arXiv Computation and Language By Meilin Chen, Hongyuan Bao

Incremental Open-Ended Deep Research with Structured Harness

Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →

The paper introduces Incremental Open-Ended Deep Research (Incremental-OEDR), a new research setting that treats a report as an evolving state and updates it incrementally by preserving valid knowledge, revising outdated content, and incorporating new information. It proposes Structured Harness, which represents reports as structured outlines, sections, and evidence, enabling structured retrieval, a persistent evidence pool, and selective generation for efficient updates. A ten‑year temporal evaluation framework with Single‑Step and Long‑Chain tasks demonstrates that Incremental-OEDR maintains competitive report quality while improving continuity and reducing research costs, achieving up to 0.51 higher content‑level ROUGE‑L F1, 0.63 higher outline‑level EM F1, 33% lower token consumption, and 61% fewer search calls compared to traditional OEDR.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Computation and Language.

arXiv AI
Sep 30

LongCat-DeepResearch Technical Report

LongCat-DeepResearch is a deep research system that merges an enhanced LongCat model with a multi‑agent workflow to produce comprehensive, evidence‑grounded reports. The workflow separates global planning from detailed investigation, using planning agents to create a ResearchSpec and research agents to draft sections in parallel, followed by targeted local revisions guided by global review. The system achieves strong benchmark scores, including 55.25 on DeepResearchBench and 79.83 on ResearchRubrics, and shows benefits from combining planning perspectives and additional editing for readability.

By Meituan LongCat Team, He Zhu, Yue Xu, Wanli Wu, Haolin Ren, Yuxin Bian, Jiarui Zhao, Rongzhi Zhang, Quanchi Weng, Jinghao Cui, Yu Fan, Yuhan Liu, Yunhu Ye, Jiyuan Ren, Fengcheng Yuan, Zhao Yang, Jiacheng Zhang, Yuchuan Dai, Ruixuan Xiao, Haozhe Sun, Xiangyuan Liu, Cheng Sun, Yao Du, Yiming Hao, Hongbo Guo, Shuo He, Lei Wang, Xunliang Cai, Yan Chen, Fan Yang, Lingchuan Liu
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 19

DeepWeaver: Bridging the Evidence Synthesis Gap in Open-Ended Question Answering

DeepWeaver addresses the evidence synthesis gap in open‑ended question answering by weaving noisy retrieved evidence into comprehensive answers. It introduces Thought Block Chains (TBCs) that organize claims, key information, and citations, allowing the system to revise and expand evidence before final generation. Evaluations on LoQA and DeepResearch Bench show improved content sufficiency, citation grounding, and detail preservation across multiple LLMs.

arXiv AI
Aug 20

DeepWeaver: Bridging the Evidence Synthesis Gap in Open-Ended Question Answering

DeepWeaver is a framework designed to improve open‑ended question answering by weaving noisy retrieved evidence into comprehensive, well‑cited answers. It introduces Thought Block Chains (TBCs) that organize claims, key information, and supporting evidence, and uses subordinate TBCs to refine and expand the evidence before final generation. Evaluations on LoQA and DeepResearch Bench show that DeepWeaver enhances content sufficiency, citation grounding, and detail preservation across multiple LLMs.

By Xujia Wang, Yizhe Zhang, Bin Xu, Lei Hou, Juanzi Li
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 11

DeepResearch Bench II: Diagnosing Deep Research Agents via Rubrics from Expert Reports

Deep Research Bench II is a new benchmark designed to evaluate Deep Research Agents (DRAs) by requiring them to produce research reports for 132 grounded tasks across 22 domains. Each report is assessed using 9,430 fine‑grained binary rubrics that cover information recall, analysis, and presentation, all derived from expert‑written investigative articles through a rigorous LLM‑plus‑human pipeline. Evaluation of current state‑of‑the‑art DRAs shows that even the best models satisfy fewer than 50% of these rubrics, highlighting a significant gap between automated agents and human experts.

By Ruizhe Li, Mingxuan Du, Benfeng Xu, Chiwei Zhu, Xiaorui Wang, Zhendong Mao