#01Nov 10, 2026
cs.CV
C$^2$-Routing: Complementary Cropping and Compression for Efficient Vision-Language Inference
Guorui Lu, Qinyu Chen
Visual Question Answering (VQA) imposes substantial computational overhead on vision-language models (VLMs), motivating model-agnostic input reduction methods that can be readily applied across diverse VLMs, including in black-box settings. Simply enforcing a visual-token cap reduces computation, but it can discard information needed to answer the question. A single reduction strategy also struggles to accommodate different scenarios. Our key observation is that cropping and compression are complementary: cropping highlights small targets and local details, whereas whole-image compression better preserves context for large targets or distributed evidence. Based on this observation, we propose C$^2$-Routing, which adaptively selects cropping or compression according to the input image and question. Since both strategies may still discard key information, we further design a safety gate that uses the predicted joint correctness distribution under original and reduced inputs to guide fallback and protect accuracy. To accommodate consumer GPU resource constraints, all training and evaluation experiments run on RTX 3090 GPUs. To measure gains beyond token capping, we use full-image baselines with the same cap of 1,024 visual tokens. We conduct extensive evaluation on three VLMs and 18 datasets spanning local details, global scenes, scene text, and documents. With the visual budget already capped, C$^2$-Routing further reduces end-to-end FLOPs by 36.53% and visual tokens by 42.36% on average, with a mean relative task-score decrease of only 0.77%.
#02Nov 10, 2026
cs.AI
Contrastive Discovery: Open-Ended Scientific Discovery over Competing Explanations
Ziang Liu, James J. Kim, Yijia Dai and 1 more
LLM agents are increasingly used for open-ended, data-driven scientific discovery, yet most of them evaluate hypotheses pointwise, testing an empirical claim $h$ only against its complement $\neg h$. When evidence rejects $h$, the agent learns that one explanation is unlikely but not which alternative the evidence supports. To recover that alternative, we introduce Contrastive Discovery, which replaces the single hypothesis with a contrast set, a scientific question paired with mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive competing explanations. Each experiment is scored by how its evidence redistributes belief across the set, and the question is resolved when belief concentrates on one explanation. Because contrast sets change only the unit an agent proposes and scores, an existing agent can use them to re-evaluate evidence it has already collected or to guide its search. Across six domains, $89\%$ of the pointwise candidates with the largest belief shifts are rejections. On the same evidence, contrast sets resolve $73\%$ of these candidates to a specific alternative. When contrast sets guide search, the agent resolves $67\%$ more questions than pointwise surprisal under the same experiment budget. In a blinded study, $38$ human experts chose the same explanation on $78\%$ of resolved questions and on $82\%$ of questions where the pointwise agent rejected its hypothesis and stopped. Together, these results support explicit competing explanations as a way for discovery agents to resolve more scientific questions from the same evidence and validation budget.
#03Nov 10, 2026
cs.CL
Pterodactyl: Pushing the Limits of Efficient Automated Translation Evaluation
Evelyn Y. Garland, Carola F. Berger
In this paper, we present 1020 Group's submission to the WMT26 shared task on automated quality evaluation. Our system, Pterodactyl, was engineered specifically for subtasks 2 and 3, that is, segment-level quality score prediction and the detection of error-free segments. Pterodactyl is a highly customizable, ultra-low cost system optimized for binary classification in translation triage and data curation. It is based on an LLM-as-a-judge approach, with prompt engineering and model selection guided by ROC analysis. We also developed several variants of Pterodactyl that were specifically adapted for subtasks 3.
#04Nov 10, 2026
cs.CV
RS-JEPA: Remote Sensing Joint-Embedding Predictive Architecture with Scan-Path Views for Cross-Sensor Image Retrieval
Tanishq Rachamalla, Srishti Kaushik, Muhammad Attique Khan and 2 more
Cross-sensor remote sensing image retrieval aims to find scenes with the same content across heterogeneous sensors, such as SAR and optical or panchromatic (PAN) and multispectral (MS) imagery, without manual labels. Existing self-supervised methods either reconstruct sensor-specific pixel detail, align each image only with its co-registered twin, or rely on large transformers with 118-173M parameters (and up to 398M). We introduce RS-JEPA, a compact joint-embedding predictive framework built on a Vision Mamba encoder shared by both sensors. Since a state-space encoder reads an image as an ordered sequence of patches, we propose scan-path views, which treat two reading orders of the same image as two views with identical pixels and predict the hidden patches in one order from the visible patches in the other.To keep this prediction challenging, we propose Adversarial View Coupling (AVC), which learns the hardest split of the visible patches, and a neighbourhood consensus loss that aligns the scene similarities of both sensors. Extensive experiments on SAR-optical (BEN-14K, CBRSIR-VS) and PAN-MS (DSRSID) benchmarks demonstrate that RS-JEPA achieves the highest F1@5 among twelve re-implemented methods (72.92, 80.35 and 94.43) with a retrieval network of only 3.88M parameters (14.57M in training, 8-16times fewer than prior JEPA retrievers). Like prior methods, RS-JEPA trains on co-registered pairs. Our results highlight reading order as a source of self-supervised views. code: https://github.com/Tanishq251/RSJEPA.
#05Nov 10, 2026
cs.AI
Re-Search: Dissecting LLM Ideation Through a Two-Player Questioning Game
Muhan Gao, Hangxiao Zhu, Xinqi Su and 3 more
Research ideation is iterative: researchers refine their ideas step by step based on feedback. Yet existing evaluations obscure this search process, making it difficult to understand how LLMs explore the space of research ideas and what limits their progress. We introduce Re-Search, which adapts the format of Twenty Questions to research ideation: given only the research problem of a published paper, a model must rediscover the paper's core idea by asking yes-or-no questions. Built from 200 ICML 2026 papers, Re-Search tracks how a model's idea evolves as it asks questions and receives binary oracle feedback, isolating ideation from execution. Across six recent LLMs, nearly all progress happens within the first 30 of 100 questions, which largely decide how the game ends; after that, most models plateau. Through controlled interventions on the candidate questions and the hypothesis space, we find that the bottleneck is generation, not judgment: models recognize a good idea or a good question when one is offered, but often cannot produce it on their own. We further analyze the ideation traces and find that models fail by either over-exploiting one direction or over-exploring too many. These findings point to concrete design principles for autoresearch systems: since models can judge candidates they cannot produce, enriching the search with externally sourced ideas and questions may be more effective than improving any single model's generation ability.