, with a translation-invariant kernel on $\mathbb{R}^d$, both are ways of meeting a single condition on the kernel's spectral density: the spectral regularized discrepancy captures the $L^2$-separation $Δ$ of a Sobolev alternative of smoothness $s$ as soon as the regularization parameter $λ$ is below the spectral density on frequencies up to $Δ^{-1/(2s)}$. A kernel with a shrinking bandwidth $h$ meets this condition with $λ\asymp h^d$, and under this coupling the constant regularizer, which gives the MMD test itself, attains the Sobolev minimax rate. This explains, from a spectral perspective, the need for a shrinking bandwidth in the convolution approach. With a non-constant spectral regularizer, our analysis requires the bandwidth to shrink only when the spectral density decays faster than any polynomial, as for the Gaussian kernel. Thus, for Matérn and Laplace kernels, a fixed bandwidth with $λ\to 0$ attains the Sobolev minimax rate. Finally, an adaptive test over a grid of bandwidths and regularization parameters is minimax optimal, up to a $\log\log$ factor, over both classes without prior knowledge of the smoothness.