Loop
Momentum
19 papers in the last four weeks, up 280% on the four weeks before. 0.2% of all new papers.
Latest papers 66
Autonomous GUI agents face two fundamental challenges: early stopping, where agents prematurely declare success without verifiable evidence, and repetitive loops, where agents cycle through the same failing actions without recovery. We present VLAA-GUI, a modular GUI agentic framework built around three integrated components that guide the system on when to Stop, Recover, and Search. First, a mandatory Completeness Verifier enforces UI-observable success criteria and verification at every finish step -- with an agent-level verifier that cross-examines completion claims with decision rules, rejecting those lacking direct visual evidence. Second, a mandatory Loop Breaker provides multi-tier filtering: switching interaction mode after repeated failures, forcing strategy changes after persistent screen-state recurrence, and binding reflection signals to strategy shifts. Third, an on-demand Search Agent searches online for unfamiliar workflows by directly querying a capable LLM with search ability, returning results as plain text. We additionally integrate a Coding Agent for code-intensive actions and a Grounding Agent for precise action grounding, both invoked on demand when required. We evaluate VLAA-GUI across five top-tier backbones, including Opus 4.5, 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro, on two benchmarks with Linux and Windows tasks, achieving top performance on both (77.5% on OSWorld and 61.0% on WindowsAgentArena). Notably, three of the five backbones surpass human performance (72.4%) on OSWorld in a single pass. Ablation studies show that all three proposed components consistently improve a strong backbone, while a weaker backbone benefits more from these tools when the step budget is sufficient. Further analysis also shows that the Loop Breaker nearly halves wasted steps for loop-prone models.
pAI/MSc: ML Theory Research with Humans on the Loop
We present pAI/MSc, an open-source, customizable, modular multi-agent system for academic research workflows. Our goal is not autonomous scientific ideation, nor fully automated research. It is narrower and more practical: to reduce by orders of magnitude the human steering required to turn a specified hypothesis into a literature-grounded, mathematically established, experimentally supported, submission-oriented manuscript draft. pAI/MSc is built with a current emphasis on machine learning theory and adjacent quantitative fields.
LiveVLN: Breaking the Stop-and-Go Loop in Vision-Language Navigation
Recent navigation systems achieve strong benchmark results, yet real-world deployment often remains visibly stop-and-go. This bottleneck arises because the sense-inference-execution loop is still blocking: after each new observation, the controller must wait for sensing, transmission, and inference before motion can continue. Reducing action-generation cost alone therefore does not remove redundant waiting. To address this issue, we present LiveVLN, a training-free framework for more continuous embodied navigation by augmenting pretrained VLM navigators with multi-step action continuation. Instead of pausing for each full sense-and-inference round, LiveVLN overlaps execution with the processing of newly arrived observations, allowing refreshed future actions to be handed off before the current executable prefix is exhausted. This design keeps actions continuously available during motion, reducing idle waiting and enabling smoother online execution. The framework operates at runtime and can be integrated with compatible pretrained VLM navigators. Across R2R and RxR, LiveVLN preserves benchmark performance while reducing waiting time and improving action availability. In real-world deployments, it cuts average episode waiting time by up to and shortens wall-clock episode time by on StreamVLN and on NaVIDA, yielding more coherent execution during deployment. Code is available at https://github.com/NIneeeeeem/LiveVLN.
Bias in the Loop: Auditing LLM-as-a-Judge for Software Engineering
Large Language Models are increasingly used as judges to evaluate code artifacts when exhaustive human review or executable test coverage is unavailable. LLM-judge is increasingly relevant in agentic software engineering workflows, where it can help rank candidate solutions and guide patch selection. While attractive for scale, current practice lacks a principled account of reliability and bias: repeated evaluations of the same case can disagree; small prompt edits can swing outcomes; and seemingly semantics-preserving, human-equivalent perturbations may elicit divergent verdicts. This paper studies LLM-as-a-Judge for code through a measurement-first lens. We analyze two pointwise judging regimes across code generation, code repair task, and test generation, and we systematically probe prompt-induced biases. Our study considers difficulty levels for repeated runs and controlled prompt interventions that isolate one presentation cue at a time, and it evaluates judges using consistency and sensitivity to bias. We find that judge decisions are highly sensitive to prompt biases even when the underlying code snippet is unchanged. Across all three tasks, several biases systematically shift preferences toward the option favored by the prompt, improving accuracy when that option aligns with the gold answer but substantially reducing it otherwise. In some settings, these effects are large enough to change task-level conclusions and alter relative model rankings. These findings show that reported judge performance may reflect prompt artifacts rather than stable assessment ability, posing a direct threat to the validity and reproducibility of code evaluation. We therefore argue that LLM-as-a-Judge studies should report bias sensitivity alongside accuracy and incorporate explicit controls to support more trustworthy model comparison in software engineering.
Do We Still Need Humans in the Loop? Human vs. LLM Annotation in Active Learning for TikTok Hate Speech Detection
Annotating data remains a costly bottleneck for supervised NLP. Active learning (AL) reduces the number of human labels needed by selecting only the most informative instances, while instruction-tuned LLMs attack the same bottleneck from the other side, making labels cheap enough to annotate entire corpora. This raises two questions: can LLM labels replace human labels within the AL loop, and does AL remain necessary when entire corpora can be cheaply labeled? We investigate both by training supervised hate speech classifiers on a new dataset of 278K German political TikTok comments, comparing human and LLM annotation under matched conditions. LLM annotation at scale outperforms human-supervised classifiers at roughly one-tenth the cost, for both a closed-source (GPT-5.2) and an open-weight (Qwen3.5-122B-A10B) LLM, and the advantage is robust under soft-label evaluation. It hinges on the annotation interface: only a two-question decomposition mirroring the human annotation task unlocks it. AL provides no reliable advantage over random sampling in our prefiltered pool. Error structure depends on the LLM: only GPT-5.2 matches the human FP/FN balance, while other variants over-flag border-control and economic-competition discourse. Humans remain essential as evaluators; for training labels, the question shifts to which LLM, which interface, and what shape of pool.
An Real-Sim-Real (RSR) Loop Framework for Generalizable Robotic Policy Transfer
The sim-to-real gap remains a critical challenge in robotics, hindering the deployment of algorithms trained in simulation to real-world systems. We propose a flexible Real-to-Sim-to-Real (RSR) framework whose central contribution is an information-theoretic cost function that explicitly accounts for sim-to-real discrepancies. This cost balances two objectives, completing the task and steering the policy to collect real-world samples that are maximally informative for improving transfer. It can be integrated seamlessly into existing reinforcement learning algorithms (e.g., PPO, SAC) and ensures a balanced exploration of critical regions in the real domain. The framework treats differentiable simulation as optional: when a differentiable simulator is available, the collected informative data can also be used to tune simulator parameters. We implement the framework with the MuJoCo MJX platform and demonstrate its generality by evaluating on both manipulation tasks with a 6-DOF robotic arm and locomotion tasks on a legged robot. Empirical results show that our RSR loop yields more efficient data acquisition and substantially improves task performance in real-world that achieves a smoother sim-to-real transfer.