Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 1, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Temporal Knowledge Graph Question Answering (TKGQA) requires language model agents to retrieve evidence, select relevant facts, and perform multi-step temporal reasoning. However, the trajectory-level outcome signal in GRPO does not explicitly distinguish the quality of intermediate decisions: downstream failures can penalize useful evidence acquisition, while identical rewards in all-failed groups eliminate the relative outcome signal despite differences in intermediate progress. We propose Credit Redistribution with Evidence-Driven Opportunities (CREDO), which uses intermediate evidence to recover local supervision, including in all-failed groups, and determine where outcome supervision acts. CREDO assigns positive stage-level credit through comparisons among rollouts of the same question and uses retained answer overlap as an opportunity proxy to shift part of the outcome-policy weight toward reasoning and answering. The framework preserves terminal rewards and trajectory-level advantages, while redistribution conserves total outcome-policy weight per trajectory. Following the public evaluation protocol of prior work, CREDO raises Overall accuracy from 78.0% to 82.4% and Multiple accuracy from 55.0% to 65.6% on MultiTQ relative to the strongest published baseline in our comparison. On TimelineKGQA, it raises cross-KG accuracy from 30.9% to 36.4% relative to our reproduced baseline via direct transfer to ICEWS Actor under matched training and evaluation settings.