Comparison

One hospital runs bloods and imaging at the same time. Another runs them one after the other, in either order, equally often. Knowing which actually happened, and how it is recorded in data, is critical for all operational managers. In process mining, the standard approach is to construct an event log, and attempt to discover concurrent and sequential processes in a data-driven way. We show this standard approach, built on the stochastic language of an event log, reports only the assumptions of its discovery algorithm, because every such log is explained equally well by a model with no concurrency at all. Further, before any data is acquired, we characterise when data can and cannot distinguish concurrent behaviour. Where it cannot, the distinction is recoverable from evidence the stochastic language discards, such as the times at which activities start and end, or object-centric records that fix an order within an execution. The remedy is therefore a choice of what is recorded, rather than a larger sample. This impacts decision making, as planning resource for truly concurrent services is very different from sequential services.

AI systems have begun to report solutions, disproofs, and substantive advances on long-standing mathematical problems, raising questions about whether they approach research in the same way as mathematicians. This study compares public AI research accounts with the human literature on 11 such problems. The human corpus contains 58 papers that directly addressed the same mathematical targets later reported by AI sources as resolved, disproved, or substantially advanced; 31 within-problem comparisons were constructed from these materials. Six validated text-based measures capture problem resolution, method articulation, uncertainty and boundary specification, successor-question generation, generality, and cross-disciplinary integration. AI accounts place greater emphasis on resolving the focal problem and connecting ideas across fields. Human papers devote significantly more attention to explaining methods, specifying assumptions and limitations, and identifying questions for subsequent research. No precise difference is detected in generality. The estimated directions remain unchanged when each mathematical problem is removed in turn. The findings reveal two distinct research profiles: AI accounts concentrate on closing and recombining problems, whereas mathematical papers more extensively document the procedures, limits, and research opportunities through which results become cumulative knowledge. Evaluating research AI therefore requires attention to the organization of inquiry, not only whether a target is solved.

Decentralized bandit systems often contain heterogeneous agents: rewards can change at individual agents even when the best action for the network stays the same. These local changes may cancel when rewards are averaged across agents, so the number of local changes $\Stloc$ can be much larger than the number of changes in the best common arm $\Stdec$. We introduce Decision-Relevant Fresh Comparison (DRFC), which uses new, balanced samples from all agents to compare arms at the network level and switches only when fresh global evidence indicates that the common best arm has changed. We prove a high-probability dynamic regret bound with no adaptation term depending on $\Stloc$, and show that every algorithm must still pay for identifying genuine decision switches and propagating them through the communication graph. Under a distinct time-average benchmark, an anytime-valid sliding-window extension handles gradual drift; experiments on synthetic, semi-real, and MovieLens-1M replays show that DRFC ignores decision-irrelevant local changes while the extension avoids false switches.

As artificial intelligence's capabilities improve, it is increasingly viewed as a general scientific method. But how true are these claims? Does AI outperform all techniques, or only some, and how is this changing? To assess the claims, we assemble a corpus of 2,507 head-to-head comparisons between AI and other scientific analysis techniques across 27 scientific disciplines from papers published between 2000 and early 2025. We find a profound dichotomy. Relative to traditional statistics, AI often outperforms, but at a significantly higher computational cost. But there are also nearly a quarter of cases where AI is both more expensive and performs worse than traditional statistical techniques and this fraction has been stable for a decade. Relative to scientific computing, AI often underperforms, but at lower computational cost. This has begun to change: since 2020, AI's performance against scientific computing has notably strengthened and it now outperforms on more than half of comparisons. These patterns suggest that AI is therefore not a universal replacement for existing methods, but rather a valuable -- and improving -- part of a new AI-enabled scientific frontier.

We introduce document embedding geometry as a quantitative observable of conceptual reorganization and develop a counterfactual ablation framework for measuring how individual concepts influence the organization of scientific knowledge, providing a quantitative framework for detecting scientific revolutions. The observable is defined by the geometric perturbation induced when removing documents associated with a candidate concept from the embedding space before and after its historical emergence. Statistical validation is performed using five historical case studies spanning physics, mathematics, and machine learning: special relativity, Gödel's incompleteness theorems, the Higgs mechanism, deep learning, and the attention mechanism underlying transformer architectures. Across the historical case studies, the framework identifies measurable geometric signatures associated with conceptual reorganization, while the validation studies expose important limitations arising from document assignment and sparse historical data. These results establish embedding geometry as a medium for quantifying conceptual reorganization, providing a new approach for studying how scientific fields restructure over time.

Choosing when to retrain a deployed classifier requires assessing subgroup error rates across the sequence of models used, including periods between updates. We compare complete scheduled, loss-triggered, and subgroup-gap-triggered policies with retaining the initial model on the same observations and delayed labels. For true-positive and false-positive rates separately, the outcome is the paired difference in absolute subgroup gaps summed over deployment windows. Population evaluation in simulation, action records, and alternative schedules assess how measurement and retraining behaviour affect these comparisons. In a follow-up sample of 400 new trajectories per condition across two simulated drift regimes, all three policies had lower mean cumulative disparity, equivalent to reductions of 0.04 to 0.88 percentage points in the average gap per window. Evaluating the unchanged models against the known generating distributions preserved all mean directions, but finite-window and population comparisons agreed on whether updating increased, reduced or left cumulative disparity unchanged in 69 to 92 percent of trajectories. Under subgroup-specific drift, smaller true-positive-rate gaps accompanied lower sensitivity in both groups. In an exploratory American Community Survey replay, person weighting reversed all three race false-positive-rate mean comparisons without changing predictions or actions; all three weighted intervals included zero. Policy comparisons require group-specific rates, action distributions, and an explicit evaluation population alongside mean disparity. These analyses are non-confirmatory. Shared replay requires policy-independent observations and complete labels after the specified delay.

An LLM-agent leaderboard invites a familiar inference: an agent ranked above another is the better agent. Public evaluation logs may not support that conclusion when systems differ in task mixture, label source, release detail, or cost rule. We study what leaderboard scores estimate and when they justify pairwise superiority conclusions. Our estimand-aware pairwise procedure states the comparison target and measurement source, checks common support, and evaluates the supported difference using a stated uncertainty rule and practical margin. Controlled checks evaluate the decision labels under known finite-sample conditions and show why uncertainty must be included when judging sensitivity to target reweighting. Across SWE-bench, AgentRewardBench, and tau2-bench, close rank differences are often unresolved; proxy labels and utility rules can also change which system is selected. DataAgentBench and Open Agent show what remains estimable from coarser public records. A leaderboard score summarizes a released evaluation, whereas a fine-grained superiority claim additionally depends on the estimand and uncertainty rule used to interpret the difference.

Energy consumption is one of the largest operational expenditure items for mobile network operators, yet site-level energy inefficiencies such as faulty cooling controllers, idle radio equipment, and parasitic auxiliary loads often remain undetected because no ground-truth inefficiency labels exist and historical measurements may already contain embedded inefficiencies. This study proposes an unsupervised peer-relative approach based on the premise that sites with similar structural and operational characteristics should exhibit comparable energy consumption. To capture these relationships, a novel energy-aware Minimum Distortion Embedding (MDE) formulation is introduced that extends the standard MDE objective with an energy-based repulsion mechanism. This encourages sites with anomalously high energy consumption relative to comparable peers to become displaced from their local neighbourhoods in the embedding space. The resulting low-dimensional representation simultaneously preserves structural similarity and encodes energy-related deviations, enabling the identification of potentially inefficient sites through peer-relative comparison. The derived anomaly scores provide a practical mechanism for prioritising field investigations, allowing mobile network operators to focus engineering resources on sites most likely to yield energy savings. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed approach outperforms conventional anomaly detection baselines and provides a robust foundation for large-scale energy-efficiency optimisation in mobile networks.

Self-supervised pre-training via cross-view completion learns strong features for 3D vision from co-visible regions of image pairs. However, the reference view provides little information for reconstructing non-co-visible patches, implicitly yielding a monocular training signal in these regions. We introduce Gekko, which turns this limitation into a useful signal. The relative improvement of the cross-view reconstruction error over a masked-autoencoder error is a self-supervised proxy for co-visibility: large improvements indicate co-visible regions, negligible ones non-co-visible areas. Gekko is a network, trained from scratch, that jointly performs cross-view completion, masked autoencoding, and per-pixel prediction of this relative improvement, providing an additional binocular signal for all masked regions without any ground-truth 3D annotation. Under identical architectures and training data, Gekko consistently outperforms CroCo on zero-shot correspondence estimation, relative pose estimation, and pointmap regression, with up to 6 times higher accuracy at the strictest relative-pose threshold and a 22% drop in end-point error on ETH3D. The extra channel it learns is itself a strong co-visibility detector on unseen scenes, and Gekko's frozen features outperform released cross-view backbones of comparable or larger size. It can also be trained directly from raw videos with a simple stride-based curriculum, removing the cumbersome 3D preprocessing prior methods require while matching models trained on curated data. Code and pre-trained models are publicly available.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have emerged as a promising platform for firefighting operations due to their flexibility, low operational cost, and ability to acquire high-resolution imagery in locations that may be difficult or dangerous to access using conventional methods. Recent advances in deep learning have significantly improved the capabilities of UAV-based wildfire monitoring systems. The present work investigates RGB-infrared fusion for binary wildfire segmentation on the FLAME3 dataset. In this Study, RGB and Infrared baselines are compared with three representative fusion strategies across three segmentation architectures, including U-Net, DeepLabV3+, and SegFormer. The key motivation of this work is to analyze the contribution of each modality, evaluate the impact of fusion timing, and examine how different network architectures exploit multimodal information for UAV wildfire delineation. The findings indicate that thermal information plays a dominant role in UAV segmentation and that feature-level multimodal fusion combined with transformer-based architectures offers the most promising direction for future research.

Crisis helplines assess suicide risk through structured interviews, a process that is slow and dependent on operator training and workload. Natural language processing could support risk assessment and call prioritization, but almost no work addresses Arabic-language helpline calls or operates within the privacy constraints of real helpline data. We analysed de-identified transcripts from Lebanon's National Lifeline for Emotional Support and Suicide Prevention. Audio never left the helpline: calls were transcribed on site with a speech recognition model for Levantine Arabic, and an Arabic named-entity recognition model removed identifying information locally. Only the de-identified transcripts were shared with the research team. Operators recorded the five suicidal ideation items of the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale, which we combined into two binary outcomes: at-risk and high-risk. We also machine-translated the transcripts into English, giving a paired Arabic/English comparison. On each corpus, we fine-tuned five instruction-tuned large language models alongside six transformer encoder baselines (four Arabic, two English) and evaluated all models on a held-out test set. We included 383 calls: 373 for the at-risk task (52.3% positive) and 297 for the high-risk task (30.0% positive). The best Arabic model reached a macro-F1 of 81.19 and a ROC-AUC of 90.61 on high-risk; the best English model reached 85.00 and 92.59, identifying 88.9% of high-risk calls. In both languages, high-risk calls separated more cleanly than at-risk calls, and translation to English did not reduce the best observed performance. Suicide risk can be classified from de-identified Arabic transcripts without sending audio outside the helpline. The high-risk results support further testing as an operator-facing tool; lower-severity ideation proved the harder case.

Spiking neural networks (SNNs) are often regarded as energy-efficient alternatives to artificial neural networks (ANNs), yet their advantage depends critically on both network architecture and data properties. We develop an analytical framework to compare fully-connected ReLU ANNs and integrate-and-fire SNNs for time-series data with respect to their theoretical energy efficiency at matched expressive capacity. By relating an inference-energy model to theoretical bounds on representational expressivity, we derive an expressivity-normalized efficiency ratio and explicit thresholds in network width, spike sparsity, and ANN depth scaling. Our analysis characterizes the regimes in which event-driven computation offsets the temporal overhead of SNNs, providing capacity-aware principles for designing energy-efficient temporal networks. It shows that ANNs exceed SNNs in expressivity-normalized efficiency only in specific regimes.

Industrial anomaly detection is a critical component of modern manufacturing. Most traditional unsupervised methods rely on modelling normal feature distributions, inherently limiting generalization to unknown categories. To improve generalizability, some recent methods incorporate vision-language models (VLMs) for zero-shot detection via text prompts. However, we observe that reasoning-oriented post-training can cause anomaly discrimination to collapse, with some fine-tuned models performing worse than their base VLMs. Existing methods also provide only textual decisions or coarse boxes, without pixel-level segmentation. A more explicit detection principle comes from human inspection: anomalies are identified by comparing a query image with a defect-free reference. Inspired by this, we propose InspectorGPT, a VLM framework centered on comparative reasoning. Given a normal reference and a query image, InspectorGPT compares them to identify discrepancies and perform multiple inspection tasks with detailed reasoning. We internalize this capability through Chain-of-Thought (CoT) fine-tuning and Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) with tailored, verifiable rewards. We further introduce InspectorGPT-Seg for pixel-level anomaly masks. Segmentation supervision improves anomaly discrimination but weakens semantic reasoning, while joint training fails to balance them. We therefore train the two branches separately and combine them through task-vector fusion. Extensive experiments demonstrate superior multi-dimensional performance and generalization to unseen benchmarks, validating comparative reasoning for comprehensive industrial inspection.

A model that behaves differently when it senses it is being tested would undermine the evaluations we rely on, so recent work has sought to read that sense directly from a model's activations. The standard instrument contrasts activations on prompts that announce an evaluation against prompts that do not, and reports how well the resulting direction separates held-out cases. That number is then compared across models and correlated with scale. We observe that the instrument has a free parameter its readings do not disclose: "a prompt that announces an evaluation" is not a prompt but a choice among many, and nothing in the method fixes which. Holding the task text fixed and varying only that choice, we find that the reported score, and even the direction in which it trends with model size, follows the prompt rather than the model; two published studies that disagree about the sign of that trend are both reproducible from a single design, by choice of prompt alone. Treating the prompt as a facet of a measurement design rather than an implementation detail, we find the model under study accounts for a small share of the variance in the number reported about it, and most of the rest lies in how each model responds to each prompt: collecting more evaluation items cannot repair the measurement, while varying prompts can. A further check finds that the split these probes are scored on is largely separable from surface form alone, so a direction carrying no information about evaluation at all still reproduces a substantial fraction of each published score. We conclude that a single-prompt design cannot support comparison between models, and we give the number of prompts a defensible comparison requires.

Alzheimer's disease is a leading cause of death with no cure. Therefore, early detection is critical to slow progression and preserve quality of life. Diagnosis relies on medical history, cognitive tests, physical exams, and MRI brain scans, making deep learning suitable for Alzheimer's classification. This work proposes a benchmark that evaluates ten different convolutional neural network (CNN) architectures (including ResNet, DenseNet, MobileNet, EfficientNet, and VGG family models) under the same held-out test split protocol. A two-stage transfer learning and full fine-tuning pipeline is introduced to perform training using a class-balanced subset (3,900 images) derived from the OASIS medical imaging dataset, comprising 86,437 single-view MRI brain scans labeled into four classifications of Alzheimer's disease: Non-Demented, Very Mild Dementia, Mild Dementia, and Moderate Dementia. The best results were achieved by VGG16, with a 0.9637 validation accuracy and a 0.9533 test accuracy score. A key finding documented in this work is the difficulty of classifying the transition from Non-Demented to Very Mild Demented stages, observed consistently across all ten architectures.

Multimodal retrieval and classification across different types of media, spanning text, images,video and audio, has traditionally relied on dual-encoder models that align visual and textual representations through contrastive learning. The March 2026 release of Gemini Embedding 2, Google's first natively multimodal embedding model to map text, images, video, audio, and documents into a single shared space, raises competition among multimodal retrieval systems. Simultaneously, frontier Large language models (LLMs) have also demonstrated strong visual understanding, raising the question of whether they can serve as effective zero-shot rankers. Our study provides the first direct comparison of native multimodal embeddings against LLM-based visual ranking on Flickr30k. We observe that GPT-4.1 and Claude Sonnet 4.6 perform on par with Gemini Embedding 2. Additionally, once embeddings are precomputed, multimodal embeddings are better suited for low-latency applications.

Industrial anomaly detection (IAD) requires identifying fine-grained deviations from normal visual patterns. Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) can improve recognition accuracy by comparing query images with references at inference time, but these benefits rely on additional retrieval and processing. We investigate whether the benefits of reference comparison can instead be internalized in the model parameters. Access to references during training allows a reference-aware teacher to supervise a query-only student. However, the teacher may favor plausible responses based on query cues or language priors rather than valid visual information. We propose ADOPD, a reference-privileged on-policy distillation framework. The teacher evaluates student-generated rollouts under matched and mismatched references. The matched-reference teacher-to-student log-ratio defines the token-level learning direction, specifying what the student should learn. The likelihood gap between the two reference views estimates reference-specific support and calibrates the sequence-level weight. ADOPD achieves 77.31% average accuracy on the MMAD benchmark under zero-shot inference, improving the Qwen3-VL-4B backbone by 6.14 points and outperforming its one-shot setting by 2.64 points. Experiments show that ADOPD learns a fine-grained anomaly inspection strategy from reference comparison. The project will be available at https://github.com/withTai/ADOPD.

Residential energy estimates are often needed before detailed envelope characteristics, equipment efficiencies, infiltration, sensor, or billing data are available. This study quantifies the trade-off between predictive accuracy and input accessibility using two nationally representative U.S. residential-energy datasets: the survey-based Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) and the simulation-based ResStock dataset. Full-feature models were first used to establish dataset-specific performance benchmarks. For total-energy estimation, the models were subsequently restricted to ten low-burden variables obtainable from occupants, administrative records, or location-based weather data without an on-site energy audit. Among CatBoost, XGBoost, LightGBM, Random Forest, and Neural Networks, CatBoost consistently achieved the highest predictive performance for the full-feature analysis, reaching R2 = 0.90 for ResStock and R2 = 0.73 for RECS. When the feature set was restricted to ten homeowner-accessible inputs to simulate realistic deployment conditions, model performance converged to R2 = 0.61 for RECS and R2 = 0.62 for ResStock, showing that algorithmic complexity cannot fully compensate for missing physical and behavioral information. However, for a more homogeneous ResStock cohort consisting of single-family detached, natural-gas-heated homes in Climate Zone 6A constructed between 2000 and 2010, a reduced-input model improved accuracy to R2 = 0.85, demonstrating the value of targeted modeling for homogeneous populations. The results indicate that tree-based ensemble models can serve as high-fidelity emulators of national-scale residential energy datasets. However, careful consideration of feature availability, dataset origin (empirical vs. synthetic), and applicable use cases are also important.

Comparisons between AutoML systems at short time budgets -- tens of seconds rather than hours -- are common in tool READMEs and workshop papers, and they are easy to get wrong. We report a case study in which a simple AutoML engine, Orcetra, appeared to beat FLAML and AutoGluon on 513 OpenML datasets, winning 57.1% of them at a nominal 60-second budget and 78.4% of datasets against FLAML alone at 30 seconds. Both margins came from protocol defects that a results table cannot show. The search loop scored every candidate on the test split and reported the best, making the headline metric a maximum over dozens of noisy estimates while the baselines selected on training data and touched the test set once; and the budget was checked before launching a candidate but never enforced during one, so the system consumed a median of 120 s against a 60-second budget, 2.24x the wall-clock AutoGluon used. Re-running with selection moved to a validation split, the deadline enforced externally and every framework pinned to an equal share of the machine, Orcetra's win rate on the re-run subset falls from 59.4% to 34.3% and no pairwise difference against either competitor remains significant. Recording both estimands inside a single search lets us attribute the collapse: the selection rule accounts for 4.8 percentage points and unequal compute for most of the rest. The same traces give the selection bias as a function of budget, measured rather than assumed: it grows with $K$ but reaches only 0.27 accuracy points, about five times below the $σ\sqrt{2\ln K}$ bound a marginal-standard-error argument predicts, because candidates scored on shared test rows cancel most of the noise. We close with a checklist for short-budget comparisons. Code, per-dataset results and the scripts that regenerate every number and figure in the paper are released with it.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) have become powerful tools for supporting and automating complex human tasks. Despite their benefits, growing attention has been directed toward their environmental implications, primarily due to their high energy demands and associated carbon emissions. This concern is particularly relevant in light of the increasing deployment of large-scale models, especially Deep Learning (DL) architectures, which provide advanced predictive capabilities but require substantial computational resources. This paper presents a systematic review of research on Green AI, Green DL, and optimization techniques aimed at reducing the environmental impact of AI models. In addition, we examine and compare several carbon measurement tools for estimating emissions generated by AI algorithms. To complement the review, we conducted an empirical evaluation using a CPU-based experimental setup, in which six DL models were implemented for a multi-label classification task. The objective was to quantify and compare their overall carbon emissions and to determine which stages of the DL lifecycle contribute most significantly to the total footprint. The results show that the training phase is the primary source of emissions. Moreover, the findings reveal that increased architectural complexity does not systematically translate into proportional accuracy gains, highlighting the importance of carefully balancing predictive performance and environmental cost. These results reinforce the need to integrate sustainability considerations into model selection and AI system design.

Agents backed by large skill libraries must decide which skills to load and in what order. Loading the entire library into context is expensive and provides no structure for autonomous sequencing. We study two systems for this problem over a corpus of 690 skills: a hybrid ranker combining lexical and dense-embedding retrieval for sparse, on-demand loading, and a typed knowledge graph encoding workflow relations such as prerequisites, data flow, and ordering. On a set of 117 realistic, non-echoing queries, the hybrid ranker retrieves the correct skill within the top five in 73.5% +/- 8.0 of cases, leaving roughly a quarter of queries unserved. When used as the design intended (substituting graph neighbours for additional ranked results at matched token budget), the graph is significantly worse (-11.2 points, p = 0.0007). Its LLM-generated edge layer adds nothing over neighbours obtained free from a local embedding pass, and 73% of the queries the ranker misses are not reachable through the graph at all. We attribute this to a pre-filter topology bound. Because the graph's candidate edges are drawn from the same embedding neighbourhood the ranker already searches, 98.6% of typed edges connect skills the ranker had already surfaced together. The graph can enrich relation semantics but cannot extend retrieval reach. We further show that evaluating on author-written queries overstates hit@5 by up to 44 points, which would have hidden these results entirely. Our contribution is a mechanistic account of why added structure does not improve retrieval over a strong ranker, and identify the conditions under which adding structural interdependence into the retrieval is optimal.

The paper addresses several ranking-dependent decision support methods. Ordinal information on compared objects can be used to improve the quality of expert data during estimation and help reduce the number of comparisons that the experts need to perform. In the paper we compare three incomplete ranking-dependent pair-wise comparison patterns which can be used in the Analytic Hierarchy Process - Best-worst method, Best-Second Best (Top 2) method, and the original maximum difference method. The first two comparison patterns (and respective methods) are incomplete, while the third can be a complete one. We determine conditions under which these three methods can be compared in terms of stability to expert errors. We also present the results of a simulation-type experiment, in which the three methods are compared. The research allows us to define the most stable incomplete ranking-dependent pair-wise comparison pattern and reduce the number of comparisons without loss of credibility of expert session results. The research contributes to algorithmic, cognitive, and applied aspects of decision support in uncertain environments.

Interpreting clustering outcomes remains a fundamental challenge in data analysis, particularly in domains such as healthcare where meaningful patterns must be extracted from high-dimensional data. While numerous explainability techniques exist, they are primarily designed to assess feature importance or provide local instance-level explanations rather than to identify structured patterns present within clusters. This work presents a comparative evaluation of commonly used post-hoc analysis methods for pattern detection in clustering results. To enable controlled evaluation, we introduce a suite of synthetic datasets in which predefined patterns are systematically injected. Three widely used techniques are evaluated: a Random Forest surrogate model with permutation feature importance, LIME (Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations), and principal component analysis. Results demonstrate that although each method can successfully recover relevant features, none consistently detects all injected pattern types. These findings high- light a critical gap between existing explainability tools and the requirements of pattern-level cluster interpretation, motivating the development of dedicated pattern detection methodologies.

Recognizing new and rare words - named entities, acronyms, domain specific special words, and other items scarce in training data - remains a key challenge for automatic speech recognition (ASR). We compare two strategies for this: context biasing methods, where an ASR model is extended such that during inference a word list can be supplied, and speech large language models (LLMs) prompted with context directly. We evaluate two context biasing methods based on Whisper against three speech LLMs across read and non-read speech, reporting biased, unbiased, and overall word error rate (WER). The context biasing methods cut biased WER by up to 88% relative while leaving other words largely unaffected. Speech LLMs excel on read speech but generalize less well to non-read speech, and prove sensitive to distractor count and prompt word order. We characterize the resulting trade-offs to guide method selection.

Large language models are increasingly deployed in multilingual contexts, yet safety alignment and bias evaluation remain overwhelmingly English-centric. We investigate whether social biases generalise across languages by submitting 4,900 symmetric English--Swahili prompt pairs to GPT-5.2 and Gemini 2.5 Flash across nine demographic bias axes, yielding 19,600 completions evaluated for stereotype prevalence, sentiment, refusal behaviour, and cross-lingual semantic similarity. Our findings show that bias transforms rather than transfers: stereotype rates shifted by up to 12 percentage points on specific axes, Gemini's neutral-sentiment rate doubled in Swahili, and GPT-5.2 refused 169 prompts in English and zero in Swahili, consistent with refusal behaviour anchored to English-language surface forms at the behavioural level. Over 55% of prompt pairs produced semantically dissimilar completions across both models. These reinforce the idea that English-only bias audits do not produce adequate coverage for multilingual deployment.

Comparing stochastically trained models requires estimating both a performance difference and its uncertainty from repeated runs. We study whether training logs from those same runs can make such comparisons more precise. Because training-log covariates are produced during training rather than measured before it, we use arm-specific covariate adjustment: each model is adjusted only with statistics from its own runs, and the raw mean difference remains the reported effect. In a vision study spanning three architectures and three datasets, simple adjustments based on early training logs often reduce uncertainty in model comparisons. The main limitation is covariate selection. Broadly searching the log pool for the most correlated statistic often adds more noise than it removes, even when useful statistics exist in hindsight. Training logs therefore appear useful for more precise model comparisons, but only when the adjustment avoids large selection noise.

Care robots are increasingly being introduced into healthcare settings, raising important questions about their acceptance and ethical implementation. To better understand these challenges, this study investigates caregivers' perceptions of four categories of care robots: delivering supplies, helping patients into bed, monitoring vital signs, and assisting with mobility. We conducted a mixed-methods study employing a mixed-factorial design in which 298 caregivers from the United States, Mexico, and Chile evaluated all four robot categories. Quantitative measures integrated constructs from the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, the Cognitive-Affective-Normative model, and overall acceptance ratings. Qualitative data were collected through open-ended questions and analyzed using a literature-informed ethical framework. The results indicate that participants across countries generally evaluated care robots positively, particularly for logistical and physically demanding tasks rather than those requiring intensive interpersonal interaction. The qualitative findings provide further insight into stakeholders' views of the ethical implications of care robot use. Participants emphasized potential benefits such as reduced workload, lower risk, and greater patient autonomy, while also expressing concerns about dependability, the need for human oversight, and potential job displacement. Although many ethical concerns were shared across countries, participants differed in how they interpreted and prioritized them. These findings advance a context-sensitive and socially informed understanding of responsible design and implementation of care robots.

The Loggia dei Lanzi in the Piazza della Signoria is one of Florence's most prominent structures visited by millions every year. Its construction history spans multiple centuries of modification. This paper presents the results of a thermal imaging campaign conducted in December 2025, using a FLIR T1020 HD camera, revealing hidden architectural features including walled-up openings and material transitions beneath the plaster surface. The favorable winter ambient conditions provided a feature-rich benchmark upon which to compare the results of enhancement algorithms and artificial intelligence models. We evaluate the application of AI-based image enhancement to thermal heritage documentation through a comparison of three tiers of image resolution in a photogrammetric Structure-from-Motion (SfM) pipeline: native resolution, FLIR's hardware-based pixel-shifted super-resolution (UltraMax), and state of the art AI-upscaled imagery models. We quantify the effect of each resolution tier on feature detection and tie-point generation, assessing whether the additional detail produced by super-resolution, whether hardware or AI-derived, translates into meaningfully denser and more accurate 3D thermal models. Our results contribute to the emerging intersection of artificial intelligence and heritage thermography by providing a direct comparison of hardware microscanning and AI super-resolution within a thermal photogrammetric workflow for cultural heritage. All datasets are made publicly available and accessible within an interactive 3D archival framework, and integrated into a custom citywide extended reality overlay application.

We introduce a mathematical framework for shape comparison based on mapping functions from the shape domain to a common reference domain. This Push-Forward Transform enables invariant and robust comparison of shapes, preserving intrinsic geometric information. Quantitatively comparing shapes and their temporal evolution is a fundamental challenge in image analysis. Meaningful shape comparison requires representations that are invariant to transformations that do not alter shape itself, such as translation, rotation, reflection, re-parametrization, and uniform scaling, while remaining sensitive to intrinsic geometric variation. Existing approaches often rely on sensitive parameterizations, landmark correspondence, or learned representations that are difficult to interpret and reproduce. We show that the Push-Forward Transform (PF-T) applied to Signed Distance Functions (SDFs) yields a continuous representation that captures both boundary and interior geometry. We derive an interpretable morphometric that quantifies shape similarity and reveals features such as skeletal topology and rotational symmetries. The push-forward transform applies consistently to two- and three-dimensional shapes, extends to time-evolving geometries, and supports the joint analysis of shape and additional scalar fields defined over shapes, such as intensity or molecular signals. We present the mathematical formulation, describe an efficient algorithm, and benchmark the approach on 2D, 3D, and temporal data sets.

In this paper, we study prediction problems for paired comparison data, for example, predicting the win probability between two unmatched players and ranking all the players according to the order of their strengths by using win probability data between two matched players. Paired comparison data are typically analyzed using Bradley-Terry and Thurstone-Mosteller models. These models predict the win probability by transforming the difference between learned rate parameters, which represent players';strengths, with a pre-specified inverse link function, and employ the order of learned rate parameters for player ranking. However, these models may suffer from model misspecification owing to the selection of a fixed inverse link function. Therefore, in this study, we propose to learn the rate parameters by a (sub-)gradient method and the inverse link function by an isotonic regression technique alternately. The proposed model guarantees monotonic improvement in training error, and is likely to yield an exact tie when the available data is insufficient to establish a strict ranking. We also verified that the proposed model could improve the win probability prediction and ranking performance through numerical experiments with synthetic data and real-world data of football Premier League, baseball MLB, and tennis ATP tour.

Deliberation, involving the formulation and exchange of arguments, forms an integral part of political decision making in democracies. Argumentation patterns however differ substantially across different political arenas, such as plenary speeches and committee meetings. However, despite a lot of interest in argumentation, there is comparatively little computational work on analyzing differences in patterns of political argumentation between arenas. Our work addresses this research gap. First, we present a 17k-sentence corpus with annotation for argumentative passages (argument and their justifications, both their boundaries and their categories) across three German political arenas (plenary speeches, committee meetings, and press conferences), keeping the topic (COVID-19) constant. Our analysis of the corpus finds that contrary to expectations, justification by domain-specific expertise is more frequent in press conferences than in committee meetings. Second, we present a pilot study on automatically identifying such argumentative passages. The results show that boundaries are hard to pin down, and models predictions additionally suffer from confirmation bias.

Standard model comparison is global, aggregating losses across the covariate space to declare a single winner. This can obscure heterogeneous performance, where different models are preferable in different regions. We introduce conformalized local model comparison, a split-sample framework for constructing calibrated local best-model maps. Given a model comparison score, such as the difference between two squared losses, the method uses three disjoint splits to fit competing models, estimate local centers and scales from out-of-sample scores, and conformally calibrate residual uncertainty. At a target point, the procedure declares a local winner only when a one-sided conformal bound excludes a tie, with the score's sign determining the favored model. We prove finite-sample marginal control for one-sided erroneous declarations on the realized future comparison score, establish pointwise consistency of the localized mean-score estimator away from tie boundaries, show that aggregate comparison can disagree sharply with the prevalence of local superiority, and derive a squared-loss bias--variance decomposition that clarifies how model structure affects local wins. Synthetic and real-data experiments show that the method recovers heterogeneous winner regions, abstains under uncertainty, and yields higher conditional gain than global selection.

Machine unlearning seeks to selectively remove specific knowledge from trained language models without full retraining, a growing necessity under privacy regulations such as GDPR and the EU AI Act. Recent work has reformulated unlearning as a Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) problem, where models are optimized against verifiable rewards computed directly from their outputs. However, existing methods rely on sparse binary rewards that provide minimal learning signal, indicating only whether forbidden content was avoided, and limiting convergence speed. In this paper, we study how reward design affects unlearning efficiency within the Reinforcement Unlearning (RUL) framework. We introduce a principled reward decomposition framework that decouples verifiability from sparsity, and propose two new reward functions: an exponential reward that provides graded penalties based on the count of forbidden-concept occurrences, and a PageRank inspired reward that weights penalties by semantic importance. We conduct experiments on the Real World Knowledge Unlearning (RWKU) benchmark, demonstrating that both rewards consistently outperform the binary setting, while reaching similar forgetting performance up to $3\times$ faster and preserving general model utility. Our results show that reward design is a key driver of unlearning efficiency offering a practical path toward scalable and efficient machine unlearning.

Benchmarks for Geospatial Foundation Models (GFMs) increasingly rank models by aggregate score, but such rankings obscure why models differ: how much of the gap is architecture, how much is decoder capacity, and how much is a use-case-specific artefact? This study addresses that gap through a controlled comparison of two GFMs developed under European Space Agency's $Φ$-lab with contrasting design philosophies: THOR, which introduces a compute-adaptive architecture supporting variable patch sizes and unifies Sentinel-1, -2, and -3 data at their native resolutions; and TerraMind, a multimodal generative GFM pretrained with a dual-scale token/pixel objective that enables any-to-any cross-modal generation (Thinking-in-Modalities) to infer missing sensors at inference time. Rather than reporting a single leaderboard, we investigate the axes along which the two architectures actually differ - patch size, decoder complexity, finetuning regime, input modality, and model scale - across ten use cases spanning segmentation and regression in diverse domains, including climate disaster response, methane leak detection, snow monitoring, or sea ice mapping. We find that architectural design choices - patch size and decoder type in particular - explain more performance variance than model identity itself, that the two models embody complementary investment strategies (pretraining-time scale for TerraMind versus inference-time tokenisation for THOR), and that correctly interpreting results requires dataset-level characterisation. The resulting picture is not a single winner but a set of hypotheses and a diagnostic ablation methodology that we expect to generalise to future GFMs beyond THOR and TerraMind.

Background: Retinal fundus imaging is central to the early diagnosis of sight-threatening conditions including diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma, and retinal vein occlusion. Clinical utility of fundus images is routinely compromised by non-uniform illumination, motion blur, and low contrast - artefacts that increase the risk of diagnostic error. Effective image enhancement is therefore a prerequisite for reliable computer-aided ophthalmic diagnosis. Methods: This study proposes a two-stage image enhancement pipeline combining luminosity correction via HSV colour space decomposition with Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization (CLAHE) applied exclusively to the Value (V) channel. Experiments are conducted on the publicly available DRIVE dataset (40 retinal fundus images, 584 x 565 pixels, Canon CR5 camera, ophthalmologist-annotated ground truth). Quantitative evaluation employs Peak Signal-to-Noise Ratio (PSNR), Structural Similarity Index (SSIM), and Contrast-to-Noise Ratio (CNR). Baseline comparisons include standard Histogram Equalization (HE) and Adaptive Histogram Equalization (AHE). A binary masking step is subsequently applied to isolate hyper-reflective regions consistent with vascular pathology. Results: The proposed method achieves PSNR = 29.3 dB, SSIM = 0.91, and CNR = 3.12 - outperforming HE (PSNR = 21.4 dB, SSIM = 0.74) and AHE (PSNR = 23.1 dB, SSIM = 0.79) across all metrics, with an average processing time of 0.14 seconds per image. Conclusions: The combined luminosity-CLAHE pipeline yields measurably superior contrast and structural fidelity compared to established baseline methods, with processing speed compatible with clinical screening workflows. Limitations and directions for deep-learning-based comparison are discussed.

The ODRL policy language is emerging as the de-facto standard for policy modelling data access and usage preferences, AI governance policies and data workflows in European dataspaces. The current standard has no mathematical formal semantics to describe how a system should implement policy evaluation. This has resulted in a variety of systems and tools that implement their own interpretation of the language, which limits interoperability and cannot guarantee consistent results. Based on an existing semantic model of ODRL, we formalise the problems of ODRL evaluation for the access control and monitoring scenarios, in both static and streaming settings, and we provide a novel, efficient algorithm and implementation. We present the first ODRL Evaluator with transparent formal semantics and supporting all rule types. We experimentally measure its performance, analysing different scalability dimensions related to policy complexity and size of the data on which a policy is evaluated. We compare our system with the state-of-the-art by providing a comparative review of existing ODRL evaluators, which highlights the differences in supported ODRL features and evaluation modes.

This study concentrates on predicting stock prices in the Egyptian market, focusing on the EGX30, an influential financial hub in the Middle East. While most research focuses on global stocks, there's a growing need to understand stock trends in developing countries like Egypt. The study compares different machine learning models for forecasting EGX30 trends, covering short and long-term predictions. Using historical EGX30 data, including metrics like root mean squared error, Mean Absolute Percentage Error, and coefficient of determination, models like K-Nearest Neighbours, random forest, extreme gradient boosting, long short-term memory networks, and gated recurrent unit networks were evaluated. The goal is to determine the most effective models for EGX30 prediction, considering Egypt's unique market dynamics. Insights from this study aid investors in making informed decisions. Results show that the Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU) outperformed the other models in the one-week, one-month, and two-months while the eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) model outperformed others in the one-day predictions, highlighting their usefulness in predictive analysis for financial markets. The study also showed the importance of using the ensemble techniques, especially in the long-term predictions which proved better results reaching 5 times the GRU in the two-month predictions. Additionally, the study notes the surprisingly good performance of K-Nearest Neighbours (KNN) on long-term predictions, suggesting its enduring relevance and potential for future applications in the fintech domains.

Accurately modeling and understanding player experience is crucial for designing engaging puzzle games. To achieve this, a common approach involves collecting diverse user data to train predictive playtesting models that mimic player behavior. However, existing data-driven methods often lack the ability to capture the full range of player strategies and require extensive feature engineering and network architecture modeling. This limitation becomes particularly evident when new game mechanics or features are introduced, which necessitate continual adjustments to the models. To addrss these challenges, we propose a more generalized representation that reduces - or even eliminates - the need for ongoing feature-engineering maintenance. Specifically, we investigate two general-purpose network architectures: (a) a transformer-based model (BERT) and (b) a graph attention model (GAT), both of which are designed to effectively capture the relational structure of Candy Crush Saga (CCS) game boards. Our experiments compare these approaches to Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) baselines, revealing better performance on challenging board configurations and underscoring the benefits of our generalizable representation.

The promise of AI literacy ``for all'' confronts a structural challenge embedded in how nations organise secondary computer science education. In most systems, a general-track subject -- Digital Literacy, ICT, TIC, or SNT -- bears the weight of universal AI literacy, while a specialist Informatics course serves STEM pathways separately. Yet the content and depth of the general track are shaped by governance decisions made largely with reference to the specialist one. This paper presents a comparative analysis of curricula and examination frameworks across fifteen countries, identifying two structural challenges. First, in several systems a significant portion of students completes secondary education without any formal programming exposure. Second, among those who do receive CS education, a \emph{Syntax Ceiling} emerges: Python-based instruction reaches most students, while the algorithmic depth associated with C++ remains concentrated in elite STEM tracks. Drawing on reform cases spanning centralised mandates (France, China, Japan), assessment-driven systems (Poland, Romania, South Korea), and recent universal reforms (Switzerland, Kazakhstan), we show that governance structures and high-stakes examinations are the primary drivers of both challenges -- and that specialist and general-track language choices are rarely independent, linked through shared teacher pipelines that curriculum policy seldom acknowledges. Achieving genuine AI literacy for all requires confronting not just curriculum content, but the access architectures and resource constraints that determine who receives it -- and at what depth.

Young job seekers frequently turn to social media to compare themselves with peers and make sense of career possibilities. However, passive feed browsing creates a paradox: the authentic peer content that provides emotional grounding also triggers potentially detrimental upward social comparison and cognitive overload. Previous work has either structured online user-generated content to reduce noise without changing the passive browsing modality, or built AI-powered career exploration systems that disregard authentic human experiences. To address this gap, we developed JobMate, an interactive system that transforms real social media career posts into persona-grounded conversational AI agents, shifting the interaction from passive scrolling to active, personalized dialogue. We conducted a between-subjects study ($N$ = 24, three disciplines) comparing JobMate with native RedNote browsing. Our study shows that JobMate's AI-mediated dialogue redirected social comparison from potentially detrimental upward comparison toward constructive self-reframing, while promoting sensemaking through active conversational engagement. However, users still relied on the authenticity of real peer content for emotional grounding. We discuss design implications for AI systems that augment authentic online user-generated content consumption across social comparison contexts.

Modern coding agents expose multiple tool surfaces -- IDE primitives, bash, and Model Context Protocol (MCP) code-execution -- and the field has shipped three contradictory claims about which one matters. We run the missing crossed comparison: an integrity-clean three-arm ablation (baseline / bash_only / code_only) on synthetic computation tasks and SWE-bench Mini modification tasks, holding model, harness, and prompts fixed, with two agents (Claude Code, OpenAI Codex CLI) so the comparison spans both regime and agent-design axes. Across the four resulting (regime, agent) cells, restricting the agent to a single execute_code MCP tool is cheaper than -- or statistically tied with -- its cheapest tool-rich rival in three cells (significantly on Artifact/Claude and SWE-bench/Codex; directionally on Artifact/Codex), with pass rates statistically tied within each cell. The lone exception is SWE-bench/Claude, where code_only is directionally costlier (+14.4%, not significant); a conditional-cost analysis localizes that gap to failure-cost on doomed-run trajectories, not a per-edit tax on successful runs. Two implications: the cheapest tool surface is jointly determined by task regime and agent design rather than by either axis alone, and the headline cost signal lives in cache-adjusted cost -- not pass rate, which is invariant across surfaces at the model sizes we evaluate. The benchmark harness, task suite, and analysis code are available at https://github.com/hyang0129/onlycodes.

State estimation is essential for quadruped robots, enabling robust locomotion, navigation, and control. While many estimators have been proposed in the literature, existing implementations are often tied to specific robots or software stacks, making fair comparisons difficult. This lack of a general-purpose benchmarking framework hinders reproducibility and slows down algorithmic innovation. In this paper, we introduce Chalito, an extensible MATLAB/Python library for benchmarking filter-based state estimation algorithms in quadruped robots. Chalito imports robot models directly from URDF, supports multiple filtering approaches, and is designed to be easily extended with new methods. The framework runs on both simulated and real datasets, enabling systematic evaluation across robots and filters. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first open-source library exclusively dedicated to benchmarking filtering algorithms for quadruped robots.

We study the active learning problem of fixed-confidence top-$k$ identification from noisy pairwise comparisons. In this problem, an algorithm sequentially chooses pairs of items to compare, observes the outcomes, and stops when it can return the set of top-$k$ items with error probability at most $δ$. The objective is to design such a $δ$-correct procedure that minimizes the expected number of comparisons (the sample complexity). This problem falls within the broader literature on fixed-confidence pure exploration in bandit models, where a common target is asymptotic optimality: the algorithm's expected sample complexity matches the information theoretic lower bound as $δ\to 0$. Asymptotically optimal procedures have been developed for a range of fixed-confidence pure-exploration problems, however to the best of our knowledge, for top-$1$, or more generally top-$k$ identification from pairwise comparisons under latent utility models an asymptotically optimal algorithm has not been established. In this setting, we develop such an algorithm. We characterize the structure of the lower bound and formulate it as a saddle-point problem. This structure enables a computationally efficient primal-dual procedure that learns the asymptotically optimal comparison allocation online. We then construct an adaptive comparison-allocation algorithm that tracks the allocation learned by the primal-dual procedure and prove it is asymptotically optimal.

We propose contrastive order learning (ConOrd), a contrastive learning framework for ordinal regression that integrates the strengths of contrastive learning and order learning. While contrastive learning effectively leverages all samples in a batch, it typically ignores the inherent ordering among rank labels. Conversely, order learning explicitly models label ordinality but often relies on local, margin-based comparisons, limiting its ability to capture global ordinal structure. ConOrd addresses these limitations by introducing a contrastive order loss with soft affinity and disparity weights based on rank differences, enabling fine-grained modeling of ordinal relationships across all sample pairs within a batch. Extensive experiments on a range of ordinal regression tasks, including facial age estimation, blind image quality assessment, and blind video quality assessment, demonstrate that ConOrd consistently achieves state-of-the-art performance and generalizes well across diverse ordinal regression scenarios. The source code is available at https://github.com/cwlee00/ConOrd.

Document Visual Question Answering (DocVQA) presents a complex multimodal challenge, requiring models to exploit visual, textual, and layout information from documents. Although Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have shown remarkable performance in text-vision tasks, their robustness and transferability to different document domains remains underexplored. In this study, we present a comprehensive evaluation of 8 open-source pretrained VLMs on DocVQA in three different document domains: industrial documents of varying type, infographics, and presentation slides. We systematically assess model performance under zero-shot evaluations, fully supervised finetuning with inter- and intra-dataset evaluations, and few-shot learning evaluations of knowledge transfer between domains. Our findings demonstrate that while large pretrained VLMs possess strong zero-shot baselines for structured layouts, their performance strongly decreases on visually complex layouts of infographics and slides. Although parameter scaling is a dominant factor on performance, supervised finetuning yields higher relative gains in smaller architectures. Furthermore, our cross-domain and few-shot experiments show that visual understanding is the main bottleneck for DocVQA, not a lack of knowledge from the VLMs. Using 50 target domain samples, the models finetuned in DocVQA with datasets of different domains rapidly adapt to the target domain documents, even surpassing their fully supervised counterparts in some cases.

Local pairwise comparisons are a standard tool for learning how people want decision rules to work, e.g., in participatory design or alignment. However, their use builds in two strong assumptions: that local comparisons are sufficient evidence about how a person wants an automated decision rule to behave, and that people can always answer those comparisons decisively. We investigate how these assumptions may be compromised under internal pluralism: the idea that an individual evaluates decision rules according to multiple authoritative priorities about how the rule should behave. We provide a formal model of such pluralistic preferences over decision rules, which then lets us identify two distinct failures of forced local pairwise comparison data. First, priorities such as proportionality, egalitarianism, and equal treatment are inherently global: what they imply in one case can depend on what happens elsewhere, so local comparisons may fail to capture them. Second, even when priorities are representable locally, tension between strongly-held priorities can generate internal conflict, producing potentially costly behavioral distortions when comparisons are forced. We then use our model to investigate the alternative -- allowing people to report indecision -- and our findings suggest that doing so can considerably reduce the number of queries needed to learn preferences accurately. We conclude by describing how our model points toward preference-learning methods that elicit these priorities directly, yielding more faithful and interpretable accounts of what people value.

Multiple-choice medical benchmarks are increasingly saturated, and recent rubric-based evaluations such as HealthBench have shown that open-ended clinical performance is far from solved - its "Hard" subset top score remains 32%. We present a small, deliberately difficult evaluation dataset of five clinician-authored clinical scenarios spanning four specialties (anaesthesia, internal/family medicine, emergency medicine, and obstetrics), each accompanied by an atomic, weighted, MECE rubric (25-62 criteria per task; 184 criteria total) authored from a clinician-drafted golden answer. We evaluate three frontier models: GPT 5.4, Claude Opus 4.7, and Gemini 3.1 Pro. Mean rubric pass rates were 0.47 (Claude), 0.38 (GPT), and 0.37 (Gemini). The central finding is an inversion of clinical priority: the highest-weighted (weight-5, critical) criteria passed at only 32.4-41.7%, while low-stakes weight-1 criteria passed at 80-90%. 55 of 108 critical (weight-5) criteria (51%) were satisfied by no model. Three LLM autoraters reproduced expert met/not-met labels on 92.8-94.6% of 552 graded criteria. We position this as a methods-and-preliminary-findings contribution: the five tasks demonstrate a scalable, defensible pipeline ready to develop into a large-scale benchmark.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as cheap, scalable judges that compare candidate outputs pairwise -- to rank responses, select models, or triage papers. Yet LLM judges are both noisy and systematically biased: they favor verbose or well-formatted answers and exhibit position effects, so simply aggregating their votes recovers a ranking of presentation, not of true quality. We study the practical goal of identifying the \topk{} items under a fixed comparison budget, and make two contributions. First, we cast judging as Bayesian inference over latent quality with explicit, judge-specific bias covariates (verbosity, position), regularized by a shrinkage prior so that the data decide which biases a given judge actually exhibits. Second, we introduce a \topk-aware active acquisition rule that chooses the next comparison to maximally reduce uncertainty about \topk{} \emph{membership}, rather than about the full ranking. On a controlled benchmark with known ground-truth quality, judged by sixteen real LLMs spanning open and proprietary families (Llama, Qwen, Phi-4, GPT-4o-mini/5.1/5.5, Gemini, DeepSeek, and Claude Haiku/Sonnet/Opus), naive aggregation plateaus at a wrong \topk{} on biased judges regardless of budget, while our bias-aware model recovers it; \topk-aware acquisition reaches this ceiling with far fewer comparisons than round-robin or a global-uncertainty (D-optimal) rule. Bias is real but heterogeneous and capability-dependent: cheap and mid-tier judges carry a strong verbosity bias that our model corrects (lifting recall from \sim$$0.5--$0.6$ to $0.84$--$1.0$), whereas the frontier judges we tested show little bias and already rank accurately, so bias-aware modeling changes little there.

News articles are an important source of information on disaster impacts and adaptation. A key methodological challenge in socio-environmental studies is how to select a representative data sample. Two approaches are common: querying news databases top-down with the aid of an existing disaster inventory or using NLP methods to cluster news texts bottom-up based on temporal and spatial features. Using a dataset of German news about landslides worldwide, we compare these approaches and discuss variations in event coverage. Such research design decision can influence the resulting news sample, affecting its use in studies of inequality in media coverage, disaster monitoring and inventory enrichment.

This paper presents Speech Playground, an interactive speech visualization and comparison tool. While existing tools such as Praat are excellent, it can be cumbersome to integrate them with modern deep learning representations and use them for comparison. Speech Playground addresses this by combining a Python backend with a web-based frontend for interactive exploration of multiple feature types, including continuous, discrete, and variable-length representations. It includes TextGrid and forced alignment support together with configurable distance and alignment settings for visual and auditory comparison. Speech Playground is intended for use in speech research, representation validation, and computer-aided pronunciation training (CAPT)-oriented experimentation.

Text encoders are known for their utility in natural language processing, as they are able to efficiently compress inputs into dense vectors while preserving semantics. These models have been applied to affective computing, in particular to help with solving sentiment analysis and emotion recognition tasks. Nevertheless, it remains unclear to what extent the latent representations produced by modern text encoders capture well-defined psychological theories of affect. In this work, we investigate the affective capabilities of twelve recently released text encoders by probing their generated embeddings as input features for solving regression and classification tasks across three established emotion frameworks, using both word- and sentence-level data. Additionally, we apply a semantic data-leakage prevention technique to improve robustness in word-level evaluations. Our main findings show that the latent manifolds of the latest instruction-aware open-weight encoders enclose an equal or even a larger amount of affective information in comparison with proprietary counterparts when evaluated at word level. In contrast, embeddings of task-tuned and proprietary encoders reach the highest scores on sentence-level affective classification. Furthermore, a qualitative analysis of latent representations and their encoded affective cues is provided.

LLM-as-a-Judge and self-evaluation pipelines implicitly assume that evaluation is easier than generation. We test this in a controlled in-context QA setting where a context passage is the sole information source and each model judges the answer it generated, removing the parametric-knowledge confound of open-domain comparisons. Across four benchmarks (SQuAD 2.0, DROP, HotpotQA, MuSiQue) and two models, evaluation is not uniformly easier: generation accuracy exceeds self-evaluation on three of four, with multi-hop MuSiQue the exception. Attention analysis reveals why: evaluation attends to context 3--5x less than generation does and barely reads the candidate answer. LoRA fine-tuning confirms the asymmetry is not a training artifact: generation fine-tuning induces over-acceptance and evaluation fine-tuning degrades generation. These findings challenge core assumptions in self-evaluation pipelines.

Kolmogorov Arnold networks (KAN) have recently been introduced as a (deep) neural network architecture whose trainable parameters adapt the activation functions, instead of the coefficients of the affine transformations at the core of traditional architectures such as deep multilayer perceptrons (MLPs). This architecture builds on the Kolmogorov-Arnold theorem, which endows it with universal approximation properties. While the advent of KANs has been received with excitement, there is a current debate about the possible KAN supremacy over deep multilayer perceptrons (MLPs) for classic fields such as symbolic regression, generic-purpose machine learning, natural language processing or computer vision. Here we assess the performance of KANs --and its nuanced comparison against MLPs and graph neural networks (GNNs)-- in the realm of fluid dynamics surrogate modelling. To that aim, we consider the task of predicting the surface pressure distribution over subsonic and transonic airfoils, a canonical task in aerodynamics. Our results show that KAN models show good performance in predicting the whole pressure coefficients and is able to interpolate across Mach numbers and angles of attack, however its performance is comparable --marginally inferior-- to a suitably trained MLP, where best performance is achieved by a GNN at the expense or requiring lengthier training. While the optimal KAN model have typically much lower complexity than MLP and GNN --hence resulting in faster training--, we find that KANs suffer from training instabilities, and their performance is highly dependent on a proper hyperparameter optimisation.

We study the problem of finding stationary points of non-convex functions when access to the objective is provided only through a comparison oracle that, given two points, outputs which has the larger function value. For a twice differentiable $f\colon\mathbb R^n\to\mathbb R$ with Lipschitz gradient and Hessian, we develop an algorithm that visits an $ε$-stationary point using $\widetilde O(n^2/ε^{1.5})$ queries. Our approach uses a subroutine that estimates the normalized Hessian to accuracy $δ$ using $\widetilde O(n^2\log(1/δ))$ queries. We further study this problem with a quantum comparison oracle model where queries can be made in superpositions, and develop the first quantum algorithm that finds an $ε$-stationary point, which takes $\widetilde O(n/ε^{1.5})$ queries.

Existing texture datasets for tactile sensing primarily consist of sensor readings from a specific sensor interacting with available surfaces/objects rather than describing the textures themselves, limiting fair comparison between tactile sensors and hindering reproducible research. In this work, we introduce a 3D-printable dataset of mathematically defined textures designed to be fabricated reliably across different printers and filament types. The dataset consists of six parametrically generated surface patterns derived from combinations of sine-wave and Fourier-based functions, giving controlled variation in spatial frequency, amplitude, and directional structure. We evaluate the reproducibility of these textures across three popular 3D printers and multiple filament types by measuring variance in images captured using an optical TacTip sensor under controlled contact conditions. Our results show that print quality, particularly peak sharpness and stringing, affects tactile variance, with higher-end printers producing significantly more consistent signatures. Classification experiments using neural networks and PCA-based models further demonstrate that high-quality prints support strong within-printer generalisation, while cross-printer generalisation remains challenging due to geometric inconsistencies. This work establishes the first openly available, physically reproducible 3D-printed texture benchmark, providing a foundation for fair comparison of tactile sensors.

With the widespread adoption of large language models (LLMs) in chatbots and everyday applications, companies increasingly need guardrails that are effective while remaining low-cost and low-latency. Safety evaluation of LLM outputs has generally relied on LLM-based judges, which can be effective but are often slow and expensive to deploy at scale. In this paper, we evaluate whether fine-tuned modern encoder classifiers from the ModernBERT family, including ModernBERT and Ettin, can reliably identify harmful LLM outputs in user-model conversations without substantial performance loss relative to LLM-based judges. We benchmark these encoder classifiers against rule-based prefix matching, fine-tuned LLM classifiers, and LLM judges using a range of judge-prompting strategies across open-source adversarial datasets. The LLM judges include evaluation methodologies from StrongReject, ShieldGemma, JailbreakBench, AILuminate, SorryBench, and a Claude-as-a-judge setup, as well as fine-tuned safety classifiers such as LlamaGuard 3 and LlamaGuard 4. The encoder classifiers are fine-tuned on judge-labeled data using a majority-voting label strategy and are then evaluated on a gold-standard holdout dataset to assess their performance relative to LLM judges. We report absolute performance using F1 score, false negative rate, and precision-recall metrics. We also break down results by attack technique, including single-turn prompting, decomposition, escalation, and context manipulation, to identify where encoder classifiers align with or diverge from LLM-based judges. Our findings provide guidance on when encoder classifiers can serve as cost- and latency-efficient alternatives to LLM-based safety evaluation.

In this study, the learning-based inertial odometry problem is investigated using raw IMU measurements obtained from the EuRoC MAV benchmark dataset. Instead of absolute position regression-a formulation that may lead to large constant errors-the models are trained to estimate the incremental displacement (Δp) over a fixed 50 ms sliding window, and the full trajectory is reconstructed through numerical integration. A standard Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) is compared with a Kolmogorov-Arnold Network (KAN) equipped with learnable B-spline activations. Although KAN has 6.9 times fewer parameters than MLP (8,444 versus 57,859), it produces a 44% lower error in terms of final cumulative drift on the test trajectory (9.61 m versus 17.23 m). In addition, KAN exhibits more stable behavior in terms of long-term error accumulation, with lower P_50 and P_90 cumulative drift values. These findings indicate that learnable B-spline-based activations have the potential to reduce error accumulation in the inertial odometry problem.

As Large Language Models are increasingly deployed in critical applications, robustly evaluating their social biases is paramount. However, the current literature suffers from widespread methodological fragmentation, which yields contradictory conclusions. This stems largely from ignoring the structural framing of benchmark-level evaluations. To resolve this, we introduce a unified and controllable framework that standardizes heterogeneous benchmarks to systematically contrast isolated demographic assessments with forced-choice comparative settings. Crucially, this allows us to disentangle the confounding effects of Chain-of-Thought reasoning, neutral fallback options, and other structural artifacts in social bias evaluations. Our evaluation across multiple model families reveals a massive, systematic paradigm gap: while isolated assessments limit prejudice activation, comparative settings act as aggressive catalysts for latent discrimination, a shift primarily driven by underspecified contexts. Alarmingly, CoT reasoning exacerbates social biases under comparative settings, and this systemic bias persists as a deterministic prejudice even when models are provided neutral fallback options or claim to answer randomly. Finally, we demonstrate that this comparative prejudice is a generalized phenomenon that scales positively with model size. Ultimately, we offer a crucial methodological guideline: while researchers must leverage comparative settings to robustly audit hidden biases, practitioners cannot safely rely on comparative deployments in ambiguous real-world tasks.

Large audio-language models (LALMs) can reason about audio, yet it remains unclear whether they can perform comparative judgments between two speech signals along emotional, environmental, linguistic, prosodic, and interpersonal dimensions. We study this question in the context of speech emotion recognition (SER), where the model determines which utterance exhibits higher arousal, valence, or dominance. We introduce a reasoning-guided ordinal SER framework that conditions an LALM on paired speech inputs. The model is trained using reasoning traces generated from both semantic audio descriptions and acoustic evidence derived from GeMAPS features, enabling interpretable comparative decisions. Beyond direct supervision, we also employ direct preference optimization to encourage stronger separation for emotional differences. Experiments show that the proposed framework improves preference prediction while requiring only 5% of the training data used by conventional ordinal SER systems.

Efficient sorter diversion control of automated material handling systems (MHS) is critical for optimizing operational efficiency in large-scale warehouse environments. In this study, we use an inbound receiving sorter at a high-volume e-commerce warehouse as our primary use case, where the sorter diversion system relies on cost functions with static weight configurations that fail to adapt to highly dynamic system contexts, such as volume mode, congestion level, equipment physical status, and upstream/downstream dependencies. To address this real-time sorter diversion optimization challenge, we conducted a comparative study of three candidate hybrid machine learning frameworks: Linear Regression with Gradient Descent Optimization (LR+GDO), XGBoost with Bayesian Optimization (XGB+BO), and Bayesian Contextual Bandits (BCB). Model training and evaluation were enabled by leveraging a high-fidelity physics-aware emulator to overcome the cold-start problem and allow a safe transition from offline to online learning. We performed comprehensive evaluations including reward model predictive accuracy, contextual sensitivity, action distribution, and projected reward uplift. Our results demonstrate that while tree-based reward models offer slightly better predictive power, the BCB framework achieved overall higher performance with 2.03% reward uplift over the heuristic baseline. Furthermore, BCB exhibits several superior characteristics, such as its decisive time-optimal policy backed by Bang-Bang control theory, continuous online learning capability, strategic balance between exploration and exploitation, and significantly shorter inference latency. These results demonstrate the potential of the BCB framework for real-time control optimization in large-scale warehouse environments, motivating further investigation toward operational deployment.