Zheyu Wang
Publications
OMG-Agent: Toward Robust Missing Modality Generation with Decoupled Coarse-to-Fine Agentic Workflows
Data incompleteness severely impedes the reliability of multimodal systems. Existing reconstruction methods face distinct bottlenecks: conventional parametric/generative models are prone to hallucinations due to over-reliance on internal memory, while retrieval-augmented frameworks struggle with retrieval rigidity. Critically, these end-to-end architectures are fundamentally constrained by Semantic-Detail Entanglement -- a structural conflict between logical reasoning and signal synthesis that compromises fidelity. In this paper, we present \textbf{\underline{O}}mni-\textbf{\underline{M}}odality \textbf{\underline{G}}eneration Agent (\textbf{OMG-Agent}), a novel framework that shifts the paradigm from static mapping to a dynamic coarse-to-fine Agentic Workflow. By mimicking a \textit{deliberate-then-act} cognitive process, OMG-Agent explicitly decouples the task into three synergistic stages: (1) an MLLM-driven Semantic Planner that resolves input ambiguity via Progressive Contextual Reasoning, creating a deterministic structured semantic plan; (2) a non-parametric Evidence Retriever that grounds abstract semantics in external knowledge; and (3) a Retrieval-Injected Executor that utilizes retrieved evidence as flexible feature prompts to overcome rigidity and synthesize high-fidelity details. Extensive experiments on multiple benchmarks demonstrate that OMG-Agent consistently surpasses state-of-the-art methods, maintaining robustness under extreme missingness, e.g., a $2.6$-point gain on CMU-MOSI at $70$\% missing rates.
Retrieval-Infused Reasoning Sandbox: A Benchmark for Decoupling Retrieval and Reasoning Capabilities
Despite strong performance on existing benchmarks, it remains unclear whether large language models can reason over genuinely novel scientific information. Most evaluations score end-to-end RAG pipelines, where reasoning is confounded with retrieval and toolchain choices, and the signal is further contaminated by parametric memorization and open-web volatility. We introduce DeR2, a controlled deep-research sandbox that isolates document-grounded reasoning while preserving core difficulties of deep search: multi-step synthesis, denoising, and evidence-based conclusion making. DeR2 decouples evidence access from reasoning via four regimes--Instruction-only, Concepts (gold concepts without documents), Related-only (only relevant documents), and Full-set (relevant documents plus topically related distractors)--yielding interpretable regime gaps that operationalize retrieval loss vs. reasoning loss and enable fine-grained error attribution. To prevent parametric leakage, we apply a two-phase validation that requires parametric failure without evidence while ensuring oracle-concept solvability. To ensure reproducibility, each instance provides a frozen document library (drawn from 2023-2025 theoretical papers) with expert-annotated concepts and validated rationales. Experiments across a diverse set of state-of-the-art foundation models reveal substantial variation and significant headroom: some models exhibit mode-switch fragility, performing worse with the Full-set than with Instruction-only, while others show structural concept misuse, correctly naming concepts but failing to execute them as procedures.
Retrieval-Infused Reasoning Sandbox: A Benchmark for Decoupling Retrieval and Reasoning Capabilities
Despite strong performance on existing benchmarks, it remains unclear whether large language models can reason over genuinely novel scientific information. Most evaluations score end-to-end RAG pipelines, where reasoning is confounded with retrieval and toolchain choices, and the signal is further contaminated by parametric memorization and open-web volatility. We introduce DeR2, a controlled deep-research sandbox that isolates document-grounded reasoning while preserving core difficulties of deep search: multi-step synthesis, denoising, and evidence-based conclusion making. DeR2 decouples evidence access from reasoning via four regimes--Instruction-only, Concepts (gold concepts without documents), Related-only (only relevant documents), and Full-set (relevant documents plus topically related distractors)--yielding interpretable regime gaps that operationalize retrieval loss vs. reasoning loss and enable fine-grained error attribution. To prevent parametric leakage, we apply a two-phase validation that requires parametric failure without evidence while ensuring oracle-concept solvability. To ensure reproducibility, each instance provides a frozen document library (drawn from 2023-2025 theoretical papers) with expert-annotated concepts and validated rationales. Experiments across a diverse set of state-of-the-art foundation models reveal substantial variation and significant headroom: some models exhibit mode-switch fragility, performing worse with the Full-set than with Instruction-only, while others show structural concept misuse, correctly naming concepts but failing to execute them as procedures.