Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.23299

Optimist Deep Research: An Iterative, State-Centric Agent for Autonomous Literature Research

Gihan Panapitiya
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Most retrieval-augmented systems treat literature search as a single retrieval step followed by summarization. Real literature research works differently: the investigator's understanding of the question changes as they read, new subquestions appear, and evidence is weighed, not just collected. We present Optimist Deep Research, an open-source agent that runs literature research as an iterative evidence-acquisition process over an explicit, mutable research state. A research question is broken into a tree of subquestions, each served by search intents that are translated into source-specific queries over arXiv, OpenAlex, Crossref, PubMed, Semantic Scholar and the web. Results are merged into a canonical, provenance-preserving document registry through a conservative four-tier deduplication hierarchy. The registry is expanded by citation snowballing until a saturation criterion is met, and then screened, ranked and allocated to subquestions round-robin. Documents are read in parallel into a structured evidence store of claims with support, location, type and strength. A critic reviews the state along eight dimensions and returns research actions rather than a binary verdict: it can add, split, rephrase, deprioritize or close subquestions, so the research plan is an output of the investigation as well as an input. The final report is written section by section from the evidence store, and every citation resolves to a retrieved document. We describe the design, the deterministic machinery that keeps a language-model pipeline auditable, and a case study that read 28 of 237 retrieved documents in about three and a half minutes. We also report weaknesses the case study exposed.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gihan Panapitiya. 2026-10-16. Optimist Deep Research: An Iterative, State-Centric Agent for Autonomous Literature Research. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.23299

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

GVPO: Group Variance Policy Optimization for Large Language Model Post-Training

Post-training plays a crucial role in refining and aligning large language models to meet specific tasks and human preferences. While recent advancements in post-training techniques, such as Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), leverage increased sampling with relative reward scoring to achieve superior performance, these methods often suffer from training instability that limits their practical adoption. As a next step, we present Group Variance Policy Optimization (GVPO). GVPO incorporates the analytical solution to KL-constrained reward maximization directly into its gradient weights, ensuring alignment with the optimal policy. The method provides intuitive physical interpretations: its gradient mirrors the mean squared error between the central distance of implicit rewards and that of actual rewards. GVPO offers two key advantages: (1) it guarantees a unique optimal solution, exactly the KL-constrained reward maximization objective, (2) it supports flexible sampling distributions that avoids on-policy and importance sampling limitations. By unifying theoretical guarantees with practical adaptability, GVPO establishes a new paradigm for reliable and versatile LLM post-training.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Towards Unified World Models for Visual Navigation via Memory-Augmented Planning and Foresight

Enabling embodied agents to imagine future states is essential for robust and generalizable visual navigation. Yet, state-of-the-art systems typically rely on modular designs that decouple navigation planning from visual world modeling, which often induces state-action misalignment and weak adaptability in novel or dynamic scenarios. We propose UniWM, a unified, memory-augmented world model that integrates egocentric visual foresight and planning within a single multimodal autoregressive backbone. UniWM explicitly grounds action selection in visually imagined outcomes, tightly aligning prediction with control. Meanwhile, a hierarchical memory mechanism fuses short-term perceptual cues with longer-term trajectory context, supporting stable and coherent reasoning over extended horizons. Extensive experiments on four challenging benchmarks (Go Stanford, ReCon, SCAND, HuRoN) and the 1X Humanoid Dataset show that UniWM improves navigation success rates by up to 30%, substantially reduces trajectory errors against strong baselines, generalizes zero-shot to the unseen TartanDrive dataset, and scales naturally to high-dimensional humanoid navigation. These results position UniWM as a principled step toward unified, imagination-driven embodied navigation. The code and models are available at https://github.com/UWMILab/UniWM.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Moral Sycophancy in Vision Language Models

Sycophancy in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) refers to their tendency to align with user opinions, often at the expense of moral or factual accuracy. While prior studies have explored sycophantic behavior in general contexts, its impact on morally grounded visual decision-making remains insufficiently understood. To address this gap, we present the first systematic study of moral sycophancy in VLMs, analyzing ten widely-used models on the Moralise and M^3oralBench datasets under explicit user disagreement. Our results reveal that VLMs frequently produce morally incorrect follow-up responses even when their initial judgments are correct, and exhibit a consistent asymmetry: models are more likely to shift from morally right to morally wrong judgments than the reverse when exposed to user-induced bias. Follow-up prompts generally degrade performance on Moralise, while yielding mixed or even improved accuracy on M^3oralBench, highlighting dataset-dependent differences in moral robustness. Evaluation using Error Introduction Rate (EIR) and Error Correction Rate (ECR) reveals a clear trade-off: models with stronger error-correction capabilities tend to introduce more reasoning errors, whereas more conservative models minimize errors but exhibit limited ability to self-correct. Finally, initial contexts with a morally right stance elicit stronger sycophantic behavior, emphasizing the vulnerability of VLMs to moral influence and the need for principled strategies to improve ethical consistency and robustness in multimodal AI systems.

cs.AI↗