arXiv subjects

Xingda Lyu

Publications and source records attributed to Xingda Lyu.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Beyond Instruction-Driven Editing: Source-Grounded Problem Discovery with User-Governed Repair for Scientific Posters

Interactive editors usually assume that users already know what to change. Yet an important interaction state comes earlier: a user may recognize that an artifact is not working without knowing what intervention to request. We call this the articulation gap. We introduce PROS (Proactive Refinement Of Scientific Posters), which separates epistemic initiative from behavioral authority: the system can surface source-grounded candidate problems, while users decide which become repair goals and whether resulting changes are committed. Accepted issues hand off to native-object PPTX editing with validation and reversible preview. We also introduce PROS-Bench, a source-linked collection of 120 papers and 320 editable PPTX posters, including a 120-poster matched primary core and a separate conference representation challenge. On the primary core, PROS achieves a mean VLM-rated stage-balanced diagnosis quality score of 67.2 on a 0-100 scale and 87.6% operator-verified target resolution among accepted diagnoses. Temporally blinded automated scoring yields a +22.7-point paper-macro accepted-target uplift, yet 14.8% of assessable accepted targets decline. This divergence shows why problem discovery, local resolution, and realized outcome should be evaluated separately. More broadly, intelligent editors can support problem discovery before a concrete edit request exists without taking authority over consequential change.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Knowing Isn't Understanding: Re-grounding Generative Proactivity with Epistemic and Behavioral Insight

Generative AI agents equate understanding with resolving explicit queries, an assumption that confines interaction to what users can articulate. This assumption breaks down when users themselves lack awareness of what is missing, risky, or worth considering. In such conditions, proactivity is not merely an efficiency enhancement, but an epistemic necessity. We refer to this condition as epistemic incompleteness: where progress depends on engaging with unknown unknowns for effective partnership. Existing approaches to proactivity remain narrowly anticipatory, extrapolating from past behavior and presuming that goals are already well defined, thereby failing to support users meaningfully. However, surfacing possibilities beyond a user's current awareness is not inherently beneficial. Unconstrained proactive interventions can misdirect attention, overwhelm users, or introduce harm. Proactive agents, therefore, require behavioral grounding: principled constraints on when, how, and to what extent an agent should intervene. We advance the position that generative proactivity must be grounded both epistemically and behaviorally. Drawing on the philosophy of ignorance and research on proactive behavior, we argue that these theories offer critical guidance for designing agents that can engage responsibly and foster meaningful partnerships.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

P-RAG: Prompt-Enhanced Parametric RAG with LoRA and Selective CoT for Biomedical and Multi-Hop QA

Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable capabilities but remain limited by their reliance on static training data. Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) addresses this constraint by retrieving external knowledge during inference, though it still depends heavily on knowledge base quality. To explore potential improvements, we evaluated three RAG variants-Standard RAG, DA-RAG, and our proposed Prompt-Enhanced Parametric RAG (P-RAG), a hybrid architecture that integrates parametric knowledge within the LLM and retrieved evidence, guided by Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting and Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) fine-tuning-on both general and biomedical datasets. Using LLaMA-3.2-1B-Instruct fine-tuned via LoRA, we evaluate on PubMedQA and 2WikiMultihopQA. P-RAG outperforms Standard RAG on PubMedQA by 10.47 percentage points in F1 (93.33% vs. 82.86%; 12.64% relative). On 2WikiMultihopQA, P-RAG nearly doubles the overall score vs. Standard RAG (33.44% vs. 17.83%) and achieves 44.03% on the Compare subset (with 42.74% Bridge, 21.84% Inference, 8.60% Compose). CoT prompting substantially improves multi-hop reasoning but yields mixed results for simpler, single-hop queries. These findings underscore P-RAG's potential for accurate, scalable, and contextually adaptive biomedical question answering. Our contributions include: (1) LoRA-based fine-tuning of LLaMA-3.2-1B-Instruct for biomedical QA, (2) introduction of P-RAG with Chain-of-Thought prompting, and (3) state-of-the-art results on PubMedQA and 2WikiMultihopQA.

cs.CL↗