Chengyang Shi | Search arXiv

arXiv2026

A11yLTLNav: Automatic Detection of Accessibility Navigation Failures

For blind and low-vision (BLV) screen-reader users, a website that appears accessible in a static snapshot can become difficult or impossible to navigate once interaction begins. Yet, most automated accessibility checkers miss failures involving focus, interface state, and accessible feedback across interactions. We present A11yLTLNav, a property-based approach for automatically detecting accessibility navigation failures. Through a structured review of prior research, we organize accessibility navigation failures into a failure taxonomy and formalize a browser-observable subset as executable Linear Temporal Logic properties over action-state traces. A11yLTLNav combines random keyboard exploration with runtime property monitoring to detect these failures during interactions. We evaluate A11yLTLNav on 31 generated websites based on real-world websites and tasks. It reported 309 accessibility failures, of which 274 were confirmed, achieving 88.7% precision and identifying more confirmed failures than the comparison checkers. Our results show that A11yLTLNav transforms accessibility knowledge into reusable checks of interface behavior over time.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

The Greatness of Science Cannot Be Planned: Agentic Auto-Research is Fuzz Testing

Agentic auto-research is emerging, but most systems treat scientific discovery as goal-oriented optimization against a final benchmark. This paradigm rewards a sparse final verdict and ignores the exploration that precedes it. When agents optimize only the final score, they overfit to the test conditions and sample blindly rather than search. Within a declared research problem, a research agent and a greybox fuzzer for software analysis face the same sparse feedback. A fuzzer rarely finds a bug directly, but coverage makes partial progress observable on every execution. Fuzzers use that dense signal to mutate inputs and allocate effort, rather than merely rank completed runs. Auto-research needs the same two capabilities. First, each experiment must expose a cheap, dense signal of epistemic progress before final scientific validation is available. Second, that signal must determine the next intervention so the agent searches rather than repeatedly samples. Because the progress signal provides guidance rather than a final verdict, final validation must still evaluate claims using evidence protected from adaptive reuse. We propose controlled tests to determine whether candidate signals predict validated progress, whether feedback-directed search yields more validated discoveries per unit cost than repeated sampling, and whether protected validation reduces false discoveries. In a simulated physics environment, an AI research agent that tracks its intermediate epistemic progress discovers a hidden physical law. Optimization-driven baselines fail because they repeatedly sample and overfit to their existing data instead of probing unfamiliar regimes. Feedback architecture, not generation capacity, is the central bottleneck in auto-research.

cs.AI↗