Skill Is Not Document: A Query-Conditional Benchmark and Two-Stage Retriever for LLM Agent Skill Routing

LLM agents complete complex tasks by composing multiple skills, and skill retrieval is a front-end stage for agents. Skill retrieval differs fundamentally from traditional document retrieval at the supervision level: top-K joint correctness depends not only on the semantic relevance of each individual query-skill pair, but also on whether the skills retrieved together can collaborate to fulfill the task under the given query. Such "skill compatibility" cannot be derived from independent relevance alone. Yet existing LLM-based data synthesis pipelines can produce a direct supervision signal for "which skills should not be jointly retrieved under this query" -- namely the LLM's own rejection decisions -- and this signal is routinely discarded as low-quality data. To address this gap, we propose Reject-as-Resource Retriever (R3) and construct R3-Skill, a bilingual (Chinese-English) skill retrieval benchmark targeting realistic agent skill routing. R3-Skill spans four language directions, features query phrasings close to real user requests, and is verified through multi-expert cross-checking. On R3-Skill, we build a two-stage retrieval system (R3-Embedding + R3-Reranker) with skill compatibility as an explicit training signal. Gradient analysis shows that the "push-away" signal is diluted by bilateral balancing in the bi-encoder but acts as lossless graded ranking supervision in the cross-encoder -- motivating its placement at the cross-encoder stage, as confirmed by ablations on two datasets. The R3-Embedding + R3-Reranker pipeline attains Hit@1 = 0.7714, NDCG@10 = 0.8327 and Set-Compat = 0.3525 on R3-Skill. The dataset, training code and model weights are released as open source for agent skill routing.

Cause-and-Effect Analysis of ADAS: A Comparison Study between Literature Review and Complaint Data

Advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) are designed to improve vehicle safety. However, it is difficult to achieve such benefits without understanding the causes and limitations of the current ADAS and their possible solutions. This study 1) investigated the limitations and solutions of ADAS through a literature review, 2) identified the causes and effects of ADAS through consumer complaints using natural language processing models, and 3) compared the major differences between the two. These two lines of research identified similar categories of ADAS causes, including human factors, environmental factors, and vehicle factors. However, academic research focused more on human factors of ADAS issues and proposed advanced algorithms to mitigate such issues while drivers complained more of vehicle factors of ADAS failures, which led to associated top consequences. The findings from these two sources tend to complement each other and provide important implications for the improvement of ADAS in the future.