#01Nov 5, 2026
cs.RO
Social Humanoid: Socially Responsive Human-Humanoid Interaction
Vongani H. Maluleke, James Ni, Kie Horiuchi and 7 more
Humanoid robots are typically trained as solitary agents, leaving them unable to coordinate physically with human partners who naturally anticipate and adjust to one another. To bridge this gap, we present Social Humanoid, a hierarchical system that generates and executes socially responsive whole-body motion on a 29-DoF Unitree G1 conditioned on a human partner's motion. Its high-level policy performs flexible sequence modeling of human and humanoid motion through a shared tokenized representation, generating reactive humanoid motion and anticipating the partner's motion when they are occluded, while a low-level whole-body tracking controller executes the generated motion on the robot. To train the system, we introduce a two-phase adaptive retargeting procedure that retargets one interaction partner to the robot while morphing the other partner to preserve contact dynamics, reachability, and relative body scale. We apply this procedure across five motion-capture datasets to produce a new Human-Humanoid Interaction (HHI) benchmark of 260 hours of human-humanoid interactions. Our results demonstrate that Social Humanoid produces coordinated, human-aligned behavior across diverse interaction types in simulation and the real world. Project page: https://von31.github.io/social-humanoid/
#02Nov 5, 2026
cs.LG
A Hidden Markov Preference Model for Online Prediction of Adversary Actions
Angel Daruna, Michael Cogswell, Tixiao Shan and 3 more
A defender anticipating an attacker needs a probability distribution over the attacker's next action from information available before that action occurs. Two structures complicate this: the attacker's behavioral regime persists and can switch within an episode, and each action combines an operation with state-dependent arguments whose feasible values change over time. We capture both with a hidden Markov model whose latent state is the active regime and whose regime-conditioned action law is defined on a feasibility-masked tree of executable actions. The same likelihood forms the next-action distribution and updates the regime belief once the action is seen, and a partially observed prefix contributes its resolved local factors. Estimation separates into convex logistic fits that Baum-Welch reuses when regimes are unlabeled. We derive a reach-weighted nodewise KL expression for regime information, a sequence-wise log-loss bound for switching regime paths, and a uniform fallback guarantee. On the CAGE 2 cyber defense benchmark the filtered latent state is worth 0.8 nats per step, and after a controller switch the loss begins to fall in three steps against ten for a recurrent baseline.
#03Nov 5, 2026
cs.AI
The Gold Rush in AI4Math, II: What are signatures of AI-assisted Proofs?
Yuanchuan Guo, Jiashun Jin, Zheng Tracy Ke and 1 more
The growing use of AI in mathematics raises a question: can we detect AI involvement in proofs, separately from AI assistance with writing? Historical arXiv papers, recent papers disclosing substantive AI use, and manuscripts released by OpenAI provide a rich empirical basis for studying this question. However, several challenges remain: lack of matched case-control pairs; potential incompleteness of disclosure; and lack of ready-to-use features designed to capture signals of AI involvement in proofs. To address these challenges, we construct five cohorts comprising 8,281 papers by combining existing manuscripts with those we produced using generative AI. These cohorts span different levels of AI involvement and include matched pairs of papers addressing the same research problems. We then introduce ProofTrace, a framework that represents each paper as a graph of immediate proof support (GIPS) and extracts interpretable features of mathematical organization. Our study yields three discoveries. First, principal-component projections of our features reveal a qualitative gradient of AI involvement, where AI-reworded papers remain close to human papers, the two AI-generated cohorts depart in broadly shared directions, and papers disclosing substantive AI use occupy intermediate positions which shifts toward AI-generated cohorts over time. Second, we identify recurring signatures of AI-generated proofs, such as fewer externally cited results, greater reliance on intermediate conclusions, and altered graph connectivity; many of these signatures persist under controls for research field, manuscript length, or graph size. Finally, in a separate detection experiment, ProofTrace distinguishes human-written papers from those disclosing substantive AI use. Its performance remains stable under AI rewording, whereas the performance of state-of-the-art text-based detectors declines sharply.
#04Nov 5, 2026
cs.CV
Where and Why is Grounded Reasoning Useful?
David Yan, Le Xue, Forrest Huang and 4 more
Grounded reasoning, where a model outputs text coordinates of relevant locations in chain-of-thought reasoning, is a common strategy for solving complex visual reasoning problems. However, the benefits and limitations of grounded reasoning are understudied. We study where and why grounded reasoning is most useful. To do so, we introduce a chain-of-thought analysis method to measure how much a model uses its outputted grounding in its thinking trace and perform a detailed ablation study of a grounded reasoning training recipe. We find that grounded reasoning improves counting but shows no significant gain over baselines without coordinate grounding across a wide range of spatial reasoning and perception benchmarks. Using several synthetic tasks, we show that grounded reasoning is most useful when a task requires undescribable references, which are visual concepts that are difficult to describe in language. However, we observe that many existing visual reasoning benchmarks are solvable with only describable text references. To close this gap, we introduce BrickVision, a new benchmark that requires undescribable visual references to solve.
#05Nov 5, 2026
cs.LG
Unpacking the Compute Efficiency of Strong-to-Weak OPD against GRPO
Zeyu Leo Liu, Yang Li, Bo Pang and 7 more
On-policy distillation (OPD) trains a student on its own rollouts under a frozen teacher's per-token supervision. Does this dense signal reduce the training FLOPs needed to reach a target accuracy compared with reinforcement learning? We systematically compare vanilla reverse-KL OPD with Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) across task difficulty, student and teacher size, domain, and optimization choices, measuring held-out accuracy against training FLOPs. With an external post-trained teacher, OPD generally loses to GRPO in accuracy per training FLOP at matched settings, even when the teacher is further trained with GRPO, and often suffers response-length inflation. Yet a different teacher changes the picture: when the teacher is the student's own GRPO checkpoint, OPD recovers that checkpoint's accuracy on math with $50\times$ fewer distillation FLOPs than GRPO needs to reach the same accuracy. Following the same teacher setting, we consistently observe this high efficiency with a larger student, on code, and in a second model family. On a single domain, however, the GRPO checkpoint is already the desired model, so distilling it adds to total compute. Across domains, separate GRPO checkpoints hold different capabilities, and no single checkpoint serves every domain. Multi-teacher OPD (DeepSeek-AI, 2026) consolidates per-domain GRPO experts into a single student that matches each expert's accuracy, with the distillation stage costing only 5.2% (on 2 domains) and 8.0% (on 4 domains) of the specialist training FLOPs. Counting specialist training and distillation together, this pipeline reaches joint GRPO's performance on the 2-domain mix with 42.0% fewer total FLOPs.