Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

ProCompNav: Proactive Instance Navigation with Comparative Judgment for Ambiguous User Queries

Junhyuk Kwon, Seungjoon Lee, Hyejin Park, Kyle Min, Jungseul OkPublished May 7, 2026
arXiv PDF
Researcher verdict
Context only
Use as context only
Benchmark evidence
Thin evidence
Verify before relying
Time to first repro
A few days
Plan setup time
Risk flags
2
Review before use

Abstract

Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.

Natural-language instance navigation becomes challenging when the initial user request does not uniquely specify the target instance. A practical agent should reduce the user's burden by actively asking only the information needed to distinguish the target from similar distractors, rather than requiring a detailed description upfront. Existing approaches often fall short of this goal by mistaking distractors that strongly match the accumulated information about the target provided by the user. As a result, despite the dialogue, the agent may still fail to distinguish the target from distractors, leading to premature decisions and lengthy user responses. We propose Proactive Instance Navigation with Comparative Judgment (ProCompNav), a two-stage framework that first constructs a candidate pool and then identifies the target through Recursive Comparative Judgment (RCJ). RCJ iteratively narrows the pool by selecting an attribute-value pair that divides the candidates, asking the user a binary question, and removing inconsistent candidates, without requiring an attribute unique to the target. On CoIN-Bench, ProCompNav outperforms the evaluated baselines in Success Rate while substantially reducing Response Length. On the non-interactive TextNav benchmark, ProCompNav achieves the highest Success Rate. Two human studies further show that participants prefer ProCompNav's interaction strategies.

Results and benchmarks

Freshness tier: hot
Natural-language instance navigation becomes challenging when the initial user request does not uniquely specify the target instance.
Task Dataset Metric Value Source
Agentic tool use ProCompNav Gemma-3-12B. 20.9 paper-derived

Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure below.

Implementation

No direct implementation yet

Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.

Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.

Implementation evidence summary
Confidence: low

Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.

Reproduction risks
  • Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow

Reproduction readiness

Time to first repro: days
Last checked: Oct 13, 2026

No repo

No verified implementation available

  • No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.

Hardware requirements

  • Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.

Hugging Face artifacts

No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.

Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.

Research context

Tasks

Agentic tool use

Methods

Agentic systems

Domains

AI Agents

Evaluation and human feedback data

Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.

Open in HFEPX
Explore similar papers

Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.