探索全球前沿学术脉络

KGEdit: Ambiguity-Aware Knowledge Graphs for Training-Free Precise Video Generation and Editing

In recent years, training-free video generation has progressed remarkably. However, when handling complex textual instructions, existing methods still suffer from semantic ambiguity, incorrect concept binding, and cross-frame inconsistency. To address these issues, we propose KGEdit, a structured semantic control framework for text-to-video (T2V) diffusion models. Specifically, we first construct an ambiguity-aware knowledge graph (AAKG) to disentangle and disambiguate the input prompt, converting it into four types of structured semantics: identity, relation, attribute, and negative constraints. We then design a structured semantic injection module (SSIM) to inject these semantic signals into key layers of the diffusion Transformer, enabling fine-grained semantic control. In addition, we introduce a temporal-aware semantic control (TASC) module that dynamically schedules semantic objectives according to the stage-wise characteristics of the denoising process, further improving semantic alignment and temporal consistency. Experiments show that KGEdit outperforms existing methods in editing precision and temporal stability, while offering higher efficiency and controllability in text-driven interaction scenarios.

ORAgentBench: Can LLM Agents Solve Challenging Operations Research Tasks End to End?

arXiv:2606.19787v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents for multi-step tasks in executable environments, yet their ability to perform realistic operations research (OR) work remains unclear. Existing OR evaluations often decouple modeling from solving, rely on pre-formalized or text-only instances, and rarely test the full workflow from operational artifacts to validated decisions. In this work, we introduce ORAgentBench, an execution-grounded benchmark for evaluating autonomous agents on challenging end-to-end operations research tasks. It contains 107 human-reviewed tasks across diverse operational scenarios, each packaged in an isolated environment with a natural-language brief, multi-file data, configuration artifacts, and a required submission schema. Agents must write and run solution code, and their submissions are evaluated by hidden validators for schema validity, hard-constraint feasibility, and normalized objective quality. Experiments with fourteen frontier agent-model configurations show that current agents remain far from reliable OR practice. The best agent passes only 35.51% of all tasks and 20.59% of hard tasks, and many feasible submissions still fall below the required quality threshold. Failure analysis further shows that errors are dominated by strategic weaknesses, including missed operational rules, brittle formulations, weak feasible-solution construction, and insufficient solution improvement. OR-specific procedural skills increase hard-task feasibility, but do not reliably improve solution quality or pass rate. These results suggest that progress in OR agents requires moving beyond plausible optimization code toward dependable, high-quality operational decision-making.