A Later Test Set Is Not a New Domain: Pretraining Familiarity Survives a Contamination-Free Hold-Out

Time-series foundation models are evaluated almost exclusively on public archives that predate them, so a strong score cannot be separated from having seen the test set during pretraining. The obvious remedy is a hold-out that postdates the models. We build one: thirteen forecasters -- four classical, three trained per dataset, six pretrained -- on seven groups drawn from five domains, every observation published after the last model was released, and every dataset rebuildable without an API key. Under this protocol pretrained models win 5 of 7 groups, lose one to a Theta baseline, and on daily exchange rates are indistinguishable from a seasonal naive forecast, along with every other method tested. We then ask what separates the wins from the losses, and report a negative result: the two intrinsic properties one would reach for -- seasonal strength and spectral entropy, measured on the input window -- do not account for the pattern, and seasonal strength is if anything negatively associated with the advantage. What does track it is corpus familiarity. Our largest gain (28% lower MASE than the best classical method, on weekly Wikipedia pageviews) falls on Wikipedia pageviews, the domain TimesFM's authors describe as the bulk of its pretraining corpus, at the same granularities and differing only in time window. Within the pretrained family, where every model forecasts identical series so that series difficulty cancels, the TimesFM family outranks the Chronos family by -0.53 ranks on Wikipedia against -0.09 everywhere else (1,500 vs. 754 series, Mann-Whitney p < 1e-5). We conclude that a temporal hold-out removes memorisation of a window but not familiarity with a domain, that benchmarks therefore need domain hold-outs stated relative to disclosed corpora, and that the practitioner's question is less which model is better than whether their domain is one the model was raised on.

Mais de arXiv AI Papers

Entre para seguir esta fonte

arXiv AI Papers·ontem☆

Retriever-Free Retrieval: Navigating Documents with Decision Models↗

While language models have become dramatically more capable, retrieval still largely relies on lexical matching or similarity in fixed embedding spaces. This creates a capability asymmetry: what the retriever fails to find, even the strongest generator cannot recover. We propose DecisionRAG, which brings the capabilities of pretrained language models to retrieval using decision models that jointly evaluate candidate branches in a single forward pass, without generating any tokens, and show that judging candidates in a shared context makes their relevance estimates comparable. Like a person browsing a library, DecisionRAG navigates the corpus's inherent structure from broad topics down to individual passages, deciding at each level which branches are worth exploring. Without task-specific training or a first-stage retriever, DecisionRAG outperforms dense retrieval with an 8B reranker by 13.8 R@1 points on MultiDoc2Dial and 17.4 Hit@1 points on Natural Questions. Across four benchmarks, including a corpus of 2.68 million Wikipedia paragraphs, retrieval takes just 0.7-1.8 seconds per query.

en

arXiv AI Papers·ontem☆

Auto-Research Arena: Benchmarking and Advancing Auto-Research in Language Modeling↗

As autonomous research systems become more capable, benchmarks must both evaluate their performance and support meaningful research progress. We introduce Auto-Research Arena, a multi-target benchmark for evaluating autonomous research systems and discovering ideas in language modeling. Arena supports diverse research objectives within a shared experimental environment by separating admissibility from improvement: model quality and resource constraints determine whether a result qualifies, while the selected target measures progress among admissible results. We instantiate Arena in language model pretraining with nine targets spanning model, data, training, and inference efficiency, and evaluate seven research harnesses using two foundation models. Arena clearly differentiates existing harnesses across research objectives, with several sophisticated methods outperformed by our simple sequential search baseline, indicating substantial headroom in current auto-research systems. Beyond evaluation, Arena reveals a substantially broader frontier of model and system ideas aligned with active research directions. Reusing these discoveries in a new quality-driven search yields lower training loss under matched data and FLOPs and lower held-out BPB at the same model size. Together, Arena provides a common framework for benchmarking autonomous research and expanding its scope in language modeling. The code is available at https://github.com/Auto-Research-Arena/auto-research-arena

en

arXiv AI Papers·ontem☆

Center-of-Mass Interpretation of Evolution Strategies↗

Evolution strategies (ES) update a model by sampling a population of perturbed copies, scoring each one, and moving in the reward-weighted direction of the perturbations. This update is usually presented as an estimate of a smoothed gradient. We present a geometrical interpretation of this update instead. Treat each perturbed model as a particle and its reward as the particle's mass. Before scoring, every particle has the same mass and the population balances at its centroid. Once rewards are assigned, it balances at its reward-weighted center of mass instead. We show that the mean-subtracted ES update is exactly this displacement, scaled by a scalar factor that depends on the mean reward, for any finite population. The physical reading needs nonnegative rewards, which can always be arranged by adding a constant to every reward without changing the update. In the limit of a large population or under antithetic sampling, the centroid sits on the model itself, so ES has an even simpler geometric interpretation: from its current location, the model moves towards the reward-weighted center of mass of its own population. The same picture explains what subtracting the mean reward does: it changes the point from which the displacement is measured, from the model to the sampled centroid. Our contribution is an intuitive, geometric way to visualize an ES update, exact for any finite population.

en

arXiv AI Papers·ontem☆

Learning Force-Reactive Humanoid Loco-Manipulation↗

Many everyday tasks require controlling contact force as well as motion. On a humanoid, this force must often be coordinated across both hands and the whole body, and cannot be specified by kinematic trajectories alone. Therefore, we present FLORE, a framework for learning force-reactive humanoid loco-manipulation. We collect robot-free demonstrations using two force-sensing UMI-style handheld grippers for hand motion and contact wrenches, and wearable trackers for body motion. A force-reactive diffusion policy takes vision, proprioception, and measured wrenches as input, then predicts actions and per-hand force commands. A hybrid compliance whole-body controller with force tracking executes these commands while maintaining balance: an integral of the force error measured by real force/torque (F/T) sensors lets each hand track force accurately along the commanded direction and remain compliant along the others. In simulation, the controller tracks per-hand force commands of varied magnitude and direction, with little loss in whole-body motion accuracy. Across three contact-rich tasks on the robot, the force-reactive policy succeeds in 80% of rollouts, compared with 26.7% for a position-only policy trained on the same demonstrations and executed by the same controller. For more details, please visit our website: https://louis-leee.github.io/FLoRe/.

en