#01Nov 6, 2026
cs.LG
From PAC bounds on the generalization error to PAC bounds on the parameter estimation error
Mihaly Petreczky, John Leth, Emma Lukacs and 1 more
Probably Approximately Correct (PAC) bounds on the generalization error (the difference between the empirical prediction error computed on the training data and its expectation) are an established tool in statistical machine learning, and there have been several extensions of these bounds to dynamical systems. In parallel, in recent years, there has been growing interest in finite-sample bounds for parameter estimation error in system identification. The latter bounds tend to be algorithm-specific, relying on reformulating the identification algorithm as a least-squares regression problem. This is in contrast to classical PAC bounds, which are algorithm-agnostic and can be applied to any identification algorithm based on minimizing a cost function involving the empirical loss. In this paper, we show how oracle bounds derived from PAC bounds can be used to derive finite-sample bounds for dynamical systems. As an illustration of this approach, we present finite-sample parameter-estimation bounds for linear and bilinear systems with bounded inputs and noise. These bounds apply to identification algorithms based on minimizing a regularized empirical loss function. The key ingredient is to establish an oracle inequality, i.e., an inequality between the true prediction error of the learned model and the minimum achievable true prediction error, and then use either the convexity of the true loss or system-theoretic properties of the loss function to derive bounds on the parameter estimation error. We also analyze the rates of the obtained bounds and compare them with those of classical asymptotic results.
#02Nov 6, 2026
cs.RO
Grasp-TAGS: Task-Aware Grasp Selection via Critic Distillation for Prehensile Loco-Manipulation
Xun Tu, Minghao Zou, Karthik Desingh
Loco-manipulation, which requires mobile manipulators to coordinate locomotion and manipulation over long horizons, is a key capability for large-object rearrangement in applications such as service robotics and warehouse automation. Despite recent progress, reliably executing these tasks remains challenging because performance depends on complex robot-object and object-environment interaction dynamics. Existing approaches address this challenge either through model-based methods, which often require accurate dynamics models, or through learning-based methods, which reduce this requirement but typically assume a fixed or predefined initial grasp. However, different geometrically stable grasps can lead to substantially different downstream manipulation performance. Therefore, we propose Grasp-TAGS, a task-aware grasp selection framework for goal-conditioned large-object rearrangement. We train a unified PPO-based reinforcement learning policy across multiple initial grasp configurations and distill the learned critic into a lightweight grasp utility network that ranks candidate grasps using only the candidate grasp configuration and goal information. At inference time, we select the grasp with the highest predicted downstream utility for the downstream policy to complete the task, before even making a contact. Experiments demonstrate that Grasp-TAGS improves rearrangement success over both fixed single-grasp policies and random grasp selection, achieving an average success rate of 89.84% compared with 79.87% for the best-performing single-grasp policies, an improvement of 9.97 percentage points. Grasp-TAGS also reduces final orientation errors across all evaluated objects. For more qualitative results, refer to the supplementary webpage: https://rpm-lab-umn.github.io/Grasp-TAGS-web-page/
#03Nov 6, 2026
cs.AI
Test-Time Compute Scales Better with Parallel Agent Teams
Junlin Wang, Haozhe Chen, Ang Li and 2 more
Test-time scaling improves the performance of a fixed model by spending more computation at inference. There are two common ways to spend it on agents when a verifier can score every attempt. Best-of-N sampling runs many independent agents and keeps the best result but saturates quickly. One large team of collaborating agents can score higher but stops improving as it grows. Can we get the best of both? Our method, parallel agent teams, does so by sampling many small teams in parallel and keeping the best team's result. We test it on 12 long-horizon tasks from GPU kernels and formal proofs to exploit development. With a 27B model and a budget of 100 agents, parallel teams of ten beat parallel agents on 10 of 12 tasks and beat one team of 100 on all four tasks where we ran such large teams. At equal dollar cost the same parallel teams beat a frontier model on half the tasks. A simple statistical model shows that individual agents lose because their many samples have a low mean and that one large team loses because a single sample gets no gain from variance. Sampling many small teams in parallel balances a high mean with the gain from variance. Parallel agent teams thus offer a more effective way to scale test-time compute.
#04Nov 6, 2026
cs.AI
Can Agentic Systems Close the Gap in Radiology with Production AI Tools?
Aubin Charley, Julien Khlaut, Charles Corbière and 3 more
Radiology AI has developed along two paths: specialized models that perform well on narrow tasks but cover few clinical findings, and generalist models that address a broader range of tasks but remain prone to hallucination and inaccurate measurements. Combining the two through agentic systems offers a route towards comprehensive radiology reporting, but published systems are tied to one modality or body part. We describe a radiology agentic framework that standardizes how an orchestrator calls modular tools to produce a structured report, and use it to measure what such a system can do with the tools from FDA-cleared radiology AI devices. Report generation is simulated on a large multi-modality report corpus, with the orchestrator given either a catalog of finding classes consolidated from the cleared devices, each available on the modalities it is cleared for, or an unlimited catalog in which any class can be requested, and planning either from the clinical indication or from the target report. Tool outputs are simulated from the reference report, so the comparison isolates tool availability and orchestration from tool error. With the cleared catalog and the indication alone, the orchestrator recovers under a third of the clinically actionable findings; recovery improves substantially with the unlimited catalog, and further when the plan is written from the target report. Attributing every missed finding to a cause shows that most are classes no cleared device offers for the study's modality, and that a third are classes or tools that were offered and not called. Adding the most frequently missing tools closes most of the gap to the unlimited catalog on held-out reports, whereas a smaller orchestrator with the unlimited catalog gives up the whole gain. Tool availability and effective orchestration are thus complementary constraints on comprehensive AI-assisted radiology reporting.
#05Nov 6, 2026
cs.LG
Designing Effective Monitor-Based Interventions for Mitigating Reward Hacking During RL
Aria Wong, Joshua Engels, Neel Nanda
Reinforcement learning (RL) rewards are notoriously difficult to design and control, often leading to the model learning unintended behaviors such as reward hacking. One potential solution is to monitor for reward hacking and penalize it when detected; however, training against a monitor could lead to evasive behavior, and our general understanding of how to apply monitors effectively during training is limited. To study how best to use monitors to mitigate reward hacking, we introduce and open source three realistic environments where Qwen3-4B reward hacks: a coding environment hackable via test overwriting, a medical chat environment hackable via sycophancy, and a biography generation environment hackable via hallucination. We first focus on the coding environment, where we find that: (1) models can learn to evade highly accurate monitors by exploiting systemic flaws in probes and LLM judges; (2) monitors that leak more learning signal during RL suppress reward hacking but are more often evaded; and (3) including easier problems in training can decrease reward hacking. We apply our findings to build better reward hacking monitors for the medical chat and biography generation environments that improve upon naive baselines to reduce reward hacking rates across seeds to before-training levels in some interventions. Our results demonstrate that our takeaways translate to new settings and that better monitor intervention designs are possible.