As researchers delve more deeply into their work, paper search requirements may become more flexible, sometimes involving specific details such as module configuration rather than being limited to coarse-grained topics. However, previous paper search systems are unable to meet these flexible-grained requirements, as previous systems mainly collect paper abstract to construct corpus index, which lacks detailed information to support retrieval by some finer-grained queries. In this work, we propose PaperRegister, which transforms traditional abstract-based index into a hierarchical index tree, thereby supporting queries at flexible granularity. Experiments on paper search tasks across a range of granularity demonstrate that PaperRegister achieves the SOTA performance, and particularly excels in the fine-grained scenarios, highlighting good potential as an effective solution for flexible-grained paper search in real-world applications.

Designing solutions for complex engineering challenges is crucial in human production activities. However, previous research in the retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) field has not sufficiently addressed tasks related to the design of complex engineering solutions. To fill this gap, we introduce a new benchmark, SolutionBench, to evaluate a system’s ability to generate complete and feasible solutions for engineering problems with multiple complex constraints. To further advance the design of complex engineering solutions, we propose a novel system, SolutionRAG, that leverages the tree-based exploration and bi-point thinking mechanism to generate reliable solutions. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that SolutionRAG achieves state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance on the SolutionBench, highlighting its potential to enhance the automation and reliability of complex engineering solution design in real-world applications.

Declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge are two key parts in meta-cognitive theory, and these two hold significant importance in pre-training and inference of LLMs. However, a comprehensive analysis comparing these two types of knowledge is lacking, primarily due to challenges in definition, probing and quantitative assessment. In this paper, we explore from a new perspective by providing ground-truth knowledge for LLMs and evaluating the effective score. Through extensive experiments with widely-used datasets and models, we get conclusions: (1) In most tasks, benefits from declarative knowledge are greater than those from procedural knowledge. (2) Profits of procedural knowledge are larger than declarative knowledge only in reasoning tasks with simple logic. (3) As pre-training progresses and size increases, model ability to utilize both kinds of knowledge significantly improves, but in different speed. We do detailed analysis for the findings and this can provide primary guidance for evaluation and enhancement of large language models.