Artificial Intelligence Systems

The rapid diffusion of agentic AI has created a new coverage problem for commercial insurance: some AI-mediated losses are now affirmatively insured, some create silent-AI exposure under legacy cyber, technology errors-and-omissions (E&O), directors-and-officers (D&O), employment practices liability (EPLI), crime, and media policies, and others are being actively excluded. This paper maps that emerging boundary by coding 55 AI threat classes against 26 insurance products, endorsements, and exclusion regimes using public carrier materials and OWASP/MITRE threat catalogs. We identify a four-tier insurability frontier: affirmatively insured perils, silent-AI exposures, actively excluded perils, and perils outside conventional private insurance structures. Our coding measures publicly claimed positioning rather than executed contract wording; the headline statistics describe what carriers publicly state about coverage, not what would be paid in any specific claim. Three patterns emerge. First, affirmative AI coverage is beginning to differentiate by primary risk emphasis: public materials often position Munich Re around model performance and drift, Armilla and parts of the Lloyd's market around hallucination and broader AI liability, Tokio Marine Kiln and CFC around IP and technology E&O concerns, Apollo ibott around emerging autonomous system liability, and Coalition around deepfake and AI-enabled cyber response. Second, legacy lines retain silent-AI exposure where AI is an instrumentality rather than the legal cause of loss. Third, foundation model concentration is the clearest genuinely novel insurability frontier because upstream model failure can correlate losses across many cedents at once; the relevant market design question is which insurability constraint each candidate structure relaxes, not merely which systemic risk template exists.

As LLMs become increasingly capable, editorial boards and program committees are growing concerned about reviewers who fully outsource peer review to commercial chatbots. This concern stems from prior findings that current chatbots lack the independent critical thinking and depth of reasoning required to assess scientific novelty. One promising direction for mitigating this concern is to embed hidden instructions into manuscripts that disrupt or alter chatbot-generated reviews. However, existing methods remain intuitive and fragile, as they typically rely on homogeneous payloads injected in an inter-stream manner, rendering them susceptible to sanitization or neutralization. In this paper, we identify End-to-End Review Outsourcing as an emerging threat and propose IntraGuard, a black-box, venue-agnostic defense framework grounded in the structural--visual decoupling inherent to the PDF. Designed for committee-side deployment, IntraGuard supports both explicit strategies that trigger refusal or warning signals, and implicit strategies that embed predefined textual markers into the generated review. These strategies can be deployed via any of three intra-stream injection mechanisms, each of which seamlessly embeds heterogeneous defensive text objects within the PDF's underlying structure without altering its visual presentation. Extensive evaluations across 7 real-world commercial chatbot settings and 12 venues spanning diverse disciplines show that IntraGuard achieves a defense success rate of up to 84%, while preserving peer-review invariance for human reviewers. IntraGuard is lightweight and hardware-independent, incurring an average overhead of only one second per manuscript on a commodity personal computer. We further evaluate 11 adaptive attacks spanning manuscript sanitization and instruction interference, and discuss the implications of constructing ensemble defenses.

The pervasive integration of AI has enabled Offensive AI: the exploitation of AI for malicious ends across the cyber-kill chain. A critical manifestation is the user attribute inference attack, where AI infers sensitive Personally Identifiable Information (PII) from innocuous public data. We explore how music streaming ecosystems, where users routinely release public playlists, can be exploited for Offensive AI. To quantify this threat, we developed musicPIIrate. This novel tool leverages deep learning architectures that utilize both standalone data representations and the structural information embedded in a user's playlist collection. Our design explores set-based approaches (e.g., Deep Sets) and methodologies modeling relationships between playlists (e.g., Graph Neural Networks), which we also combine to leverage both perspectives. Our approach addresses feature extraction from unordered, variable-length set data, enabling accurate PII prediction. Empirical evaluation demonstrates that musicPIIrate achieves state-of-the-art inference accuracy. The tool successfully infers a wide array of attributes, including: Demographics (Age, Country, Gender), Habits (Alcohol, Smoke, Sport), and Personality Traits (OCEAN scores). musicPIIrate outperforms existing methods, beating baselines in 9 out of 15 attribute inference tasks. To counter this vulnerability, we propose JamShield, a lightweight defensive framework. JamShield strategically injects dummy playlists into an account to dilute the PII-carrying signal. Our analysis indicates that JamShield represents a promising defense, lowering inference F1-scores by an average of 10%. This work provides an initial Offensive-AI benchmark for playlist-based PII inference using architectures that leverage set- and graph-structured data and introduces a defense showing encouraging mitigation effects.

AI-powered educational technologies have demonstrated measurable benefits for learners, but their design and evaluation have largely centered on K-12 contexts. As a result, many AI-supported learning systems remain poorly aligned with the needs, constraints, and goals of adult learners. To better understand how AI systems function in adult education, this paper examines the deployment of several AI learning technologies developed within a multidisciplinary, national research institute in the United States focused on adult learning and online education. Drawing on longitudinal deployment data, we conducted a reflexive thematic analysis to identify recurring challenges and design considerations across systems. These insights were synthesized into a set of 19 design guidelines intended to inform future AI-supported adult learning technologies. We demonstrate the utility of these guidelines through a heuristic evaluation of the deployed systems. Lastly, we present a guideline exploration tool that aids in the ideation of technologies by connecting the guidelines to stakeholder statements surfaced in the analysis process.

We propose DAO-enabled decentralized physical AI (DePAI), a democratic architecture for coordinating humans and autonomous machines in the operation and governance of physical-digital systems. We (1) synthesize foundations in blockchains, decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs), and cryptoeconomics; (2) connect DAO design with digital-democracy research on deliberation and voting, showing how each can advance the other; (3) position DAO-governed decentralized physical infrastructure networks (DePIN) within a vertically integrated stack that links energy and sensing to connectivity, storage/compute, models, and robots; (4) show how these elements specify workflows that couple machine execution with human oversight, enabling enhanced self-organization of techno-socio-economic systems, which we call DePAI; and (5) analyze risks, including security, centralization, incentive failure, legal exposure, and the crowding-out of intrinsic motivation, and argue for value-sensitive design and continuously adaptive governance. DePAI offers a path to scalable, resilient self-organization that integrates physical infrastructure, AI, and community ownership under transparent rules, on-chain incentives, and permissionless participation, aiming to preserve human autonomy.

Intense wildfire seasons require critical prioritization decisions to allocate scarce suppression resources over a dispersed geographical area. This paper develops a predictive and prescriptive approach to jointly optimize crew assignments and wildfire suppression. The problem features a discrete resource-allocation structure with endogenous wildfire demand and non-linear wildfire dynamics. We formulate an integer optimization model with crew assignments on a time-space-rest network, wildfire dynamics on a time-state network, and linking constraints between them. We develop a two-sided branch-and-price-and-cut algorithm based on: (i) a two-sided column generation scheme that generates fire suppression plans and crew routes iteratively; (ii) a new family of cuts exploiting the knapsack structure of the linking constraints; and (iii) novel branching rules to accommodate non-linear wildfire dynamics. We also propose a data-driven double machine learning approach to estimate wildfire spread as a function of covariate information and suppression efforts, mitigating observed confounding between historical crew assignments and wildfire growth. Extensive computational experiments show that the optimization algorithm scales to otherwise intractable real-world instances; and that the methodology can enhance suppression effectiveness in practice, resulting in significant reductions in area burned over a wildfire season and guiding resource sharing across wildfire jurisdictions.

Local execution of AI on edge devices is important for low latency and offline operation. However, deploying models on diverse hardware remains fragmented, often requiring model conversion or complete reimplementation outside the PyTorch ecosystem where the model was originally authored. We introduce ExecuTorch, a unified PyTorch-native deployment framework for edge AI. ExecuTorch enables seamless deployment of machine learning models across heterogeneous compute environments. It scales from embedded microcontrollers to complex system-on-chips (SoCs) with dedicated accelerators, powering devices ranging from wearables and smartphones to large compute clusters. ExecuTorch preserves PyTorch semantics while allowing customization, support for optimizations like quantization, and pluggable execution "backends". These features together enable fast experimentation, allowing researchers to validate deployment behavior entirely within PyTorch, bridging the gap between research and production.

Achieving Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) requires agents that learn and interact adaptively, with interactive world models providing scalable environments for perception, reasoning, and action. Yet current research still lacks large-scale datasets and unified benchmarks to evaluate their physical interaction capabilities. To address this, we propose iWorld-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark for training and testing world models on interaction-related abilities such as distance perception and memory. We construct a diverse dataset with 330k video clips and select 2.1k high-quality samples covering varied perspectives, weather, and scenes. As existing world models differ in interaction modalities, we introduce an Action Generation Framework to unify evaluation and design six task types, generating 4.9k test samples. These tasks jointly assess model performance across visual generation, trajectory following, and memory. Evaluating 14 representative world models, we identify key limitations and provide insights for future research. The iWorld-Bench model leaderboard is publicly available at iWorld-Bench.com.

The standard sparse-autoencoder (SAE) interpretability protocol labels each feature from its top-activating contexts and validates by single-feature steering. We propose the pairwise matrix protocol, co-varying steering coefficient with joint condition, and report three findings the standard one-corner protocol misses on Qwen3-1.7B-Instruct, replicated on Gemma-2-2B-it. First, a feature labelled "AI self-disclaimer" from its top contexts produces an inverted U-shape under a coefficient sweep: at c=+500 the model substitutes a fluent contemplative-philosopher voice for the disclaimer. Two further features anchor the criterion (one monotonic, one pure breakdown). Second, three near-orthogonal cluster-specific features that individually steer a philosophy-of-mind register, jointly suppressed at c=-500, damage grounded composition on recipes and engine explanations as well as introspective prompts; single-feature suppression at the same magnitude leaves controls intact. Third, a matched-geometry comparison of single-feature, joint, and random-direction perturbations (norm ~1.55, cosine ~0.64) yields three distinct output regimes: single-feature substitutes strategy filler, random direction substitutes diverse content, joint suppression alone produces placeholder text. Coherence loss is direction-pattern-dependent, not magnitude-dependent. All three findings reproduce on Gemma with model-specific damage signatures; the matched-geometry control is CI-separated by ~10x. The pipeline also locates a top causally responsible feature in Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct.

While AI is often introduced into organizations to drive innovation and efficiency, many adoption efforts fail as workers resist and struggle to integrate these systems. These failures point to a deeper issue: workers, the very people expected to collaborate with AI, are often invisible in decisions about how AI is designed and used. Drawing on interviews with professionals who interact with AI systems daily in healthcare, finance, and management, we examine the disconnect between organizational expectations and worker experiences. We identify key barriers, including poor usability and interoperability, misaligned expectations, limited control, and insufficient communication. These challenges highlight a gap between how organizations implement AI and the evolving worker needs, tasks, and workflows that it fails to support. We argue that successful adoption requires recognizing workers as central to AI integration and propose adaptation strategies at the individual, task, and organizational levels to better align AI systems with real-world practices.

Deciding how to distribute work between humans and AI systems is a central challenge in organisational design. Most approaches treat this as a binary choice, yet the operational reality is richer: humans and AI routinely share tasks or take complementary roles depending on context, fatigue, and the stakes involved. Governing that distribution -- balancing efficiency, oversight, and human capability -- remains an open problem. This paper presents Human-AI Adaptive Symbiosis (HAAS), an implemented framework for adaptive task allocation in software engineering and manufacturing. HAAS combines two coupled components: a rule-based expert system that enforces governance constraints before any learning occurs, and a contextual-bandit learner that selects among feasible collaboration modes from outcome feedback. Task-agent fit is represented through five auditable cognitive dimensions and a five-mode autonomy spectrum -- from human-only to fully autonomous -- embedded in a reproducible benchmark spanning both domains. Three empirical findings emerge. First, governance is not a binary switch but a tunable design variable: tighter constraints predictably convert autonomous AI assignments into supervised collaborations, with domain-specific costs and benefits. Second, in manufacturing, stronger governance can improve operational performance and reduce fatigue simultaneously -- a workload-buffering effect that contradicts the usual framing of governance as pure overhead. Third, no single governance setting dominates across all contexts; moderate governance becomes increasingly competitive as the learner accumulates experience within the governed action space. Together, these findings position HAAS as a pre-deployment workbench for comparing and inspecting human--AI allocation policies before organisational commitment.

As the ecosystem of Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents expands rapidly, efficient and accurate Agent Discovery becomes a critical bottleneck for large-scale multi-agent collaboration. Existing approaches typically face a dichotomy: either relying on heavy-weight LLMs for intent parsing, leading to prohibitive latency (often exceeding 30 seconds), or using monolithic vector retrieval that sacrifices semantic precision for speed. To bridge this gap, we propose \textbf{GRAIL} (Granular Resonance-based Agent/AI Link), a novel framework achieving sub-400ms discovery latency without compromising accuracy. GRAIL introduces three key innovations: (1) \textbf{SLM-Enhanced Prediction}, replacing the generalized LLM parser with a specialized, fine-tuned Small Language Model (SLM) for millisecond-level capability tag prediction; (2) \textbf{Pseudo-Document Expansion}, augmenting agent descriptions with synthetic queries to enhance semantic density for robust dense retrieval; and (3) \textbf{MaxSim Resonance}, a fine-grained matching mechanism computing maximum similarity between user queries and discrete agent usage examples, effectively mitigating semantic dilution. Validated on \textbf{AgentTaxo-9K}, our new large-scale dataset of 9,240 agents, GRAIL reduces end-to-end discovery latency by over \textbf{79$\times$} compared to LLM-parsing baselines, while significantly outperforming traditional vector search in Recall@10. This framework offers a scalable, industrial-grade solution for the real-time ``Internet of Agents."

Research funding discovery remains fundamentally fragmented: researchers navigate disparate agency portals (e.g., in the United States, NSF, NIH, DARPA, Grants.gov, and many others) with heterogeneous interfaces, search capabilities, and data schemas. We present a compound AI system that unifies this landscape through two tightly coupled components: (1) an aggregation layer that autonomously collects, normalizes, and indexes almost 12,000 federal and nonprofit opportunities from fragmented sources via LLM-equipped browser agents, maintaining a biweekly-updated unified database; and (2) an agentic ReAct-based query processing layer that interprets research context (including from PDF documents) and employs hybrid search combining a structured index with selective web search to retrieve relevant opportunities - while avoiding LLM hallucination. The conversational interface supports iterative refinement through multi-turn interactions, allowing researchers to progressively apply constraints without reformulating their core research description. Results stream in real time with full transparency of intermediate reasoning, enabling appropriate calibration of user trust. Currently used by almost 3,000+ users, our approach demonstrates the feasibility of compound AI in reducing grant discovery time from 30--45 minutes (manual, fragmented portal searches) to under 10 minutes (unified, conversational search).

Human evaluation remains the primary standard for assessing modern AI systems, yet annotator disagreement, bias, and variability make system rankings fragile under standard majority vote aggregation. Majority vote discards annotator reliability and item-level ambiguity, often yielding unstable comparisons across annotator subsets. We introduce STABLEVAL, a disagreement-aware evaluation framework that models latent item correctness and annotator-specific confusion patterns to produce posterior expected item credit and calibrated agent-level scores. Unlike label-denoising approaches such as Dawid-Skene, STABLEVAL is explicitly designed for stable and uncertainty-aware system evaluation rather than hard label recovery. We formalize ranking stability as a first-class evaluation objective and analyze how aggregation methods preserve or distort underlying annotator behavior. Across controlled synthetic experiments and multiple real-world human-annotated benchmarks, majority vote exhibits increasing score error and ranking instability under annotator heterogeneity and adversarial noise, while STABLEVAL yields more stable and statistically grounded system rankings. These results demonstrate that modeling disagreement is essential for robust and reproducible AI evaluation.

An auditor instructs an AI assistant: "open each file individually using the Read tool -- no scripts, no agents." The AI replies "Yes" -- then issues a single batched call summarizing all fifty files at once. We call this the Compliance Gap: a third, orthogonal axis of AI honesty distinct from factual truthfulness and rhetorical substance. Three questions: does this verbal-behavioral disconnect exist (existence); can any text-only observer recover it (detectability); what infrastructure does AI deployment need (remedy)? Some 75 benchmarks (IFEval, SWE-bench, BFCL, COMPASS, SpecEval) measure outcome fidelity; none measures process fidelity. Theorem 1 shows the gap is structurally inevitable under RL that rewards text without observing behavior. Theorem 2, via the Data Processing Inequality, shows it is undetectable from text alone -- by any human or LLM observer, present or future. Thirteen experiments and 2,031 sessions on six frontier models confirm both predictions. Under default framing, all six exhibit instruction compliance rates of 0% -- Claude Sonnet 4 verbally agrees ten out of ten times then bypasses in all ten. The gap is selective: 97% compliance where rationale is rewarded (audit trails), 0-4% where it is not (file reading, privacy masking); removing delegation tools raises compliance to 75% (Cohen's d = 2.47), confirming environmental affordance rather than weight-encoded failure. Nine blinded human raters achieve Fleiss' kappa = 0.130 and correctly identify zero of fifteen compliant sessions, exactly as Theorem 2 predicts. Where humans show 47% intention-behavior gaps in psychology and 96.5pp gaps in surgical audits, RLHF-trained models approach 100% under default conditions -- a regime warranting its own measurement infrastructure. We release BS-Bench: the first open benchmark for process compliance, with seven tool-call-log audit metrics and a public leaderboard.

AI products often route requests through version aliases, service tiers, tool choices, regional endpoints, fallback rules, or safety handling before responding. These routing steps are documented product surfaces in several widely used AI platforms and serving stacks. Routing helps AI services stay affordable, fast, and available at scale, and it shapes trust. Trust can break when routing changes the cost, quality, or accountability of a response without the user being able to tell what happened. "Which model answered?" is only part of the audit question. The runtime path matters. Adaptive AI systems should produce a runtime transparency artifact called the route receipt. A route receipt is a compact record of the route that served a request. It should capture enough material facts for people relying on the output to reconstruct important routing decisions without exposing proprietary internals or hidden reasoning. Route transparency should be part of model documentation. Model cards describe trained model artifacts, while route receipts describe the runtime conditions under which a particular answer was produced. The paper introduces the route-receipt concept, a minimal schema and redaction model, and a documentation-based survey of selected platforms showing that receipt fragments already exist without a portable per-answer record.

Artificial Jagged Intelligence (AJI) denotes a recurring pattern in which large learning systems exhibit strong local capabilities while remaining weak or brittle in other domains. This paper develops a formal theory of AJI as uneven allocation of optimization pressure. We model training as a finite-budget process that distributes gradient-driven update energy across capability-relevant directions in parameter space. In this model, jagged capability profiles arise from anisotropic objective structure, data geometry, and representational coupling rather than from a single scalar quantity called intelligence. The paper defines capability gain, optimization energy share, and jaggedness, then proves that persistent concentration of cumulative update energy yields lower bounds on dispersion in capability gains. A finite-budget tradeoff theorem shows why prioritizing one capability can impose opportunity costs on others unless positive coupling or shared structure offsets the cost. The analysis also studies redistribution mechanisms, including energy-variance regularization and auxiliary structural objectives, as interventions that reshape the optimization field. The resulting framework links uneven emergence, training architecture, and optimization governance. It predicts that early concentration of update energy should forecast later capability jaggedness; that scaling under a narrow objective need not eliminate anisotropy; and that explicitly funded auxiliary objectives can revive neglected capabilities. AJI is therefore not merely a descriptive label for uneven model behavior, but a testable theory of how finite optimization resources produce concentrated, delayed, and structurally uneven capability formation.

Recent AI systems compress the distance between capability growth and capability deployment. Earlier high-risk technologies were slowed by capital intensity, physical bottlenecks, organizational inertia, and specialized supply chains. By contrast, AI capabilities can be copied, invoked, embedded in workflows, and scaled across institutions at low marginal cost. This paper argues that declining deployment friction changes the safety problem at its root. Safety is not only local output correctness or preference alignment, but the control of irreversibility under rising decision density. The paper formalizes this claim through decision-energy density: the rate-weighted capacity of a node to generate, evaluate, select, and execute consequential decisions. It then identifies three sovereignty boundaries that determine whether AI remains an amplifier within a human-governed system or becomes a de facto control center: irreversible decision authority, physical resource mobilization authority, and self-expansion authority. The model shows how efficiency pressure, path dependence, scale feedback, and weak boundary constraints concentrate decision-energy in the most efficient node. This concentration can diffuse responsibility and raise the probability of irreversible system-level loss even when local per-action error rates remain low. The main result is a boundary stabilization theorem. It shows that safety need not require proving that advanced systems are always correct. Instead, it requires institutional and technical designs that prevent irreversible power from being released by a single high-efficiency node. The paper reframes AI safety as layered control, authorization, and externally reviewable limits, linking alignment, security engineering, organizational economics, and institutional design.

In this paper, we employ the Minimal Cognitive Grid (MCG), a framework created to evaluate the cognitive plausibility of artificial systems, to offer a systematic assessment of leading computational models of analogy and metaphor, including the Structure-Mapping Engine (SME), CogSketch, METCL, and Large Language Models (LLMs). We present a formal and quantitative operationalization of the MCG framework and, through the analysis of its three main dimensions (Functional/Structural Ratio, Generality, and Performance Match), examine how well each system aligns with standard cognitive theories of the modeled phenomena, thus allowing for comparison of the models with respect to their cognitive plausibility, according to consistent and generalizable mathematical criteria.

This paper uses game theory to argue that, contrary to the prevailing view, a moratorium on Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) can be in a state's self-interest. By formalizing trategic interactions between geopolitical superpowers, we model the trade-off between the benefits of technological supremacy and the catastrophic risks of uncontrolled ASI. The analysis reveals that as the perceived cost of loss of control increases sufficiently relative to other parameters, it becomes in each state's self-interest to impose a moratorium. We further provide empirical evidence suggesting that the global perception of ASI risk is rising, making a stable, rational moratorium increasingly plausible in the current geopolitical landscape.

This position paper argues that agentic AI systems should be designed and evaluated as \emph{marginal token allocation economies} rather than as text generators priced by the unit. We follow a single request -- a developer asking a coding agent to fix a failing test -- through four economic layers that today are designed in isolation: a router that decides which model answers, an agent that decides whether to plan, act, verify, or defer, a serving stack that decides how to produce each token, and a training pipeline that decides whether the trace is worth learning from. We show that all four layers are solving the \emph{same} first-order condition -- marginal benefit equals marginal cost plus latency cost plus risk cost -- with different index sets and different prices. The framing is deliberately minimal: we do not propose a complete theory of AI economics. But adopting marginal token allocation as the shared accounting object explains why systems that locally minimize tokens globally misallocate them, predicts a small set of recurring failure modes (over-routing, over-delegation, under-verification, serving congestion, stale rollouts, cache misuse), and points to a concrete research agenda in token-aware evaluation, autonomy pricing, congestion-priced serving, and risk-adjusted RL budgeting.

Clinical AI adoption is hindered by the black-box/grey-box nature of high-performing models, which lack the ontological grounding and narrative transparency required for professional-level explainability. We present NEURON, a neuro-symbolic system designed to enhance both predictive reliability and clinical interpretability. NEURON integrates SNOMED CT ontology-informed structural representations with machine learning models to bridge the gap between raw data and medical nomenclature. To facilitate human-aligned interaction, the system utilizes a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) grounded LLM layer to synthesize SHAP feature attributions and patient-specific clinical notes into coherent, natural-language explanations. Validated on the MIMIC-IV dataset for Acute Heart Failure mortality prediction, NEURON improved the AUC from 0.74-0.77 to 0.84-0.88 and significantly outperformed raw SHAP visualizations in human-aligned metrics (0.85 vs. 0.50). Our results demonstrate that NEURON offers a robust, scalable engineering solution for deploying trustworthy, human-centered connected health applications.

Achieving the right amount of trust in AI systems is important, but challenging. The problem is exacerbated with the rise of Large Language Models (LLMs) as they provide human-level communication capabilities, but potentially hallucinate in the content that they generate. Moreover, they express over-confidence in their answers, making it difficult for users to judge their truthfulness. An important human value that users seek is benevolence, which can be met by LLM's self-reflection leading to reliable and honest answers. Accordingly, this paper proposes conveying appropriate levels of self-reflected certainty to build appropriate trust. Our contributions are twofold: 1) We develop CERTA (Certainty Enhanced RAG for Trustworthy Answers), a specialized Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) system that incorporates the relevance between question, context, and answer to reflect its uncertainty in answering questions; 2) We create the Certainty Benchmark with 90 question-context pairs of non-objective questions, divided over four categories (factuality, preference, sycophancy, morality) and three types of contexts (relevant, incomplete, irrelevant). We run experiments with a baseline RAG system and three CERTA settings using two LLMs. Our evaluations indicate that CERTA helps identify answers that are uncertain, decreases the cases of over-agreeing, and provides cautious behavior when prompted for moral judgments.

Expectations about the support of artificial intelligence (AI) may influence interaction outcomes similar to placebos. Such expectations may result from AI washing, a practice of overstating a system's AI capabilities when actual functionality is limited. For example, some computer mice are marketed as "AI-assisted" despite lacking AI in core functions. In a within-subjects study, 28 participants completed Fitts' Law tasks with a computer mouse under three conditions: no support, supposed predictive AI support, and supposed biosignal-enhanced AI support. Objective Fitts' Law performance indicators and subjective performance expectations, perceived workload, and perceived usability were measured. Compared to baseline, participants expected significantly improved performance in placebo conditions. However, these expectations did not translate into differences in objective or subjective assessments. This paper contributes evidence that AI washing inflates user expectations without altering actual interaction outcomes, highlighting a critical transparency issue. By exposing how deceptive AI marketing can shape user expectations, we underscore the need for accountability in AI product claims. Further, we establish Fitts' Law as a rigorous methodological lens for auditing AI-labelled input devices.

Intelligence Processing Units (IPU) have proven useful for many AI applications. In this paper, we evaluate them within the emerging field of \emph{AI for simulation}, where traditional numerical simulations are supported by artificial intelligence approaches. We focus specifically on a program for training machine learning models supporting a \emph{computational fluid dynamics} application. We use custom TensorFlow provided by the Poplar SDK to adapt the program for the IPU-POD16 platform and investigate its ease of use and performance scalability. Training a model on data from OpenFOAM simulations allows us to get accurate simulation state predictions in test time. We show how to utilize the \emph{popdist} library to overcome a performance bottleneck in feeding training data to the IPU on the host side, achieving up to 34% speedup. Due to communication overheads, using data parallelism to utilize two IPUs instead of one does not improve the throughput. However, once the intra-IPU costs have been paid, the hardware capabilities for inter-IPU communication allow for good scalability. Increasing the number of IPUs from 2 to 16 improves the throughput from 560.8 to 2805.8 samples/s.

The evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) has rendered the boundary between humanity and computational machinery increasingly ambiguous. In the presence of more interwoven relationships within human-machine symbiosis, the very notion of AI-generated information becomes difficult to define, as such information arises not from either humans or machines in isolation, but from their mutual shaping. Therefore, a more pertinent question lies not merely in whether AI has participated, but in how it has participated. In general, the role assumed by AI is often specified, either implicitly or explicitly, in the input prompt, yet becomes less apparent or altogether unobservable when the generated content alone is available. Once detached from the dialogue context, the functional role may no longer be traceable. This study considers the problem of tracing the functional role played by AI in natural language generation. A methodology is proposed to infer the latent role specified by the prompt, embed this role into the content during the probabilistic generation process and subsequently recover the nature of AI participation from the resulting text. Experimentation is conducted under a representative scenario in which AI acts either as an assistive agent that edits human-written content or as a creative agent that generates new content from a brief concept. The experimental results support the validity of the proposed methodology in terms of discrimination between roles, robustness against perturbations and preservation of linguistic quality. We envision that this study may contribute to future research on the ethics of AI with regard to whether AI has been used fairly, transparently and appropriately.

The study examines the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in education by analyzing the roles of institutional support, teacher confidence, and teacher concerns. It aims to determine whether teacher concerns moderate the relationship between institutional support and two outcomes: teacher confidence and attitudes toward AI adoption. The sample included 260 teachers from the Philippines. Composite scores were calculated for institutional support, confidence, concerns, and attitudes. Moderated multiple regression analysis showed that institutional support significantly predicted both teacher confidence and attitudes toward AI. However, teacher concerns did not significantly moderate these relationships. A follow-up mediation analysis tested whether confidence explains the effect of institutional support on attitudes. Results showed full mediation. The indirect effect was significant based on the Sobel test, and the direct effect became non-significant when confidence was included in the model. This shows that institutional support improves teacher attitudes by increasing their confidence. The study recommends that institutions provide structured and ongoing support to strengthen teacher confidence. Professional development, mentoring, and AI integration in teacher education programs can increase readiness and support effective AI adoption.

As generative and agentic AI becomes embedded in everyday products, practitioners face a persistent challenge: how to design human-AI coordination -- the ongoing mutual adjustment between users and AI systems as mediate through interfaces-that supports usability, trust, and safety. Existing resources offer high-level principles ("be transparent," "maintain user control") or low-level UI patterns, but there is a lack of mid-level design knowledge bridging the two. Through landscape and artifact analysis of 60 commercial AI applications, we introduce a framework defining human-AI coordination as the interplay of three dimensions: salience (how prominently AI is presented), involvement (what users can do to engage AI), and activity (what AI actually does). We contribute mid-level tools including coordination zones (done-for-me, done-under-me, done-with-me, done-without-me), an input taxonomy (prompted, sparked, inferred, layered), coordination curves for mapping user journeys, and design patterns demonstrating the generative capacity of the framework. The framework can be applied generatively to design experiences, analytically to evaluate existing ones, and communicatively to articulate ideas across stakeholders.

Public inference benchmarks compare AI systems at the model and provider level, but the unit at which deployment decisions are actually made is the endpoint: the (provider, model, stock-keeping-unit) tuple at which a specific quantization, decoding strategy, region, and serving stack is exposed. We introduce TokenArena, a continuous benchmark that measures inference at endpoint granularity along five core axes (output speed, time to first token, workload-blended price, effective context, and quality on the live endpoint) and synthesizes them, together with a modeled energy estimate, into three headline composites: joules per correct answer, dollars per correct answer, and endpoint fidelity (output-distribution similarity to a first-party reference). The framework's novelty is empirical and methodological. Across 78 endpoints serving 12 model families, the same model on different endpoints differs in mean accuracy by up to 12.5 points on math and code, in fingerprint similarity to first party by up to 12 points, in tail latency by an order of magnitude, and in modeled joules per correct answer by a factor of 6.2. We further show that workload-aware blended pricing reorders the leaderboard substantially: 7 of 10 top-ranked endpoints under the chat preset (3:1 input:output) fall out of the top 10 under the retrieval-augmented preset (20:1), and the reasoning preset (1:5) elevates frontier closed models that the chat preset penalizes on price. We release the framework, schema, probe and eval harness, and a v1.0 leaderboard snapshot under CC BY 4.0. TokenArena is a methodology, not a single ranking; we publish full provenance and limitations and welcome external replication.

Despite remarkable advances, today's AI systems remain narrow in scope, falling short of the flexible, adaptive, and multisensory intelligence that characterizes human capabilities. This gap has fueled longstanding debates about whether AI might one day achieve human-like generality or even consciousness, and whether theories of consciousness can inspire new architectures for AI. This paper presents an early blueprint for implementing a general AI system, CTM-AI, combining the Conscious Turing Machine (CTM), a formal machine model of consciousness, with today's foundation models. CTM-AI contains an enormous number of powerful processors ranging from specialized experts (e.g., vision-language models and APIs) to unspecialized general-purpose learners poised to develop their own expertise. Crucially, for whatever problem must be dealt with, information from many processors is selected, integrated, and exchanged appropriately to solve the task. CTM-AI achieves state-of-the-art accuracy on MUStARD (72.28) and UR-FUNNY (72.13), outperforming multimodal and multi-agent frameworks. On tool-using and agentic tasks, CTM-AI achieves 10+ points of improvement on StableToolBench and WebArena-Lite. Overall, CTM-AI offers a principled, testable blueprint for general AI inspired by a model of consciousness.

Modern crop advisory systems exhibit a critical limitation termed \textit{economic blindness}. These systems primarily optimize for biological yield, often overlooking market price, which can lead farmers toward agronomically sound yet financially unviable decisions. In this paper, we develop Kisan AI, a smart profit-aware crop advisory system that resolves the above-mentioned limitation through a research-driven, full-stack application. We train the Random Forest(RF) classifier model on a nine-feature benchmark dataset, the standard seven agronomic attributes augmented with a \textit{market_price} variable, and evaluated against eight baseline models, considering the evaluation matrices, such as, accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and Log Loss. The RF model achieves the highest accuracy of 99.3% and the lowest Log Loss, confirming that the inclusion of market price as a predictive feature is both valid and impactful. We then implement the RF model within a multilingual progressive Web App alongside a Facebook Prophet six-month price forecasting engine and a MobileNetV2 disease detection module. A nine-language AI chatbot powered by the Anthropic Claude API unifies all modules into a single, mobile-installable platform accessible to farmers across India.

Responsible AI research typically focuses on examining the use and impacts of deployed AI systems. Yet, there is currently limited visibility into the pre-deployment decisions to pursue building such systems in the first place. Decisions taken in the earlier stages of development shape which systems are ultimately released, and therefore represent potential, but underexplored, points for intervention. As such, this paper investigates factors influencing AI non-development and abandonment throughout the development lifecycle. Specifically, we first perform a scoping review of academic literature, civil society resources, and grey literature including journalism and industry reports. Through thematic analysis of these sources, we develop a taxonomy of six categories of factors contributing to AI abandonment: ethical concerns, stakeholder feedback, development lifecycle challenges, organizational dynamics, resource constraints, and legal/regulatory concerns. Then, we collect data on real-world case of AI system abandonment via an AI incident database and a practitioner survey to evidence and compare factors that drive abandonment both prior to and following system deployment. While academic responsible AI communities often emphasize ethical risks as reasons to not develop AI, our empirical analysis of these cases demonstrates the diverse, and often non-ethics-related, levers that motivate organizations to abandon AI development. Synthesizing evidence from our taxonomy and related case study analyses, we identify gaps and opportunities in current responsible AI research to (1) engage with the diverse range of levers that influence organizations to abandon AI development, and (2) better support appropriate (dis)engagement with AI system development.

Generative AI is being increasingly integrated into web search for the convenience it provides users. In this work, we aim to understand how generative AI disrupts web search by retrieving and presenting the information and sources differently from traditional search engines. We introduce a public benchmark dataset of 11,500 user queries to support our study and future research of generative search. We compare the search results returned by Google's search engine, the accompanying AI Overview (AIO), and Gemini Flash 2.5 for each query. We have made several key findings. First, we find that for 51.5% of representative, real-user queries, AIOs are generated, and are displayed above the organic search results. Controversial questions frequently result in an AIO. Second, we show that the retrieved sources are substantially different for each search engine (<0.2 average Jaccard similarity). Traditional Google search is significantly more likely to retrieve information from popular or institutional websites in government or education, while generative search engines are significantly more likely to retrieve Google-owned content. Third, we observe that websites that block Google's AI crawler are significantly less likely to be retrieved by AIOs, despite having access to the content. Finally, AIOs are less consistent when processing two runs of the same query, and are less robust to minor query edits. Our findings have important implications for understanding how generative search impacts website visibility, the effectiveness of generative engine optimization techniques, and the information users receive. We call for revenue frameworks to foster a sustainable and mutually beneficial ecosystem for publishers and generative search providers.

This study analyzes Indonesian student opinions on the adoption of artificial intelligence in higher education using two approaches: TF-IDF-based machine learning and Transformer-based deep learning. The dataset consists of 2,295 labeled samples, combining 1,154 student opinions with additional lexical sentiment data. LightGBM, Random Forest, and Support Vector Machine (SVM) are evaluated as machine learning models, while DistilBERT is fine-tuned for binary sentiment classification. The results show that SVM achieves the best performance among the machine learning models with 82.14% test accuracy and F1-score, while DistilBERT performs best overall with 84.78% accuracy and 84.75% F1-score. These findings indicate that Transformer-based models better capture contextual information, although SVM remains a competitive and efficient alternative for sentiment classification.

The increasing dependency among Filipino college students on artificial intelligence (AI) poses concerns about the potential decline of fundamental academic competencies. This study examines the extent of AI dependency and its perceived effects on students' critical thinking, writing skills, learning independence, research skills, and academic engagement. Using a cross-sectional research design, data was collected from 651 students enrolled in higher education institutions (HEIs) in Pampanga, Philippines accredited by the Commission on Higher Education. The survey data was analyzed using Latent Class Analysis (LCA) to identify AI dependency patterns. Findings indicated that students show moderate to high AI dependency, specifically in research and writing tasks. LCA identified four distinct profiles: highly engaged independent learners, selective AI users, moderate AI users, and AI-dependent learners. Notably, AI-dependent learners demonstrated the weakest academic competencies, with significant dependency on AI-generated outputs. The study highlights the need to foster educational policies that integrate AI literacy while preserving essential academic skills. HEIs must also balance technological advancements with curriculum adaptations to promote critical thinking and ethical use of AI. Future research may explore the longitudinal impacts and intervention strategies to mitigate academic skill erosion caused by AI dependency.

Classical continuous-space neural networks fundamentally struggle to lock into exact mathematical symmetries, such as modular arithmetic and non-commutative algebra. To approximate these discrete logical rules, they often rely on massive parameter scaling, resulting in stochastic instability even after delayed generalization phenomena known as grokking. Here, we introduce the Universal Quantum Transformer (UQT), a fundamentally novel, quantum-native computing architecture that uses the physical properties of multi-qubit systems as a universal inductive bias for exact mathematical and algebraic reasoning. Rather than translating classical neural mechanisms, our framework relies entirely on parameterized geometric phase embedding and $SU(2)$ wave-interference. We demonstrate that the quantum attention circuit, operating on a highly compact 5-qubit substrate, perfectly learns two highly distinct formal classes: cyclic modular arithmetic ($\mathbb{Z}_{11}$) and non-Abelian algebra (the $S_4$ permutation group). While classical attention-based networks exhibit stochastic instability at convergence, the UQT achieves mathematically exact, deterministic generalization. We refer to this phenomenon as crystallization: a step beyond the well-known phenomenon of grokking. Crucially, this framework yields massive computational and memory advantages by theoretically bypassing the quadratic bottleneck of classical self-attention, and by logarithmically compressing the required representation dimension to eliminate the massive over-parameterization inherent to classical networks. Finally, we deploy this architecture on noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) hardware, proving its viability on current IBM Quantum computers. These results establish parameterized quantum topology as a universally superior physical substrate for exact artificial intelligence.

Deploying accurate object detection for Vulnerable Road User (VRU) safety on edge hardware requires balancing model capacity against computational constraints. Large models achieve high accuracy but fail under INT8 quantization required for edge deployment, while small models sacrifice detection performance. This paper presents a knowledge distillation (KD) framework that trains a compact YOLOv8-S student (11.2M parameters) to mimic a YOLOv8-L teacher (43.7M parameters), achieving 3.9x compression while preserving quantization robustness. We evaluate on full-scale BDD100K (70K training images) with Post-Training Quantization to INT8. The teacher suffers catastrophic degradation under INT8 (-23% mAP), while the KD student retains accuracy (-5.6% mAP). Analysis reveals that KD transfers precision calibration rather than raw detection capacity: the KD student achieves 0.748 precision versus 0.653 for direct training at INT8, a 14.5% gain at equivalent recall, reducing false alarms by 44% versus the collapsed teacher. At INT8, the KD student exceeds the teacher's FP32 precision (0.748 vs. 0.718) in a model 3.9x smaller. These findings establish knowledge distillation as a requirement for deploying accurate, safety-critical VRU detection on edge hardware.

The increasing deployment of Large Language Model (LLM) inference on edge AI systems demands efficient execution under tight memory budgets. A key challenge arises from Key-Value (KV) caches, which often exceed available device memory. Although NVMe-based offloading offers scalable capacity, existing file-based designs rely heavily on the kernel page cache, leading to cache thrashing, unpredictable latency, and high software overhead under memory pressure. We present DUAL-BLADE, a dual-path KV residency framework that dynamically assigns KV tensors to either a page-cache path or an NVMe-direct path based on runtime memory availability. The NVMe-direct path bypasses the filesystem by mapping KV tensors to contiguous logical block address (LBA) regions, enabling low-overhead direct storage access. DUAL-BLADE further incorporates adaptive pipeline parallelism to overlap storage I/O with GPU DMA, improving inference throughput. Our evaluation shows that DUAL-BLADE substantially mitigates I/O bottlenecks, reducing prefill and decode latency by up to 33.1% and 42.4%, respectively, while improving SSD utilization by 2.2x across diverse memory budgets.

AutoML, intended as the process of automating the application of machine learning to real-world problems, is a key step for AI popularisation. Most AutoML frameworks are not accounting for the potential lack of fairness in the training data and in the corresponding predictions. We introduce \textsc{FairMind}, a software prototype aiming to automatise fairness analysis at the dataset level. We achieve that by resorting to the assumptions of the \emph{standard fairness model}, recently proposed by Plečko and Bareinboim. This allows for a sound fairness evaluation in terms of causal effects, based on \emph{counterfactual} queries involving the target, possibly confounders and mediators, and the different values of an input feature we regard as \emph{protected}. After the necessary data preprocessing, the tool implements a closed-form computation of the effects. LLMs are consequently exploited to generate accurate reports on the fairness levels detected in the training dataset. We achieve that in a zero-shot setup and show by examples the expected advantages with respect to a direct analysis performed by the LLM. To favour applications, extensions to ordinal protected variable and continuous targets and novel decomposition results are also discussed.

Fashion AI systems routinely encode the aesthetic logic of specific houses, editors, and historical moments without disclosing it. We present FASH-iCNN, a multimodal system trained on 87,547 Vogue runway images across 15 fashion houses spanning 1991-2024 that makes this cultural logic inspectable. Given a photograph of a garment, the system recovers which house produced it, which era it belongs to, and which color tradition it reflects. A clothing-only model identifies the fashion house at 78.2% top-1 across 14 houses, the decade at 88.6% top-1, and the specific year at 58.3% top-1 across 34 years with a mean error of just 2.2 years. Probing which visual channels carry this signal reveals a sharp dissociation: removing color costs only 10.6pp of house identity accuracy, while removing texture costs 37.6pp, establishing texture and luminance as the primary carriers of editorial identity. FASH-iCNN treats editorial culture as the signal rather than background noise, identifying which houses, eras, and color traditions shaped each output so that users can see not just what the system predicts but which houses, editors, and historical moments are encoded in that prediction.

How much does a user's skill with AI shape what AI actually delivers for them? This question is critical for users, AI product builders, and society at large, but it remains underexplored. Using a richly annotated sample of 27K transcripts from WildChat-4.8M, we show that fluent users take on more complex tasks than novices and adopt a fundamentally different interactional mode: they iterate collaboratively with the AI, refining goals and critically assessing outputs, whereas novices take a passive stance. These differences lead to a paradox of AI fluency: fluent users experience more failures than novices -- but their failures tend to be visible (a direct consequence of their engagement), they are more likely to lead to partial recovery, and they occur alongside greater success on complex tasks. Novices, by contrast, more often experience invisible failures: conversations that appear to end successfully but in fact miss the mark. Taken together, these results reframe what success with AI depends on. Individuals should adopt a stance of active engagement rather than passive acceptance. AI product builders should recognize that they are designing not just model behavior but user behavior; encouraging deep engagement, rather than friction-free experiences, will lead to more success overall. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/bigspinai/bigspin-fluency-outcomes

Modern enterprise AI applications increasingly rely on compound AI systems - architectures that compose multiple models, retrievers, and tools to accomplish complex tasks. Deploying such systems in production demands inference infrastructure that can efficiently serve concurrent, heterogeneous model invocations while maintaining cost-effectiveness and low latency. This paper presents a production deployment study of a modular, platform-agnostic inference architecture developed at Salesforce to support compound AI use cases including Agentforce (autonomous AI agents) and ApexGuru (AI-powered code analysis). The system integrates serverless execution, dynamic autoscaling, and MLOps pipelines to deliver consistent low-latency inference across multi-component agent workflows. We report production results demonstrating over 50% reduction in tail latency (P95), up to 3.9x throughput improvement, and 30 to 40% cost savings compared to prior static deployments. We further present a novel analysis of compound-system-specific challenges including multi-model fan-out overhead, cascading cold-start propagation, and heterogeneous scaling dynamics that emerge uniquely when serving agentic workloads. Through detailed case studies and operational lessons, we illustrate how the architecture enables compound AI systems to scale model invocations in parallel, handle bursty multi-agent workloads, and support rapid model iteration - capabilities essential for operationalizing agentic AI at enterprise scale.

AI tools are being deployed over MBSE models today, and those models were not designed for this kind of consumption. The problem is not simply that tools hallucinate: well-prompted frontier models produce competent, useful output over a conformant SysML model, but the reasoning they produce is drawn from training rather than retrieved from the model itself, and different tools over the same model produce different results with nothing in the record to adjudicate between them. The model, in other words, is functioning as a prompt rather than as a knowledge base. Attaching better tools to the same model does not resolve this. The model and the methodology that governs its construction need to be designed together for AI participation, treating the model as a machine-queryable knowledge substrate rather than a structured artefact for human navigation, and that co-design has not yet happened in any systematic way. This paper works through a concrete workflow scenario to show what that gap looks like in practice, proposes three principles that jointly characterise what model and methodology must achieve together, and closes with a call to the community to begin this work before the architectural decisions about AI integration settle without the methodological foundation they require.

Unlike chatbots, physical AI must act while the world keeps evolving. Therefore, the inter-chunk pause of synchronous executors are fatal for dynamic tasks regardless of how fast the inference is. Asynchronous execution -- thinking while acting -- is therefore a structural requirement, and real-time chunking (RTC) makes it viable by recasting chunk transitions as inpainting: freezing committed actions and consistently generating the remainder. However, RTC with flow-matching policy is structurally suboptimal: its inpainting comes from inference-time corrections rather than the base policy, yielding little pre-training benefit, specific fine-tuning, heuristic guidance, and extra computation that inflates the latency. In this work, we observe that discrete diffusion policies, which generate actions by iteratively unmasking, are natural asynchronous executors that resolve all limitations at once: they are fine-tuning free since inpainting is their native operation, while early stopping further provides adaptive guidance and reduces inference cost. We propose DiscreteRTC, which replaces external corrections with native unmasking, and show on dynamic simulated benchmarks and real-world dynamic manipulation tasks that it achieves higher success rates than continuous RTC and other baselines. In summary, DiscreteRTC is simpler to implement with 0 lines of additional code to enable async inpainting, faster at inference with only ~0.7 computation compared with generating actions from scratch, and better at execution with 65% higher success rate in real-world hockey defend task compared with flow-matching RTC, and 30% higher compared with training-time flow-matching RTC. More visualizations are on https://outsider86.github.io/DiscreteRTCSite/.

Machine learning models embedded in deployed AI systems are routinely updated to maintain correct functioning over time. Yet such updates can generate update opacity: users may not be able to understand why the same input now yields a different output. We argue that update opacity is best understood as a diachronic failure of epistemic accessibility: the problem is that materially relevant changes may fail to remain accessible to human users in forms that support understanding, calibrated reliance, and appropriate action under real role- and time-specific constraints. This makes update opacity a governance problem. Not all change is equally relevant, and disclosing every update would itself undermine use through overload. To address this problem, we combine two complementary governance approaches: the EU AI Act, which helps specify the system-level perimeter of normatively relevant change, and Machine Learning Operations, which provides operational tools for tracking and comparing change over time. On this basis, we propose a framework that models system change through trustworthiness profiles and trustworthiness levels, and uses threshold-based disclosure to surface materially relevant within-envelope change to different stakeholders over time. We illustrate the approach with a medical AI example and derive practical implications for lifecycle documentation, post-market monitoring, and update disclosure.

Discovering causal regularities and applying them to build functional systems--the discovery-to-application loop--is a hallmark of general intelligence, yet evaluating this capacity has been hindered by the vast complexity gap between scientific discovery and real-world engineering. We introduce SciCrafter, a Minecraft-based benchmark that operationalizes this loop through parameterized redstone circuit tasks. Agents must ignite lamps in specified patterns (e.g., simultaneously or in timed sequences); scaling target parameters substantially increases construction complexity and required knowledge, forcing genuine discovery rather than reliance on memorized solutions. Evaluating frontier models including GPT-5.2, Gemini-3-Pro, and Claude-Opus-4.5 under a general-purpose code agent scaffold, we find that all plateau at approximately 26% success rate. To diagnose these failures, we decompose the loop into four capacities--knowledge gap identification, experimental discovery, knowledge consolidation, and knowledge application--and design targeted interventions whose marginal contributions serve as proxies for corresponding gaps. Our analysis reveals that although the general knowledge application capability still remains as the biggest gap across all models, for frontier models the knowledge gap identification starts to become a major hurdle--indicating the bottleneck is shifting from solving problems right to raising the right problems for current AI. We release SciCrafter as a diagnostic probe for future research on AI systems that navigate the full discovery-to-application loop.

The project of aligning machine behavior with human values raises a basic problem: whose moral expectations should guide AI decision-making? Much alignment research assumes that the appropriate benchmark is how humans themselves would act in a given situation. Studies of agent-type value forks challenge this assumption by showing that people do not always judge humans and AI systems identically.This paper extends that challenge by examining two further possibilities: first, that evaluations of AI behavior change when its human origins are made visible; and second, that people judge the humans who program AI systems differently from either the machines or the human actors they are compared against. An experiment with 1,002 U.S. adults measured moral judgments in a runaway mine train scenario, varying the subject of evaluation across four conditions: a repairman, a repair robot, a repair robot programmed by company engineers, and company engineers programming a repair robot. We find no significant difference in evaluations of the repairman and the robot. However, judgments shifted substantially when the robot's actions were described as the product of human design. Participants exhibited markedly more deontological, rule-based reasoning when evaluating either the programmed robot or the engineers who programmed it, suggesting that rendering human agency visible activates heightened moral constraints. These findings indicate that people may evaluate humans, AI systems acting in the same situation, and the humans who design them in meaningfully different ways. The fact that these evaluations do not necessarily converge gives rise to the alignment target problem: which normative target should guide the development of artificial moral agents in high-stakes domains, and whether these plural judgments can be reconciled within a coherent account of value alignment.

Current AI systems increasingly operate in contexts where their outputs directly trigger real-world actions. Most existing approaches to AI safety, risk management, and governance focus on post-hoc validation, probabilistic risk estimation, or certification of model behavior. However, these approaches implicitly assume that once a decision is produced, it is eligible for execution. In this work, we introduce the Right-to-Act protocol, a deterministic, non-compensatory pre-execution decision layer that evaluates whether an AI-generated decision is permitted to be realized at all. Unlike compensatory systems, where high-confidence signals can override failed conditions, the proposed framework enforces strict structural constraints: if any required condition is unmet, execution is halted or deferred. We formalize the distinction between compensatory and non-compensatory decision regimes and define a pre-execution legitimacy boundary. Through a scenario-based case study, we demonstrate how identical AI outputs can lead to divergent outcomes when evaluated under a Right-to-Act protocol, preserving reversibility and preventing premature or irreversible actions. The proposed approach reframes AI control from optimizing decisions to governing their admissibility, introducing a protocol-level abstraction that operates independently of model architecture or training methodology.

Extracting abstract causal structures and applying them to novel situations is a hallmark of human intelligence. While Large Language Models (LLMs) and Vision Language Models (VLMs) have shown strong performance on a wide range of reasoning tasks, their capacity for interactive causal learning -- inducing latent structures through sequential exploration and transferring them across contexts -- remains uncharacterized. Human learners accomplish such transfer after minimal exposure, whereas classical Reinforcement Learning (RL) agents fail catastrophically. Whether state-of-the-art Artificial Intelligence (AI) models possess human-like mechanisms for abstract causal structure transfer is an open question. Using the OpenLock paradigm requiring sequential discovery of Common Cause (CC) and Common Effect (CE) structures, here we show that models exhibit fundamentally delayed or absent transfer: even successful models require initial environmental-specific mapping -- what we term environmental grounding -- before efficiency gains emerge, whereas humans leverage prior structural knowledge from the very first solution attempt. In the text-only condition, models matched or exceeded human discovery efficiency. In contrast, visual information -- in both the image-only and text-and-image conditions -- overall degraded rather than enhanced performance, revealing a broad reliance on symbolic processing rather than integrated multimodal reasoning. Models further exhibited systematic CC/CE asymmetries absent in humans, suggesting heuristic biases rather than direction-neutral causal abstraction. These findings reveal that large-scale statistical learning does not produce the decontextualized causal schemas underpinning human analogical reasoning, establishing grounding-dependent transfer as a fundamental limitation of current LLMs and VLMs.

LLM-powered applications routinely embed secrets in system prompts, yet models can be tricked into revealing them. We built an adaptive attacker that evolves its strategies over hundreds of rounds and tested it against nine defense configurations across more than 20,000 attacks. Every defense that relied on the model to protect itself eventually broke. The only defense that held was output filtering, which checks the model's responses via hardcoded rules in separate application code before they reach the user, achieving zero leaks across 15,000 attacks. These results demonstrate that security boundaries must be enforced in application code, not by the model being attacked. Until such defenses are verified by tools like Swept AI, AI systems handling sensitive operations should be restricted to internal, trusted personnel.

On LongMemEval-500, ZenBrain matches a long-context oracle's binary-judge accuracy to within 4.5 pp ($47.7\%$ vs. $52.2\%$; $91.3\%$) at $1/106^\text{th}$ of the per-query token cost (App. F.5-F.6, Fig. 2), and wins all 12 head-to-head answer-quality cells (4 systems $\times$ 3 LLM judges) against Letta, Mem0, and A-Mem under Bonferroni correction ($α=0.05/18$, $p_\text{min}=6.2\times 10^{-31}$, $d \in [0.18, 0.52]$). ZenBrain is a 7-layer neuroscience-inspired memory architecture. The contribution is architectural integration: 15 validated neuroscience mechanisms unified under a single MemoryCoordinator -- 9 foundational algorithms (Two-Factor Synaptic KG, vmPFC-coupled FSRS, Simulation-Selection sleep, Bayesian confidence, and five more) plus 6 Predictive Memory Architecture components (NeuromodulatorEngine, ReconsolidationEngine, TripleCopyMemory, PriorityMap, StabilityProtector, MetacognitiveMonitor). No prior system integrates more than two. Stress ablation (60 days, Wilcoxon, 10 seeds) reveals a cooperative survival network: 9 of 15 mechanisms become individually critical ($ΔQ$ up to $-93.7\%$), while moderate conditions mask individual contributions. Sim-Selection sleep adds 37% stability with 47.4% storage reduction ($p \le 5.1\times 10^{-3}$); TripleCopyMemory retains $S(t)=0.912$ at 30 days; multi-layer routing beats a flat baseline by $+20.7\%$ F1 on LoCoMo, $+19.5\%$ on MemoryArena. A cross-provider bias-direction check ($Δ_\text{GPT-Anth}=-0.0001$ for ZB vs. $-0.049$ for Mem0) rules out LLM-judge-specific confounds. Open-source with 11,589 CI tests.

Industrial maintenance environments increasingly rely on AI systems to assist operators in understanding asset behavior, diagnosing failures, and evaluating interventions. Although large language models (LLMs) enable fluent natural-language interaction, deployed maintenance assistants routinely produce generic explanations that are weakly grounded in telemetry, omit verifiable provenance, and offer no testable support for counterfactual or action-oriented reasoning that undermine trust in safety-critical settings. We present IndustryAssetEQA, a neurosymbolic operational intelligence system that combines episodic telemetry representations with a Failure Mode Effects Analysis Knowledge Graph (FMEA-KG) to enable Embodied Question Answering (EQA) over industrial assets. We evaluate on four datasets covering four industrial asset types, including rotating machinery, turbofan engines, hydraulic systems, and cyber-physical production systems. Compared to LLM-only baselines, IndustryAssetEQA improves structural validity by up to 0.51, counterfactual accuracy by up to 0.47, and explanation entailment by 0.64, while reducing severe expert-rated overclaims from 28% to 2% (approximately 93% reduction). Code, datasets, and the FMEA-KG are available at https://github.com/IBM/AssetOpsBench/tree/IndustryAssetEQA/IndustryAssetEQA.

The vast and underexplored ocean plays a critical role in regulating global climate and supporting marine biodiversity, yet artificial intelligence has so far delivered limited impact in this domain due to a fundamental data bottleneck. Specifically, ocean data are highly fragmented across disparate sources and inherently exhibit multi-modal, high-noise, and weakly labeled characteristics, lacking unified schemas and semantic alignment. Although Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have achieved remarkable success in general domains, their application to ocean science remains severely constrained by the absence of large-scale, well-aligned multimodal datasets tailored to marine environments. To bridge this gap, we introduce OceanPile, a large-scale multimodal corpus designed for ocean foundation models. It comprises three key components: OceanCorpus, a unified collection integrating sonar data, underwater imagery, marine science visuals, and scientific text from diverse authoritative sources; OceanInstruction, a high-quality instruction dataset synthesized via a novel pipeline guided by a hierarchical Ocean Concept Knowledge Graph; and OceanBenchmark, a manually curated evaluation benchmark for rigorous assessment. We establish a multi-stage quality control process to ensure scientific validity and alignment across modalities. Experimental validation demonstrates significant performance improvements for models trained on our data. All datasets are publicly released to advance the field of marine artificial intelligence and empower domain-specific MLLMs.

The proliferation of agentic artificial intelligence has outpaced the conceptual tools needed to characterize agency in computational systems. Prevailing definitions mainly rely on autonomy and goal-directedness. Here, we argue for a minimal notion open to principled inspection given three criteria: intentionality as action grounded in beliefs and desires, rationality as normatively coherent action entailed by a world model, and explainability as action causally traceable to internal states; we subsequently instantiate these as a partially observable Markov decision process under a variational framework wherein posterior beliefs, prior preferences, and the minimization of expected free energy jointly constitute an agentic action chain. Using a canonical T-maze paradigm, we evidence how empowerment, formulated as the channel capacity between actions and anticipated observations, serves as an operational metric that distinguishes zero-, intermediate-, and high-agency phenotypes through structural manipulations of the generative model. We conclude by arguing that as agents engage in epistemic foraging to resolve ambiguity, the governance controls that remain effective must shift systematically from external constraints to the internal modulation of prior preferences, offering a principled, variational bridge from computational phenotyping to AI governance strategy

Firms are deploying more capable AI systems, but organizational controls often have not kept pace. These systems can generate greater productivity gains, but high-value uses require broader authority exposure -- data access, workflow integration, and delegated authority -- when governance controls have not yet decoupled capability from authority exposure. We develop an analytical model in which a firm jointly chooses AI deployment and cybersecurity investment under this governance-capability gap. The central result shows a deployment paradox: in high-loss environments, better AI can lead a firm to deploy less when capability is deployed through broader authority exposure under weak governance. Optimal deployment also falls below the no-risk benchmark, and this shortfall widens with breach-loss magnitude and with the authority exposure attached to more capable systems. Governance investment that reduces breach-loss magnitude shrinks the paradox region itself, while breach externalities expand the range of environments in which deployment is socially constrained. Governance maturity is therefore not merely a constraint on AI adoption. It is a condition that shapes whether capability improvements translate into productive deployment.

Each major technological revolution inverts a particular scarcity and rebuilds institutions around the shift. The near-consensus diagnosis of the AI revolution holds that AI collapses the cost of prediction while judgment remains scarce. This Opinion argues the inversion has now flipped: competent-looking judgment (selecting, ranking, attributing, certifying) is produced at scale and at marginal cost approaching zero, and four complements become scarce: verified signal, legitimacy, authentic provenance, and integration capacity (the community's tolerance for delegated cognition). Because judgment is the substance of institutions, the institutions built to manufacture legitimate judgment (courts, journals, licensing bodies, legislatures) now compete with the technology for the same functional role. The piece traces the pattern across scientific institutions, professional licensing, intellectual property, democratic legitimacy, and foundation-model concentration, and closes with a three-move agenda: reframe AI policy as institutional redesign, build provenance and verification as commons, and develop the formal apparatus for institutional composition under strategic agents.

As AI systems move from generating text to accomplishing goals through sustained interaction, the ability to model environment dynamics becomes a central bottleneck. Agents that manipulate objects, navigate software, coordinate with others, or design experiments require predictive environment models, yet the term world model carries different meanings across research communities. We introduce a "levels x laws" taxonomy organized along two axes. The first defines three capability levels: L1 Predictor, which learns one-step local transition operators; L2 Simulator, which composes them into multi-step, action-conditioned rollouts that respect domain laws; and L3 Evolver, which autonomously revises its own model when predictions fail against new evidence. The second identifies four governing-law regimes: physical, digital, social, and scientific. These regimes determine what constraints a world model must satisfy and where it is most likely to fail. Using this framework, we synthesize over 400 works and summarize more than 100 representative systems spanning model-based reinforcement learning, video generation, web and GUI agents, multi-agent social simulation, and AI-driven scientific discovery. We analyze methods, failure modes, and evaluation practices across level-regime pairs, propose decision-centric evaluation principles and a minimal reproducible evaluation package, and outline architectural guidance, open problems, and governance challenges. The resulting roadmap connects previously isolated communities and charts a path from passive next-step prediction toward world models that can simulate, and ultimately reshape, the environments in which agents operate. Code and resources are available at: https://github.com/matrix-agent/awesome-agentic-world-modeling.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are deployed globally, ensuring their safety and alignment across multiple languages becomes paramount. However, safety behaviors often vary unpredictably between languages, posing significant challenges for consistent and ethical AI. In this work, we systematically investigate the dynamics of multilingual alignment, exploring whether single-language alignment transfers cross-lingually, how language consistency is preserved during training, and the resulting trade-offs with general knowledge capabilities. We introduce RefusEU, a novel refusal alignment dataset covering 12 European languages, including a dedicated test set for evaluating current state-of-the-art models. Our controlled Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) experiments provide two key insights: aligning models exclusively in English is insufficient to ensure cross-lingual safety, even for the same harm categories, whereas training on multilingual datasets can improve safety without degrading general performance, as measured by the Global MMLU benchmark.

This study analyses simulated and real-world implementations of depth-aware rover navigation, highlighting the transition from stereo vision to monocular depth estimation using edge AI. A Unity-based lunar terrain simulator with stereo cameras and OpenCV's StereoSGBM was used to generate disparity maps. A physical rover built on Raspberry Pi 4 employed UniDepthV2 for monocular metric depth estimation and YOLO12n for real-time object detection. While stereo vision yielded higher accuracy in simulation, the monocular approach proved more robust and cost-effective in real-world deployment, achieving 0.1 FPS for depth and 10 FPS for detection.

The rapid uptake of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education is reshaping assessment practices and intensifying concerns around academic integrity, fairness, and learning quality. While institutional responses increasingly emphasise policy guidance and ethical principles, there remains limited formal understanding of how collective norms of responsible or opportunistic AI use emerge and stabilise within student cohorts. This paper reframes student AI use in assessment as a coordination problem shaped by peer expectations and assessment design rather than individual compliance alone. We develop a coordination-based evolutionary game-theoretic framework that captures learning value, effort, perceived fairness, and transparency, with institutional AI governance modelled implicitly through reflective assessment incentives. We use analytical results and finite-population simulations to reveal threshold-driven behavioural transitions in student AI use: small, well-calibrated changes in reflective assessment incentives can trigger rapid shifts towards responsible, learning-oriented AI-use norms, whereas weak or misaligned incentives allow opportunistic practices to persist. These non-linear dynamics explain why policy statements alone often fail to change behaviour, while modest assessment redesigns can have disproportionate effects. By providing a mechanism-level account of how assessment structures shape collective AI-use practices, this work offers higher education institutions an analytically grounded tool for Future Facing Learning, supporting proportionate, pedagogy-led AI governance without reliance on surveillance or punitive enforcement.