Hugging Face Trending Papers

Learning What to Ask for Tomorrow: Active Preference Acquisition for Long-Term Personalized Web Agents

Read the original on Hugging Face Trending Papers →

The paper introduces Active Preference Acquisition (APA) for long‑term personalized web agents, defining the Prospective Personalization Value (PPV) of a missing preference as its expected cumulative utility over future tasks minus the cost of asking. APA selects questions within a per‑interaction budget, prioritizing preferences that may not benefit the current task but can be reused across many future tasks. Experiments on the ActiveWebPref benchmark show APA acquiring 80.3% of amortization‑dependent preferences and achieving higher net utility than baseline methods, while limiting the number of questions asked.

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 Hugging Face Trending Papers.

arXiv Computation and Language
Oct 23

Learning What to Ask for Tomorrow: Active Preference Acquisition for Long-Term Personalized Web Agents

The paper introduces Active Preference Acquisition (APA), a method for web agents to decide which unknown user preferences to ask about by evaluating the Prospective Personalization Value (PPV)—the expected cumulative benefit across future tasks minus the cost of asking. APA calculates counterfactual gains for each candidate preference using task prototypes and aggregates them by expected reuse, enabling agents to prioritize questions that may not help immediately but improve long‑term performance. Experiments on the ActiveWebPref benchmark show APA can acquire a large share of valuable preferences and achieve higher net utility than baseline strategies, demonstrating that considering future reuse is crucial for effective personalization.

By Yiqi Wang, Zizhi Zeng, Jiaqi Zhang, Yiqun Duan, Mingkai Zheng, Taotao Cai
arXiv AI
Sep 24

Just-in-Time Memory: Learning to Curate Task-Adaptive Memory for LLM Agents

The paper introduces Just-in-Time Memory (JitMem), a system that defers memory curation until a task is read, allowing a curator to synthesize task‑specific memory payloads based on the current query. Unlike traditional write‑time curation, JitMem retains raw trajectories and trains the curator using immediate task success, avoiding long‑horizon credit‑assignment issues. Experiments on ALFWorld, WebShop, and τ²‑bench show JitMem consistently outperforms both no‑memory agents and existing write‑time memory methods, with improvements of up to 16.3 absolute success‑rate points. whyItMatters":"By curating memory at read time, JitMem enables more effective, task‑adaptive recall that directly improves agent performance across diverse benchmarks."

By Yefan Zhou, Yang Li, Zeyu Leo Liu, Semih Yavuz, Shafiq Joty
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 16

Ask Now, Use Later: Benchmarking the Proactivity Gap in Long-Lived LLM Agents

The paper introduces ATRBench, a benchmark that measures the proactivity gap in long‑lived LLM agents by evaluating their ability to ask for user preferences that are not needed immediately but may be useful in future sessions. It defines the Ask‑to‑Remember (ATR) task, where agents must decide whether to request a reusable preference now, and shows that current state‑of‑the‑art agents perform significantly below an oracle. The study identifies preference acquisition as the main bottleneck and provides a diagnostic framework for improving agent proactivity.

By Bin Wu, Guanyun Zou, Bingbing Wang, Huan Zhao, Chuan Shi
arXiv Computation and Language
Oct 23

Why Bother Me Again? Benchmarking Personal Agent Memory for Interaction Preferences

The paper introduces MemPABench, an interactive environment designed to evaluate how personal agents remember and act on user interaction preferences. The benchmark features long‑horizon tasks where agents must decide when to clarify, confirm, or act autonomously, using data from four simulated users who provided 99 sessions over four months and five preference changes each. Experiments across four memory systems and LLM backbones show that current memory approaches offer limited improvement in preference selection, with retrieval‑based methods performing no better than no memory and file‑based memory sometimes applying preferences in irrelevant contexts.

By Jialin Li, Zhenhao Chen, Hanjun Luo, Hanan Salam