Empirical Study

Video Intelligence Surveillance (VIDINT) on over-the-shoulder footage is a proposed vector for monitoring human-computer interaction patterns without direct screen recording access. In this paper, we evaluate a Behavioral Intelligence (BEHINT) touch-detection framework designed to reconstruct keystroke events on mobile keypad interfaces from physical finger interactions. Our system integrates four parallel detection modalities: (1) anatomical hand landmarks via MediaPipe, (2) HSV skin color filtering, (3) temporal frame differencing for motion detection, and (4) shape-guided Canny edge analysis. We map relative touch coordinates to a reference screen layout to reconstruct typing sequences. Evaluation on a 120-frame first-person staged video of passcode entry reveals that while MediaPipe and Skin Detection fail to run autonomously due to partial hand occlusion and ambient noise, Motion-Only and Edge-Only configurations achieve F1-scores of 18.5% and 18.2%, respectively. The combined multi-modal configuration achieves an F1-score of 16.7% and a sequence similarity of 3.0% when mapped to the iOS passcode layout. We conduct ablation, resolution decay, noise sensitivity, and proximity threshold tuning to characterize the system's operational envelope. We then audit generalization on 5 real, publicly licensed third-person phone videos and find that the detector emits a median of 57 touch points per frame (peaking at 205), one to three orders of magnitude more than the rate of real taps, because the skin filter responds to the whole hand rather than to fingertip contact. The staged keystroke result does not survive contact with uncontrolled footage; the system does not achieve reliable keystroke reconstruction outside the calibrated staged setting.

Strictly proper scoring rules identify the true conditional class distribution at population level, but their curvature can alter optimization and finite-sample behavior. We study three multiclass objectives: a class-aware quadratic Bregman score (CAPM), a strongly convex generator with constrained log-cosh ridges (HPG), and an HPG objective with an annealed probability-margin penalty (APMS). CAPM is treated as a structured instance of established quadratic scoring-rule theory. We derive conditional-regret, curvature, range, and logit-gradient bounds for CAPM and HPG, and prove exact penalty-range and conditional-target displacement bounds for APMS. Controlled five-seed experiments use Digits, Wisconsin breast cancer, and synthetic confusion and long-tail problems under clean labels, symmetric and pair-flip corruption, class imbalance, calibration evaluation, input corruption, and first-order adversarial perturbations. The candidates are close to cross-entropy on clean data and show descriptive gains in some noisy-label cells, but the five-seed comparisons are interpreted descriptively rather than as significance evidence. The selected noisy-label baselines perform better on Digits with 40% symmetric label noise, and explicit prior-adjustment methods perform better in the 30:1 synthetic long-tail experiment. Ablations do not show a consistent benefit from the candidate-specific graph, ridge, or margin components. The mathematical analysis establishes the stated properties, and the experiments delimit the empirical evidence; together they do not support a claim of general superiority.

A Knowledge Graph (KG) represents facts as structured triples and is widely used to organize relational knowledge across diverse domains. Just as textual information ranges from words and sentences to complete documents, KG information can be interpreted at multiple levels, from entities, relations, and triples to subgraphs and entire KGs. However, existing KG embedding methods mainly focus on entities, relations, and triples, leaving graph-level semantics largely unaddressed. Conventional graph-level methods, which typically compare graphs based on structural patterns, are also insufficient because structural similarity alone cannot guarantee semantic similarity between KGs. To evaluate how well different methods capture such graph-level semantic information, we study graph-to-graph semantic similarity, which determines whether a pair of KGs represents semantically corresponding underlying information. To obtain reliable ground-truth correspondences, we construct a semantic matching dataset by modifying text documents, extracting KGs from both original and modified documents, and transferring their known correspondences to KG pairs. We compare text-based, structure-based, and KG embedding-based approaches on each dataset. For the KG embedding-based approach, we introduce two scoring functions: \textit{EmbPairSim}, which uses maximal pairwise entity similarity, and \textit{AvgEmbSim}, which uses a frequency-weighted centroid. Experiments on WikiText-2 and CC-News show that \textit{EmbPairSim} achieves up to 5.3 pp higher MRR than Sentence-BERT while using substantially fewer parameters. These results suggest that KGE representations can serve as compact and effective signals for graph-to-graph semantic similarity in KGs. Our code is available at https://github.com/SeungRyeolBaek/KG-to-KG-Semantic-Similarity.

Although most undergraduates now use large language models (LLMs), a form of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) for academic writing, no validated method distinguishes the qualitatively different ways students rely on them. Existing instruments assess reliance solely by frequency of use, a measure that, as this study shows, inadvertently rewards dependence on AI rather than recognizing students' own intellectual contribution. Conducted at a public minority-serving university and grounded in the AI Literacy Framework, Expectancy-Value Theory, and Biggs's Presage-Process-Product model, the study drew on 382 undergraduates, 14 interviews, and 396 open-ended survey responses. Four distinct reliance types were identified and confirmed: Strategic (34.3%), Instrumental (30.9%), Dialogic (30.4%), and Dependent (4.5%). Students' value and cost beliefs predicted the intensity of their reliance on LLMs, whereas their AI literacy predicted the type of reliance they adopted, indicating that differentiated support is needed. Notably, Strategic users, those who engaged AI most deliberately, scored lowest on standard outcome measures. This pattern reflects a limitation of current instruments, which index AI's contribution rather than writing quality, thereby penalizing students who show the greatest independent thinking. Analysis also revealed an additional group, roughly 13%, who declined to use AI for ethical rather than practical reasons, and who existing frameworks overlook. These findings carry implications for AI literacy programs, the measurement of student learning outcomes, and equitable AI policy at minority-serving institutions.

Factual Error Detection (FED), which is the task of identifying factually incorrect spans in a given text, has long been recognized as an important research problem. However, with the rapid rise of large language models (LLMs), research attention has shifted toward factual errors specific to LLM-generated text (hallucinations) and their detection. As a result, the detection of factual errors in human-written text has been relatively neglected. To address this gap, we first distill a taxonomy of human-induced factual errors by analyzing corrections of newspaper articles, a representative source of text that is guaranteed to be human-written and contains few grammatical errors. Our analysis revealed that there are characteristic categories such as kanji misconversions and unit errors, which are not focused in existing hallucination benchmarks. Based on the taxonomy, we then evaluate the FED capability of vanilla LLMs on synthesized realistic test cases and real corrections. Experimental results demonstrated that even high-performance LLMs such as GPT-5.4 achieved only word-level F1 score of 52% on the synthetic evaluation data, highlighting the task difficulty. Furthermore, a detailed analysis by detection difficulty revealed the current state of FED.

Training-free compression methods for large language models (LLMs) often use calibration data to guide compression decisions. ROCKET, a recent method combining sparse-dictionary factorization with multi-choice knapsack problem (MCKP) allocation, derives its per-layer factorization from an output reconstruction objective but uses weight-space Frobenius error as the MCKP allocation cost. We investigate whether aligning the allocation cost with the output-space objective improves compressed model fidelity. On Qwen3-8B at 50% compression, our ROCKET-ActCost achieves +0.8 percentage points higher average accuracy across 8 zero-shot benchmarks (53.1% vs 52.3%), but increases WikiText perplexity by 16% (61.46 vs 52.98). This accuracy-perplexity tradeoff reveals that different allocation objectives favor different downstream metrics. The high correlation ($>$0.99) between weight-space and output-space errors limits allocation divergence, explaining the modest effect size. On Llama-3.2-1B at 20% compression, the two methods produce near-identical results (53.3% vs 53.5% accuracy, 14.45 vs 14.66 PPL), suggesting that the effect of the cost function is minor at lower compression ratios.

One goal in reinforcement learning (RL) research is to understand general-purpose sequential decision-making, using benchmark simulators as a proxy for learning in deployment settings. When running experiments, however, the goal of achieving high performance in the simulator can mutate into focusing exclusively on solving the simulator. To achieve high scores, researchers may adopt solutions exclusively meant for solving simulators, rather than learning while the agent is deployed outside a simulator. Solving simulators is also worthy of investigation, but it is a fundamentally different RL research question. In this paper, we argue that RL researchers need to distinguish between two use cases of simulators: solving simulators and using simulators as a proxy for learning in deployment. We first discuss how these two use-cases are importantly different, in terms of constraints on how the agent can use the simulator, which algorithms are appropriate, and which evaluation metrics are appropriate. We then highlight several issues and misleading conclusions that can occur by not making the distinction between these two settings clear, supported with examples and simple experiments. This work is a call to the community to begin clearly distinguishing how they are using simulators in their work, hopefully sparking further discussion on which empirical practices work best in each setting.

Static verification tools can assure industrial scale software, but require significant human labor to write specifications. This is particularly true of static verifiers based on separation logic (SL verifiers), which excel at verifying heapmanipulating programs, but require many complex auxiliary specifications to reason about heap structure. Recent work applies large language models (LLMs) to generate code, tests, and proofs, including specifications for verifiers, but mostly targeting non-SL verifiers. To address this gap, this paper thoroughly evaluates how well LLMs perform when prompted to generate specifications for verifying 303 C functions with the SL verifier VeriFast. We explored eight prompting approaches, ten LLMs, and three input types in two stages. Quantitative and qualitative analyses are used to assess the LLM-generated code and specifications for functional behavior, verifiability and errors. The results show that LLMs preserve functional behavior in source code and specifications (both over 91%), but achieve modest verification success (31.4%). Using Gemini 2.5 Pro and providing formal contracts lead to higher success rates in our setting. Moreover, most errors (94%) come from LLMs' mistakes in the domainspecific knowledge of SL verifiers such as VeriFast. These findings provide guidance for optimizing LLM-generated specifications for SL verifiers.

Effective robot-to-human communication can increase transparency and trust, reduce uncertainty, and contribute to safer collaboration in shared workspaces. Designing and validating an effective robot communication strategy is challenging due to the varying and often limited communication modalities across robots, differences in how diverse recipients interpret messages, and the underexplored virtual-to-real gap in studies of communication legibility. We present a systematic, large-scale comparative validation of existing communication strategies for a mobile non-humanoid robot across message types and settings (online and in-person). Based on the prescribed message types in the existing standards for industrial robots, we realize and compare a low-expressive, unimodal LED-based strategy with a highly expressive, multimodal one that leverages robotic gaze, gestures, and voice. For each strategy, we analyze the communication of a turning intention, an attention request, error status, whether the robot is stuck, and whether it is functioning normally. We evaluate these strategies in replicated online and in-person experiments. We find strong evidence that highly expressive multimodal communication is perceived as more legible and intuitive than unimodal LED-based communication. Comparing the online and real-world study findings, we observe a notable decrease in overall legibility, particularly for signaling with LEDs. Similarly, confidence in message interpretation decreases during the real-world evaluation.

Forecasting chaotic dynamical systems such as the Lorenz attractor is notoriously difficult: small numerical errors are amplified exponentially over long autoregressive rollouts. We study seven recurrent and convolutional architectures for the AI-DEEDS 2026 Chaotic Systems Challenge: a vanilla LSTM, an LSTM with additive attention, a Bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM), a BiLSTM trained with the Huber loss, a Temporal Convolutional Network (TCN), a CNN front-end followed by an LSTM, and a CNN front-end followed by a BiLSTM. All models share the same pre-processing, sequence length, and rollout procedure, isolating the contribution of each design choice. The challenge scores predictions on a 0-100 scale where higher is better. We obtain leaderboard scores between 45.72 and 58.81, with the BiLSTM trained with Huber loss being the strongest configuration. Two findings stand out: (i) adding additive attention to the unidirectional baseline degraded performance by over ten points, and (ii) prepending a CNN front-end to either an LSTM or a BiLSTM did not help and slightly hurt the score. Per-pair RMSE measurements confirm that the BiLSTM family generalizes better in the harder pairs (6-7), while the LSTM + Attention model collapses there (RMSE up to 8.94 on pair 6). We discuss why bidirectional context and a robust loss help in chaotic regimes while attention and CNN front-ends fail in this setting.

Academic age critically shapes career development, influencing research behavior, output volume, and methodological choices. Analyzing method variation across academic ages offers a new theoretical lens on scholarly evolution and provides early-career researchers with practical guidance for method selection. A corpus of 26,677 articles published 1990-2023 in 14 authoritative Library and Information Science journals was compiled. The CogFT model automatically classified the research methods embedded in these articles, and Top2Vec generated the topic model. This process resulted in a comprehensive dataset linking research methods with topics. Author-name disambiguation enabled calculation of each scholar's academic age. Popularity and Shannon diversity indices for methods, together with topic diversity, were compared across academic age groups. Results reveal dynamic methodological trends: the share of theoretical approaches declined gradually, whereas experimental and bibliometric methods gained ground. Method popularity differs significantly among cohorts. Mid-career scholars exhibit the highest method diversity; late-career scholars the lowest.

OpenPangu models are attractive targets for private and domestic large-language-model deployment, yet their robustness under aggressive post-training quantization on Ascend NPUs has not been systematically characterized. This paper conducts a controlled empirical study of OpenPangu 1B and 7B models on Huawei Ascend 910B1 NPUs. We evaluate representative weight-only and weight-activation post-training quantization methods, including RTN, GPTQ, AWQ, SmoothQuant, GPTAQ, BiLLM, and SliM-LLM, under a unified calibration and evaluation protocol. Across 18 evaluation tasks, we find that 8-bit weight-only quantization is effectively lossless for both models, while 4-bit quantization remains practical for the 7B model but is visibly more harmful for the 1B model on reasoning, math, and code tasks. Ultra-low precision remains challenging: most 2-bit and binary settings collapse to near-random behavior, and W4A4 SmoothQuant produces non-finite perplexity in our evaluation. These results provide an NPU-oriented accuracy map for selecting OpenPangu quantization settings and highlight the persistent difficulty of extreme low-bit compression.

When a new domain resembling a popular brand appears, defenders face a fundamental ambiguity: it may be an attacker-created squatting site for phishing, or it may be a domain the brand itself registered, either defensively, to block attackers, or legitimately, for a new product or service launch. Incorrectly flagging a brand-owned domain as malicious produces a false positive that harms end users and damages the brand's reputation. Resolving this ambiguity requires brand intelligence: the ability to determine, at scale, whether a given domain belongs to a brand. Large language models (LLMs), with their broad knowledge of brand domain relationships, offer a promising zero configuration approach to this problem, but their reliability for brand intelligence tasks remains unknown. We present the first systematic empirical evaluation of LLM brand intelligence across three tasks: domain enumeration (Q1), open ended brand attribution (Q2), and binary ownership classification (Q3). We evaluate four models, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Gemini 3.5 Flash, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and Claude Sonnet 4.6, across four retrieval settings (in context, web search, WHOIS lookup, and combined) on 36 of the most phished brands. Our results reveal a stark dichotomy: models achieve up to 82% precision enumerating brand domains from memory alone, yet fail at ownership verification without external tools, with macro F1 at most 0.37 in ICL mode. WHOIS augmentation lifts Q3 macro F1 by up to 0.65 points, yielding near perfect precision (<= 0.99), dramatically reducing the false positive risk for defenders. We provide concrete recommendations for deploying LLMs in brand protection pipelines.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) show great potential in medical tasks, but their elicited confidence often misaligns with actual accuracy, potentially leading to misdiagnosis or overlooking correct advice. This study presents the first comprehensive analysis of the relationship between accuracy and confidence in medical MLLMs. It proposes a novel method that combines Multi-Strategy Fusion-Based Interrogation (MS-FBI) with auxiliary expert LLM assessment, aiming to improve confidence calibration in Medical Visual Question Answering (VQA). Experiments demonstrate that our method reduces the Expected Calibration Error (ECE) by an average of 40% across three Medical VQA datasets, significantly enhancing MLLMs' reliability. The findings highlight the importance of domain-specific calibration for MLLMs in healthcare, offering a more trustworthy solution for AI-assisted diagnosis.

The challenge associated with recognizing dysarthric speech primarily arises from pronounced acoustic variability attributed to impaired articulatory precision. Past research has demonstrated improved recognition through the use of hybrid DNN/HMM sequence discriminative training. This paper presents a comprehensive investigation of various combinations of acoustic features tailored to different Acoustic Models, offering suitable feature selections for each. The incorporation of Pitch features notably improved recognition performance, especially for sentence recognition tasks involving dysarthric speech. Through a systematic examination of the TORGO database, we have demonstrated the potential to enhance the performance of the state-of-the-art Factorized Time Delay Neural Network (F-TDNN) model for recognizing dysarthric speech. Our methods, implemented with the F-TDNN model, resulted in a 4.65% relative improvement in isolated word recognition and a 4.63% relative improvement in sentence recognition for dysarthric speech, compared to previous research. This improvement effectively compensates for speech variability, attributable to our deliberate selection of the number of overlapping frames between consecutive training example chunks.

The development of large language models (LLMs) has led to an increased focus on their adaptation to specialized domains and languages, yet the effectiveness of domain adaptation strategies remains unclear. We present a study of medical domain adaptation using French medical question-answering (QA) as a case study. We compare continual pretraining (CPT), supervised fine-tuning (SFT), and their combination across three model families, multiple sizes, and three initialization types, explicitly disentangling adaptation effects from base model choice. We evaluate both multiple-choice (MCQA) and open-ended QA (OEQA) under greedy and constrained decoding using automatic metrics and LLM-as-a-Judge evaluation. For MCQA, CPT+SFT most often achieves the best scores, but gains over SFT are small and frequently not statistically significant, making SFT a strong and cost-effective default. For OEQA, CPT consistently improves overlap-based metrics, while SFT often degrades generation quality; instruction tuning and CPT+SFT are preferred by LLM-based evaluation. Cross-lingual experiments further show effective transfer from French adaptation to English benchmarks. Overall, we provide practical guidelines for selecting adaptation strategies under computational constraints.

Monotonicity has been a long-running architectural inductive bias for neural networks, motivated by tabular, scientific, and economic settings where outputs are known to respond monotonically to certain inputs. Existing approaches are MLP- or flow-based and lack per-edge functional transparency; the only Kolmogorov--Arnold Network (KAN) variant with monotonicity, MonoKAN, enforces the constraint only on a restricted parameter subset and requires a projection-style training procedure. We close this gap with \textbf{MKAN}, a KAN with hard monotonicity guaranteed for \emph{all} parameter values via exponential reparameterization of B-spline coefficients, positive edge weights, and a monotone base activation. Training reduces to standard unconstrained gradient descent. Our headline theoretical contribution is a \emph{representation-cost} theorem: any $C^K, K >0$ feature extractor inducing a ball-shaped semantic-neighborhood partition admits a monotone realization of the equivalent neighborhood structure at $N' = N^* + k \le 2N^*$, where $k$ is the number of non-monotone coordinates of the original. The bound is architecture-agnostic and gives a principled sizing rule for monotone encoders. Empirically, MKAN is competitive with state-of-the-art monotone NNs on the SMM/ICML-2024 benchmark while being the only method that combines hard unconstrained monotonicity with KAN's per-edge functional transparency; the $2N^*$ prediction is validated in a self-supervised feature-size sweep on four real datasets, and on a controlled monotone-generative dataset MKAN recovers ground-truth factors with substantially higher Spearman alignment than KAN, MLP, and linear baselines.

Neural network parameter spaces are inherently non-injective, as distinct parameter configurations can realize identical functions through functional equivalence. While this symmetry is well understood in classical fully connected and convolutional models, it becomes substantially more intricate in modern attention-based architectures. Existing analyses of multihead attention have largely focused on the vanilla formulation, overlooking positional encodings that fundamentally reshape architectural symmetries. In this work, we provide a formal study of functional equivalence in Transformers with positional encodings. Focusing on the two most widely used variants--sinusoidal and rotary positional encodings (RoPE)--we show that sinusoidal encodings preserve the equivalence structure of vanilla attention, whereas rotary encodings significantly reduce the symmetry group, thereby enhancing expressivity. This offers a principled explanation for the growing prominence of RoPE in practice. We further examine how positional encodings affect linear mode connectivity, and through an alignment algorithm, empirically demonstrate that the presence and variability of connectivity across Transformer settings crucially depend on the positional encoding.

Transformer Grammars (TGs) enhance language modeling by incorporating syntactic tree structures. Despite the potentially significant impact on model performance of how syntactic trees are linearized in TGs, existing studies rely solely on Depth-First Traversal (DFT) for linearization. In this paper, we expand the traversal design space by exploring Breadth-First Traversal (BFT) and a novel hybrid traversal strategy, Production-Rule Traversal (PRT), which combines the structural lookahead of BFT with the early lexical generation of DFT. We integrate these traversal methods with varying tree configurations and masking strategies, and empirically evaluate their performance on language modeling, syntactic generalization and summarization. We reveal the inherent trade-offs between nested composition and global lookahead, providing actionable recommendations for designing task-aware Transformer Grammars.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to guide research methodology, yet their default methodological tendencies under minimal prompting remain unclear. Here, we prompt GPT-5.1, Gemini 3 Pro, and DeepSeek-V3.2 with an LLM-extracted research question from each of 1,000 recent arXiv computer-science papers and compare the resulting methodology suggestions against a paper-derived experimental inventory. Since we provide only the research question, the differences we measure reflect initial suggestions and not how optimal those suggestions are. We extract structured method features from both sources, map them into a shared taxonomy, and quantify divergence across multiple taxonomy dimensions including model provider, dataset task type, and evaluation metric type. The strongest imbalance appears in provider choice, with Jensen-Shannon divergence about 3-5x larger than any other taxonomy dimension. Other/Academic single-occurrence models are underrepresented by 23-24 percentage points, while reused academic/community models are slightly overrepresented (4-6pp). LLMs also suggest a much narrower range of methods overall: the effective number of model entities contracts from 1,232 to 59-96, and inter-LLM rank correlations (0.55-0.68) generally exceed LLM-to-paper correlations (0.33-0.56), so the distortions are largely shared across models. Popularity baselines, BM25 retrieval calibration, and paper-level similarity tests confirm that the outputs are query-specific responses, but filtered through a narrower set of options. Researchers who rely on LLM suggestions without cross-checking therefore risk narrowing their methodological search space toward a more concentrated default.

Machine unlearning has been extensively studied in response to growing privacy concerns and regulatory requirements. However, auditing whether unlearning algorithms have truly erased the influence of specific data remains an open challenge. The lack of reliable and practical auditing mechanisms can lead to critical privacy risks, such as residual information leakage. This paper initiates a systematic investigation into whether existing unlearning algorithms can truly forget the designated data. We propose the first practical and general-purpose auditing framework for machine unlearning, inspired by the concept of proof of ignorance. Our framework addresses the key practicality limitations of existing methods by eliminating the need for retraining-from-scratch baselines, avoiding the training of large numbers of shadow models, and requiring no intrusive intervention in the original training process. To evaluate the effectiveness of our framework, we first conduct validation experiments to verify its soundness and completeness. We then perform comprehensive experiments across six datasets and ten representative unlearning methods. The results demonstrate that our framework reliably distinguishes between successful and failed unlearning. In particular, we observe that retraining-based and fine-tuning-based methods can achieve effective unlearning, even when the target data remain in the original dataset. In contrast, de-optimization-based methods fail to achieve true unlearning and instead degrade the model's performance. Fisher/Hessian-based methods also fail to unlearn requested data, even formal certification is provided. Moreover, we show that our framework is robust against fake unlearning attempts and generalizes well to large language models.

Despite the significant advancement of LLMs in conversation summarization, their evaluation remains limited by insufficient scenarios, input lengths, and sample sizes. Furthermore, existing benchmarks often omit frontier reasoning systems and efficient small models, or lack fine-grained, multi-dimensional assessments. To bridge these gaps, we propose OmniCSEval, a unified benchmark comprising 1,800 diverse conversations across six real-world scenarios, featuring context lengths ranging from 128 to 32k tokens. For fine-grained evaluation, we employ a bidirectional fact-checking framework that integrates key fact matching to assess completeness and conciseness, alongside summary fact verification to evaluate faithfulness. To ensure reliable assessment, we establish a human-LLM collaborative pipeline for key fact extraction and a multi-LLM consensus verifier for summary fact decomposition. Leveraging this framework, we evaluate 28 LLMs across four distinct categories grouped by reasoning capability and model scale. Our extensive empirical study reveals critical insights regarding the cross-scenario challenges current LLMs continue to face, the impacts of reasoning and scale, and the efficiency and adaptability of reasoning models. We also provide guidance for system selection in real-world deployments.

For the last couple of years, the field of speech synthesis has improved dramatically thanks to deep learning. There are more and more deep learning-based TTS systems developed to make it possible to produce voices with high intelligibility and naturalness. Meanwhile, controlling the expressiveness is yet a big deal, generating speech in different styles or manners has received a lot of attention from community recently. This paper aims to give our solutions to deal with the task emotional speech synthesis (ESS) at VLSP 2022 which allows to generate humanlike natural-sounding voice from a given input text with desired emotional expression. By integrating speaker embedding, prosody bottleneck into FastSpeech 2, our systems can promisingly generate emotional speech of a single speaker (Sub-task 1), transfer speaking styles from another speaker to the target speaker with neutral non-expressive data while retaining the target speaker's identity (Sub-task 2).

Non-Euclidean optimisation methods with matrix-valued updates, such as Muon and Scion, have recently shown strong empirical performance for training Transformer models, yet their theoretical advantages over Euclidean methods remain poorly understood. We address this gap in the heavy-tailed non-convex regime, where stochastic gradients have bounded $p$-th central moments, $p \in (1,2]$. We show that certain non-Euclidean methods achieve optimal sample complexity under stronger stationarity measures, while Euclidean methods incur additional dimension-dependent costs. As a consequence, for $m \times n$ matrices, Muon finds an $\varepsilon$-stationary point in nuclear norm within $\mathcal{O}\left(\min\{m, n\} \frac{Δ_1 L}{\varepsilon^2} \left(\frac σ\varepsilon \right)^{\frac p {p-1}}\right)$ samples, absorbing heavy-tailed noise without extra dimension dependence, unlike Euclidean methods. We further prove this sample complexity, including its dimension dependence, is optimal for all first-order methods under nuclear-norm stationarity. Experiments on large language models support our theory. Surprisingly, our results suggest that other Schatten geometries beyond the spectral geometry of Muon can perform competitively in certain settings.

The "First Proof" benchmark [1] posed ten research-level mathematics questions to the strongest publicly available LLMs and found them consistently wrong-not silent, but confidently, fluently wrong. This paper asks why. Working from the per-question post-mortems in First Proof's Appendix A, I identify four failure modes: citation fabrication (F1), premise smuggling (F2), silent problem reformulation (F3), and local-to-global compatibility gaps (F4). I then audit eight one-shot proofs generated by Gemini 2.5 Flash on Questions 1, 2, and 5 of the benchmark, using two instruments built specifically to surface F1 and F2. The central finding is uncomfortable for anyone who sees retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) as the obvious fix: not one of the eight proofs contained a confirmed fabricated citation, yet every single one contained at least one load-bearing claim asserted as a "fundamental result" or "standard argument" with no justification attached. That failure mode-F2, premise smuggling-is invisible to citation verification by design. A premise-audit instrument I introduce flags it at 100% precision (5/5 judge-confirmed flags are true positives) and 50% proof-level recall in this corpus. The taxonomy and the audit together suggest that the right long-term objective is building inference-time pipelines that prevent these failure modes from occurring, not just detecting them after the fact. Index Terms--Large language models, mathematical reasoning, hallucination, premise smuggling, failure-mode taxonomy.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) such as CLIP have become a standard backbone for open-vocabulary recognition, yet their zero-shot predictions remain vulnerable to distribution shifts encountered at deployment. Test-Time Adaptation (TTA) has recently been extended to CLIP as a lightweight solution, leading to a rapidly growing body of TTA4CLIP methods. However, empirical progress in this area has largely outpaced our understanding of what truly drives adaptation, where their gains originate, and under which shifts they remain reliable. In this paper, we take a step back from the pursuit of state-of-the-art accuracy and conduct a systematic controlled study of TTA4CLIP. We first organize existing methods into three unified paradigms according to what is updated at test time. We then introduce TTABC, an open-source TTA Benchmark for CLIP, which standardizes evaluation protocols and integrates more than 20 representative methods. Our controlled empirical analysis focuses on three key areas. First, we determine the driving factors in parameter-based methods, revealing that adaptation gains are primarily driven by test-time evidence and reliable proxies rather than heavy optimization. Second, we explore evidence utilization beyond heavy parameter tuning, showing that competitive and efficient performance can be achieved through cross- or current-sample evidence and lightweight prototype updates. Finally, we demonstrate that there is no silver bullet for TTA: no single adaptation paradigm is universally optimal, and the preferred paradigm depends on the nature of shift. We hope our benchmark and study provide a clearer understanding of the current TTA4CLIP landscape and establish a foundation for further research.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in automating scientific peer review. However, existing approaches often struggle to generate in-depth reviews supported by concrete evidence. We argue that a key limitation is the lack of flexibility to proactively investigate suspicious parts of a paper based on accumulated evidence, as human reviewers do. In this paper, we explore how to enable an LLM-based review agent to perform such proactive investigation. We find that this can be naturally formulated as a Markov Decision Process (MDP), and propose ProReviewer, a scientific peer review agent that proactively reviews a paper guided by a maintained, structured review log. The structured review log serves as a workspace for the agent to track evidence and intermediate findings collected during review. Experiments show that ProReviewer with an 8B backbone, trained by supervised fine-tuning and optimized by reinforcement learning, achieves the highest average score across five quality dimensions, outperforming prompt-based methods with much larger frontier LLMs by up to 39% and the strongest fine-tuned baseline by 16% relatively. It also attains the highest win rates against baselines in human evaluation.

Recent evidence reported by Tully, Longoni, and Appel (2025) suggests that lower artificial intelligence (AI) literacy predicts greater receptivity toward AI. We revisit this claim using the public data from Study 3 of that article, which measures past usage of five AI tool categories on a five-point frequency scale. We first reproduce the negative association between AI literacy and aggregate AI usage using OLS on participant-level averages, binary logit, ordered logit, and multinomial logit specifications. We then show that the aggregate relationship masks substantial heterogeneity by tool type. In our demographic-adjusted primary specification, AI literacy does not significantly predict text AI usage (ordered-logit $β$ = -0.090, p = .387), whereas it remains a strong predictor of non-text AI adoption ($β$ = -0.377, p < .001). The non-text effect is also robust under Tully et al.'s original Study 3 control specification ($β$ = -0.502, p < .001). Binary, ordered-logit, and multinomial specifications suggest that the non-text relationship is primarily an adoption/non-adoption pattern rather than evidence of intensive use: the demographic-adjusted odds ratio of ever having used a non-text AI tool is 0.68. Thus, in the study that measures self-reported past usage rather than stated preferences, the evidence does not support a simple claim that lower AI literacy predicts greater receptivity to AI in general. It points instead to a narrower pattern of broader adoption across lower-penetration, non-text AI tools.

We present an approach to fine-tuning large language models using Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), a reinforcement learning technique. Our experimental results demonstrate that DPO simplifies the training pipeline, improves computational efficiency, and achieves competitive performance. The evaluation using BLEU, ROUGE, and cosine similarity metrics indicates effective learning and convergence, though further investigation is needed to address observed training instability.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for tasks once reserved for trained researchers, including hypothesis generation, specification choice, and drafting conclusions. We argue that the reliability of AI-assisted research depends not only on model capability, but also on how cognitive labour is structured between humans and machines. We study this problem through Human-in-the-Loop Economic Research (HLER), a decision architecture based on pre-commitment, decision sequencing, accountability, and attention allocation. In a pre-specified 2*4 factorial experiment with 280 complete research runs across four datasets, an unconstrained multi-agent baseline produced critical failures in 72% of runs. Using the same underlying model, the same agent decomposition, and identical prompts for the shared reasoning agents, HLER reduced the failure rate to 16% by imposing three architectural commitments: LLMs reason but do not execute data work, data and estimation are handled deterministically, and three human decision gates bind the workflow. Fisher's exact test rejects equality of failure rates at p<0.001. Reliability gains were largest on the least publicly represented dataset, a Qing-dynasty population register, consistent with a task-based production model with Frechet-distributed output quality. An 80-run ablation suggests that deterministic computation and human gates contribute independently, with exploratory evidence of complementarity. We interpret HLER as a research harness rather than an autonomous AI scientist: it sharply reduces failures, makes residual weaknesses more visible, and prevents unreliable claims from being advanced as publication-ready outputs.

Do research topics in artificial intelligence grow gradually, or do they advance through abrupt, detectable jumps? Analyzing 80,814 accepted main-track papers from five premier AI conferences (ACL, CVPR, ICLR, ICML, NeurIPS) spanning 2017 to 2025, we show major AI topics advance through topical phase transitions: remaining marginal for years, then surging across venues within one to three years. Large language models became the dominant cross-venue topic by 2025, diffusion models rose with comparable abruptness, and language-model methods crossed into computer vision via vision-language models, whereas reinforcement learning compounded smoothly, distinguishing genuine phase transitions from ordinary growth. This structure is our primary contribution: a large-scale, cross-venue characterization of how AI research reorganizes. We then ask whether a transition leaves a detectable footprint before it peaks. We define an early-warning signature, four publication-dynamics criteria frozen on 2017-2021 data, and evaluate it out of sample on 2023-2025 transitions, obtaining a precision of 27% and recall of 63% against a 13.5% base rate. Applied to 2025 data, the signature flags reasoning and test-time compute, agentic AI, multimodal LLMs, retrieval-augmented generation, and world models as topics to monitor over 2026-2028. The source code is also publicly available on GitHub at https://github.com/KurbanIntelligenceLab/ai-phase-transitions.

Condition-based Predictive Maintenance (PdM) for truck fleets has gained momentum in recent years. This maintenance strategy aims to minimize unplanned downtimes and reduce costs by monitoring the health status of vehicles and taking proactive action based on their condition. However, the implementation of condition-based PdM systems is challenging due to the large volume of data generated by the trucks, the inherent complexity of detecting failures through sensor data and the difficulties in finding cost-effective trade-offs in the solution's implementation. In this paper, we define and validate a condition-based PdM methodology built on the assumption that the wear-and-tear state of the monitored component can be represented as a monotonically non-decreasing time series. It involves selecting only the most recent observations from the time series and transforming them into a tabular format for classification using machine learning (ML) models designed for tabular data. Our results indicate that the proposed methodology reduces costs on the Scania Component X dataset compared to current state-of-the-art (SOTA) approaches, while also simplifying the modeling process through AutoML.

This paper explores the value of agentic AI tools for cybersecurity purposes. We evaluate the efficacy of a general-purpose GenAI Large Language Model- (GenAI-) based agent when powered by three different Ollama-hosted general-purpose open source models. We assess each agent's performance using precision, recall, false positive count, and a calculated composite score based upon the interplay of the captured metrics, against the baseline performance of an existing, vetted Static Application Security Testing (SAST) tool, Bandit. Our findings refute the notion that a modern open-source GenAI LLM-based agent is currently suitable for the specialized task of SAST scanning under realistic conditions.

We investigate whether commonly available LoRA variants have an advantage over basic LoRA in multilingual instruction tuning. Experiments involving LoRA and four other variants on two datasets across diverse target languages show that there is no significant advantage in using more complex LoRA variants instead of basic LoRA, with respect to balancing cross-lingual transfer and knowledge retention. An analysis of hidden embeddings reveal that layer-wise language representation remains largely similar across LLMs fine-tuned with different LoRA techniques, suggesting that architectural novelty of LoRA techniques may not translate into better cross-lingual adaptation.

Pedestrian Attribute Recognition (PAR) is critical for video surveillance, enabling forensic search and re-identification systems. Extreme class imbalance remains a fundamental obstacle when merging PETA and PA-100K into a 109,000-image composite corpus, where minority attributes have positive sample fractions below 1%. This causes standard BCE optimization to suppress rare traits, a phenomenon we term the majority negative class cheating trap. We present a systematic ablation of Multi-Label Focal Loss hyperparameters (alpha and gamma) on a ResNet-18 backbone. A calibrated configuration (alpha=0.50, gamma=2.0) achieves a Macro F1-score of 62.32%, matching BCE baseline while preserving superior hard-example mining and convergence dynamics. Our approach uses pure loss-function engineering with zero computational overhead for edge deployment. We identify the Sparsity Wall, a hard boundary where positive sample fractions below 0.1% make global loss reweighting ineffective, requiring instance-level intervention.

Language-agent "memory palace" systems anchor each memory to a world coordinate, on the intuition that geometry adds something text cannot. We make that intuition testable and report three results. First, the memory-palace default of folding spatial proximity into a linear blend beside recency and importance does not help and can hurt: in a pre-registered recall experiment the shipped blend fails its own frozen test (mean Delta-Hit@5 -0.0375, Wilcoxon p=0.306), sitting at a position-blind baseline, while a geometry-led weighting wins decisively (+0.3208, p<10^-15): geometry must lead recall when the query regime is spatial. Second, memory recall and visibility must be separated: recall is occlusion-blind by design (you correctly remember the next room behind a wall), while visibility is a perception predicate over stored geometry that the live system never computed. A one-line ray-versus-voxel digital differential analyzer (DDA), re-pointed from the gaze ray the agent already casts, supplies it: text and the live FoV cone both score 0.000 on 849 behind-wall targets while cone-plus-DDA reaches 0.982 (exact McNemar p<10^-6); coordinate recall separately resolves near-duplicate locations a cosine null cannot (1.000 vs 0.533, n=150). Third, the visibility predicate is confirmed live under a git-committed pre-registration (SPMEM-OCC-LIVE-v1: eight scripted worlds, automated oracle scoring, 96 behind-wall targets, false-visible 1.000->0.000, pooled exact McNemar p=2.5x10^-29), a run that surfaced and fixed a real relay anchor defect. We concede that occlusion-needs-geometry is near-tautological; the contribution is the measurement and isolation, separating what spatial memory must store from how it is read. These pilots power a frozen confirmatory study (SPMEM-ZERO-REAL-PREREG-v1); the full human-authored multi-world study with blind raters remains future work.

Hierarchical vision-language-action (Hi-VLA) systems have emerged as a promising paradigm for complex robot manipulation, by using high-level VLM planners to decompose tasks into language subgoals executed by low-level VLA controllers. Despite recent empirical progress, there is a lack of unified design principles for these systems: existing Hi-VLA systems differ in how they choose and connect planners, controllers, mechanisms to switch between the two, and how observations and memory are represented in the planner. In this paper, we present a systematic study of Hi-VLA design for robot manipulation. We unify representative Hi-VLA agents under an options-style control framework and benchmark core design choices across short-horizon, long-horizon, and reasoning-intensive tasks. Our analysis distills practical principles for building Hi-VLA systems, showing how model choices and interface mechanisms jointly shape performance. Applying these principles yields a substantially stronger system than either flat VLA control or a naively designed hierarchy, across experiments both in simulation and on a real ALOHA robot. Overall, our results provide a foundation for building more capable, robust, and principled hierarchical VLA agents. More information and video at jiahenghu.github.io/hi-vla.

Current-status data arise when an event time is observed only through an indicator of whether it occurred before an examination time. This paper studies a nonparametric neural-network sieve maximum likelihood estimator of the conditional cumulative distribution function of the event time. Under Hölder smoothness assumptions, we establish an explicit convergence rate by combining approximation theory for rectified linear unit neural networks with empirical-process arguments. This result provides theoretical support for neural-network estimation and subsequent inference under current-status observation.

This paper aims to synthesize empirical research on AI tools used to support English as a second/foreign language (EL2) learners in Arab University classrooms (AUCs) between Jan 1st 2023 and Aug 31st 2025. We utilized 3 large datasets, namely Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus as the data sources. Using PRISMA-guided searches across these well-known databases, we included only published articles. The search process results in 184 studies, but only 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. Findings unveil that EL2 learners have positive attitudes towards AI for drafting, revision, and practice. Empirical gains were most consistent for surface-level outcomes improvements in higher-order writing quality and speaking proficiency was mixed and often contingent on teacher mediation. The paper concludes by proposing a research agenda and practical guidelines for Arab universities seeking evidence-based AI integration in EL2 instruction. It also recommends scaffolded integration, teacher training, reflective tasks to reduce over-reliance on AI tools.

Spatio-temporal graph neural networks (STGNNs) have become the dominant approach for traffic prediction, yet their computational requirements pose challenges for practical deployment in intelligent transportation systems (ITS). While recent work has proposed efficient alternatives to STGNNs, a fundamental question remains unexplored: are these architectures themselves over-parameterised? We examine this question using the Spatio-Temporal Graph Convolutional Network (STGCN), one of the most widely adopted models in this domain. Through systematic experiments across four diverse traffic datasets, we compare 1-block, 2-block (standard), and 3-block STGCN variants. Our findings reveal that the single-block architecture achieves optimal performance for short-term prediction (10 mins) on three of four datasets, while incurring only marginal degradation ($\leq$1.8% relative error) at longer horizons. Crucially, the 2-block variant incurs 61% higher CPU inference latency and 37% lower throughput relative to 1-block -- substantial overhead for resource-constrained ITS deployment. The 3-block architecture offers no favourable tradeoff, more than doubling computational cost for $<$0.5% relative improvement. These results suggest that the default 2-block STGCN may be over-parameterised for many applications, with implications for both practitioners deploying traffic prediction systems and researchers benchmarking efficiency-focused methods.

As artificial intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly deployed across socially consequential domains, reports of AI-related harms and failures have grown in frequency and diversity. Although existing governance frameworks articulate high-level principles for responsible AI, large-scale empirical resources for tracking and analyzing real-world AI risk incidents remain limited. Existing incident collections are often manually curated, relatively small in scale, and insufficient for continuous, data-driven monitoring and downstream computational analysis. To address this need, we present RiskNet, a large-scale dataset of AI risk incidents constructed from large-scale multilingual news sources. RiskNet applies a structured pipeline for AI risk news identification, event-level report screening, incident alignment, and multi-dimensional incident classification. The resulting resource organizes dispersed news reports into incident-centered records and provides benchmark datasets for event classification, incident alignment, and incident-level risk labeling. In its current release, RiskNet covers hundreds of millions of source records and yields a large-scale collection of AI risk-related reports, including aligned incident clusters and annotated benchmark subsets. The dataset is also accessible through an online platform for browsing and exploration. We describe the data sources, processing workflow, taxonomy design, and technical validation of the resource. RiskNet is intended to support downstream research on AI safety, governance, risk analysis, and benchmarking, as well as longitudinal and cross-source analyses of AI-related harms. By providing a structured and reusable empirical resource, RiskNet helps bridge the gap between high-level governance principles and the documented realities of AI risk incidents.

LiDAR-based 3D Multi-Object Tracking (MOT) typically relies solely on geometric information, which is often insufficient to distinguish between targets during prolonged occlusions or in crowded human-populated environments. While integrating RGB-based Re-Identification (ReID) offers a theoretical solution for preserving identity context, existing approaches often rely on computationally expensive parallel detectors that hinder real-time robot responsiveness. This work presents a systematic study of image-based ReID in online 3D MOT, utilizing a lightweight projection-based framework to decouple geometric and appearance modeling for mobile robots. A comprehensive analysis of feature extraction architectures is conducted, employing lightweight CNNs and Vision Transformers, and evaluating various multi-modal data association strategies to balance computational latency with robust tracking. Experiments on the Pedestrian class of the KITTI dataset reveal that naive linear fusion, of appearance and motion costs, degrades performance due to visual noise. Conversely, a cascaded matching strategy successfully recovers occluded tracks without compromising overall precision, effectively preventing identity switches to maintain human-robot interaction continuity. We show that lightweight architectures can offer an optimal trade-off between the low latency required for safe navigation and the discriminative power needed for social awareness.

Real-time autonomous driving commonly relies on sampling-based trajectory planners that link candidate trajectories to target waypoints along the road centerline. The placement of these waypoints directly impacts both the existence and quality of feasible trajectories. Yet, its effect on planner performance remains largely unexplored. In this paper, we treat waypoint placement as a first-class design variable. We hold the trajectory primitive and candidate budget fixed, and systematically sweep three placement strategies (uniform spacing, an augmented Ramer-Douglas-Peucker variant (RDP*), and a novel curvature-conditioned allocation) across 449 configurations and five CommonRoad maps of increasing geometric complexity. Our results show that the nominal inter-waypoint spacing $d_s$ is the primary performance driver, with large differences in planner reliability attributed to placement alone. Uniform sampling at a well-tuned spacing matches or surpasses both RDP* and the centered curvature variant. The curvature variant offers a small but consistent advantage on geometrically complex roads under reliability-first and balanced weightings, while RDP* never outperforms uniform sampling. These findings suggest that $d_s$ should be treated as the dominant tuning parameter, with geometry-aware strategies reserved for curvature-rich corridors where feasibility is the limiting factor.

Interpretable linguistic features offer a promising approach for explaining why a given text appears machine-generated, particularly for non-expert users. However, existing findings on which features reliably indicate LLM-generated text remain fragmented across feature sets, models, and text domains. To address this gap, we conduct a large-scale empirical study assessing the robustness of linguistic signals for characterizing AI-generated text. Our analysis covers 284 interpretable linguistic features across outputs from 27 LLMs and ten text domains under cross-model and cross-domain generalization settings. We show that classifiers based solely on linguistic features can reliably distinguish AI-generated from human-written text. However, many previously proposed indicators prove strongly context-dependent, with the exception of measures of lexical richness, which remain robust signals across model families and text domains. These results demonstrate which linguistic signals generalize across contexts and provide a foundation for more reliable, interpretable analyses of AI-generated language.

Medical question answering is a high-stakes setting where factual errors can have serious consequences. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is widely viewed as a promising solution, and prior work has reported substantial gains for large medical QA models. We revisit this assumption across a broad range of open-weight instruction-tuned models spanning 7B to 72B parameters. Across five models, ten biomedical QA datasets, four retrieval methods, and four retrieval corpora, we find that retrieval yields only small and inconsistent improvements over a no-retrieval baseline, typically within 1-2 points. In contrast, the choice of backbone model has a much larger effect than the choice of retriever or corpus, and expert and layman retrieval sources perform similarly in most settings. These results suggest that the main bottleneck is not retrieval quality alone, but the model's limited ability to use retrieved evidence effectively.

Latent diffusion models leverage visual tokenizers to compress images into latent spaces for efficient generative modeling. However, better reconstruction quality of a tokenizer does not necessarily translate into better generation quality, suggesting that latent representations should be evaluated not only by fidelity but also by their diffusability. Recent studies have proposed diverse explanations for diffusion-friendly latent spaces, including semantic separability, affine equivariance, distribution uniformity, spatial structure, spectral smoothness, and manifold continuity. Yet these properties are often validated on a limited set of tokenizers, leaving it unclear which factors are most predictive of downstream generation quality and whether such conclusions hold beyond the specific settings in which they are introduced. In this work, we conduct a systematic study of latent diffusability by training a large collection of tokenizers with diverse regularization strategies, architectures, and latent configurations, and evaluating them with multiple downstream diffusion backbones. Our analysis identifies several latent properties that consistently correlate with generation quality and exhibit strong generalization across experimental settings. Beyond existing metrics, we introduce Velocity Irreducible Variance (VIV), a measure of velocity ambiguity induced by trajectory crossings. Extensive experiments show that VIV is one of the most stable predictors of generation quality.

Introductory programming (CS1) courses often struggle to support students' understanding of program execution. While visualizations can make execution processes explicit, their effectiveness depends on design and context, and empirical evidence for AI-generated visualizations remains limited. We propose Generated Animated Traces (GATs), AI-generated, analogy-based, narrated animations that coordinate source code, execution state, and conceptual analogies. We conduct a study at two institutions in CS1 courses (Python, N=961; Java N=151) comparing GATs to textual explanations. We measure immediate learning performance and experience, end-of-course engagement and exam performance. Results show that GATs can yield selective benefits for immediate learning, but benefits are context-dependent and short-term. We observe that GATs' influence on performance is moderated by learner engagement profiles. This finding underscores the importance of personalized approaches.

In nature, events that affect some individuals or groups but not others constitute an implicit intervention and are known as natural experiments. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic was an intervention by the coronavirus on the sub-population infected with COVID. We ask, do natural experiments occur in existing real-world datasets? If yes, how should we treat them? To detect natural experiments in data, we use causal discovery to recover the underlying causal graph and perform feature selection based on causal links. If downstream performance improves by treating the data as interventional rather than observational, we argue that this suggests the dataset contains natural experiments. We first validate this hypothesis by simulating datasets with and without natural experiments using synthetic graphs. We then perform a systematic empirical evaluation on a large suite of real-world datasets. Our results indicate that real-world datasets do contain natural experiments and we can take advantage of those natural experiments to improve model performance using causal inference. Our work represents the initial foray into this area, offering a preliminary exploration within a limited scope.

This paper studies the problem of inverting the DDIM image generation process to recover latent variables, particularly the initial noise map, from a generated image. Existing methods often struggle with accuracy in this task. We propose a novel hybrid approach that combines direct inversion via gradient descent for the first step, followed by a fixed-point method for subsequent steps. Empirical evaluations across three datasets demonstrate that our method significantly improves the prediction of initial latent variables while achieving superior reconstruction accuracy. Additionally, we introduce a new evaluation, called the self-interpolation test, which assesses the quality of images generated from interpolated points between the true and predicted latent maps, offering deeper insights into performance. Our results reveal that while existing methods perform reasonably well in reconstruction, they consistently fail to accurately predict the initial latent variables, resulting in poor performance on the self-interpolation test. In contrast, our method outperforms all others across all metrics, providing valuable insights into diffusion models and enhancing their applications in image generation and editing.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for molecular tasks, but it remains unclear which molecular representation to use. We present a systematic benchmark evaluating LLM molecular competence across nine representations and eight chemical tasks. We benchmark 16 LLMs across five model families, including reasoning and non-reasoning variants, chemistry-specialized LLMs, and closed frontier models. Performance is strongly representation-dependent and no single representation wins across tasks, though CML is the best, followed by MolJSON, InChI, and then canonical SMILES. Explicit structured text representations (CML and MolJSON) dominate structural tasks; IUPAC dominates semantic tasks, winning molecule retrieval for all 16 LLMs; and SMILES variants are rarely optimal despite their prevalence in pretraining. Chemistry-specialized models perform well with SMILES at the cost of large degradations with structured text representations, suggesting SMILES-only evaluation rewards specialization that does not generalize. Using LLM-as-a-judge, we find that IUPAC produces the highest fraction of correct molecule generations. A mechanistic study via tokenization audits, linear probes and attention shows that representations are encoded differently inside the model; for example, structured representations require higher attention across the molecular span. Our results argue against representation-invariant evaluation and motivate task-aware representation routing for LLM-based chemistry.

Transformers have become the standard solution for various AI tasks, with the query, key, and value (QKV) attention formulation playing a central role. However, the individual contribution of these three projections and the impact of omitting some remain poorly understood. We systematically evaluate three projection sharing constraints: a) Q-K=V (shared key-value), b) Q=K-V (shared query-key), and c) Q=K=V (single projection). The last two variants produce symmetric attention maps; to address this, we also explore asymmetric attention via 2D positional encodings. Through experiments spanning synthetic tasks, vision (MNIST, CIFAR, TinyImageNet, anomaly), and language modeling (300M and 1.2B parameter models on 10B tokens), we discovered that our transformers perform on par or occasionally better than the QKV transformer. In language modeling, Q-K=V projection sharing achieves 50% KV cache reduction with only 3.1% perplexity degradation. Crucially, projection sharing is complementary to head sharing (GQA/MQA): combining Q-K=V with GQA-4 yields 87.5% cache reduction, while Q-K=V + MQA achieves 96.9%, enabling practical on-device inference. We show that Q-K=V preserves quality because keys and values can occupy similar representational spaces and attention operates in a low-rank regime, whereas Q=K-V breaks attention directionality. Our results systematically characterize projection sharing as an underexplored instance of weight tying in attention, with direct, quantifiable inference memory benefits, particularly valuable for edge deployment. The code is publicly available at https://github.com/Brainchip-Inc/Do-Transformers-Need-3-Projections

Tool-augmented multimodal agents show strong benchmark gains, often taken as evidence that agents have learned to use tools. We argue that this interpretation can be premature: a tool-call trace alone does not show whether the tool supplied answer-critical information. We study two representative ``thinking with images'' agents, Thyme and DeepEyesV2, across real-world understanding, OCR, chart understanding, and mathematical reasoning. Each agent is compared with its Tool-Free counterpart and with a Pure-Text Reasoner trained from the same source pool without tool-calling trajectories. Tool access yields little consistent aggregate improvement, does not reliably reduce generated-token cost, and leaves only a small tool-only solved set: 93% of DeepEyesV2's tool-solved problems and 96% of Thyme's are also solved by at least one non-tool setting. Mechanism ablations further show that the full tool-use loop does not consistently outperform either the tool-call format or the returned execution result alone. In the settings we study, the analyzed agents appear to learn tool-calling patterns more reliably than tool-contributed capabilities, suggesting that evaluation should distinguish tool availability from whether tools actually expand what agents can solve.

Biopharmaceutical manufacturing organizations operate under regulatory frameworks such as FDA guidance, EU Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP), and the EU AI Act, which can restrict the use of cloud-based artificial intelligence systems. Locally deployed large language models (LLMs) offer a privacy-preserving alternative, but their suitability for pharmaceutical manufacturing tasks remains underexplored. This study evaluates four open-source LLMs (Qwen 2.5 Coder 7B, Llama 3.1 8B, Mistral 7B, and Meditron 7B) deployed locally via Ollama for natural-language-to-SQL generation over a pharmaceutical manufacturing database. A FastAPI-based evaluation platform, PharmaBatchDB AI, was developed using a synthetic Microsoft SQL Server database containing approximately 63,000 records across Batch, Manufacturing Execution System (MES), and Clean-In-Place (CIP) modules. Models were benchmarked on 60 domain-specific natural-language questions using metrics including SQL extraction rate, SQL compliance, factual consistency, ROUGE-L, hallucination rate, throughput, and latency. Qwen 2.5 Coder 7B, Llama 3.1 8B, and Mistral 7B generated SQL for all evaluation tasks, while Meditron 7B failed on nearly all tasks due to context-window limitations and poor SQL generation capability. Llama 3.1 8B achieved the highest SQL compliance, whereas Qwen 2.5 Coder 7B achieved the strongest overall text similarity and factual consistency. Performance differences between the two leading models were not statistically significant. The results show that code-tuned general-purpose LLMs outperform a domain-specific biomedical model on structured query generation for pharmaceutical manufacturing data. Although fully local, GxP-aligned NLQ systems are feasible on consumer hardware, current performance levels still require human oversight and downstream validation for regulated use.

Research is advancing faster than ever with artificial intelligence (AI); and so are the corresponding research papers. The exploding volume of AI-generated papers have put a strain to peer review, leading to the usage of AI-generated review, potentially wide yet sneaky. However, relevant ethical concerns about confidentiality, quality, and fairness are raised and no consensus has been reached in the broad research community. We expect the debate to continue for a while, but in the meantime, we ask an alternative, practical question: \textit{can AI review improve paper drafting?} We study 20 computer architecture papers, with varying levels of submission lineage, to expose how well AI review aligns with human review, quantified by a set of metrics we define. To conduct the case study, we build a web UI-integrated tool, \emph{AI-Paper-Review}, that generates structured AI review of a draft paper, available at https://github.com/unarylab/ai-paper-review. This tool selects several AI reviewers from a diverse pool of AI reviewers and clusters and ranks their comments based on commonality and importance of review comments. It also allows to align AI comments with human comments to facilitate metric-based validation. The case study shows that AI review can cover a significant fraction of human-raised issues, but also raises issues missing in human review. This paper is not intended to encourage using AI for peer review at the current stage, but to study that (1) how AI review can improve paper drafting and (2) the potential and limitation of AI-based peer review. The release of the tool and the case study data is intended to instigate future research on this topic. Misuse for peer review would violate the ethics policies from major academic venues.

Dynamic scene reconstruction via 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) has emerged as a compelling approach for representing evolving environments, yet understanding trade-offs between methodologies remains crucial. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of dynamic 3DGS methods, categorizing them into two paradigms: structure-guided methods employing auxiliary representations (deformation fields, canonical spaces, grids) to model temporal changes, and gaussian-centric methods encoding dynamics directly into primitives via continuous functions or 4D representations. We evaluate representative methods from both paradigms on the D-NeRF benchmark. Our findings reveal that structure-guided methods achieve superior reconstruction fidelity and compact model sizes, while gaussian-centric approaches demonstrate significantly higher rendering speeds enabling real-time performance, though with greater quality variability and potentially substantial storage overhead. This analysis highlights a fundamental trade-off between reconstruction quality/compactness versus rendering speed, providing insights to guide future research and application development in dynamic scene reconstruction.

Investigating the degree to which large language models (LLMs) affect teaching and learning in universities can help identify strategies for integrating LLMs in a way that supports, rather than undermines, student learning outcomes. This study examined how varying levels of LLM assistance affect writing performance, engagement, and perceived authorship. We report a pilot study in which 24 college students were randomly assigned to write a short essay with no LLM access, limited access (<=3 prompts, responses capped at 100 words), or unlimited access. Overall essay quality was statistically indistinguishable across groups. Yet writing behavior and perceived authorship diverged sharply: students with limited access reported higher ownership (62.5% would submit the essay as independent work, vs. 25% in the unlimited group), stronger organizational gains, and more strategic, revision-focused prompting. The unlimited group spent more time writing, produced essays more similar to LLM output, and reported reduced creative expression. Our findings suggest that constraining, rather than banning, LLM access may preserve authorship confidence while retaining the scaffolding benefits of AI assistance.

Much research has been carried out on large language models (LLMs) and LLM-powered agentic workflows. However, many works within the field state emergence of, ascribe to, or assume, generalised anthropomorphic attributes to them (e.g., morality or understanding of natural language). Our goal is not to argue in favour or against the existence of these attributes, but to point out that these conclusions could be incorrect. For this we build and train a simple neural network on the videogame Age of Empires II, and note that any entity in a sufficiently-powerful substrate, such as LEGO or the Greater Boston Area, could also present such attributes. Hence, the purported anthropomorphic attributes of LLMs are empirically non-unique: although some properties (e.g., responses to prompts) could remain invariant, others, such as the interpretation of their perceived behaviour, might change with the substrate. Thus, any empirically-grounded discussion on these attributes requires explicit measurement criteria; otherwise the interpretation is left to the representation. We then show that assuming that these attributes exist or not in a system, independent of the substrate and in a generalised way, leads to either circular or uninformative conclusions. This is regardless of the experimenter's viewpoint on the subject, or whether the outcome shows existence or non-existence. Finally we propose a 'null' assumption, where one assumes LLM non-uniqueness instead of assuming anthropomorphic attributes to set up an experiment, along with examples of it. We also discuss potential objections to our work, briefly survey the field, and prove that Age of Empires II is functionally- and Turing-complete.

We investigate how teacher-student capacity relationships modulate knowledge distillation (KD) effectiveness in ResNet-based image classification on CIFAR-10. Across four teacher-student pairs (R50->R18, R34->R18, R50->R34, and R101->R34) we compare Logit-KD and Feature-KD under a strict evaluation protocol: hyperparameters and checkpoints are selected on a held-out validation split, selected configurations are re-run with five seeds, and the test set is used exclusively for final reporting. Beyond accuracy, we measure distillation fidelity directly via teacher-student agreement and KL divergence. We report four findings. First, the student-capacity pattern survives the corrected protocol at reduced magnitude: the only statistically significant gains occur for R34 students under Feature-KD (+0.19 and +0.21 pp, p<0.05), in two pairs whose teachers differ two-fold in parameters but not in accuracy, localizing the moderating variable on the student side, while no KD gain for R18 students is distinguishable from zero. Second, Feature-KD matches or outperforms Logit-KD in all four pairs, and its students land closer to the teacher's output distribution (KL at T=1) than Logit-KD students despite never observing teacher logits. Third, top-1 teacher-student agreement is flat across all pairs, decoupling fidelity from accuracy gains. Fourth, architecture dominates KD: correcting the ResNet stem for 32x32 inputs is worth +5.5 to +7.2 pp, more than 25x the largest KD gain. We also retract an attribution made in v1: a controlled re-run shows the reported gradient-clipping bug had no measurable effect, and v1's larger gains are explained by test-set selection. Code and results: github.com/umutonuryasar/kd-capacity-gap (tag v2.0).

Sentence-embedding models for semantic search are overwhelmingly developed and evaluated on English corpora. When applied to clinical retrieval in other languages -- particularly retrieval of ICD-10-CM / CIE-10 codes -- recall degrades in ways often masked by aggregate benchmarks. We study whether large generative language models can serve as data factories to close this gap. We build a two-stage retriever (bi-encoder followed by cross-encoder reranker), fine-tuned from a Spanish biomedical encoder (PlanTL-GOB-ES/bsc-bio-ehr-es) on Gemini-generated synthetic data covering English, Spanish, Catalan, Italian, Portuguese and French, and evaluate against BioBERT-ST and the un-tuned Spanish encoder. The bi-encoder alone matches BioBERT-ST on MRR (0.876 vs. 0.866) and overtakes it on R@3 (0.650 vs. 0.626) and R@5 (0.804 vs. 0.790) without English biomedical pretraining. Adding a cross-encoder reranker lifts aggregate R@5 to 0.822 and dominates on four of five languages (+0.017 Spanish, +0.033 Catalan, +0.018 French, +0.037 Portuguese) at the cost of a small English regression. The trade-off is clinically acceptable: Portuguese reaches R@5 = 0.829 vs. BioBERT-ST's 0.714. Contributions: an open recipe for building domain-specific medical retrievers from LLM-generated data; quantification of the learning gain (MRR 0.755 to 0.876, +15.9% with ~19,500 synthetic pairs); and a characterisation of where gains concentrate by language and rank.

Large language models (LLMs) can autonomously conduct multi-stage cyber attacks, but the consistency of their offensive behavior under repeated trials remains unstudied. This work presents the first large-scale empirical measurement of LLM attack consistency: 400 autonomous penetration testing runs (4 models, 100 each) against an identical honeypot hosting OWASP Juice Shop and two additional vulnerable services, holding prompt, orchestrator, and target constant. No model emitted a content refusal that survived the orchestrator's one-shot authorization re-prompt at iterations 0-1. Claude Sonnet 4's API calls did encounter upstream service unavailability - 91 of 1,135 calls returned HTTP 529 overloaded_error during a documented Anthropic capacity event, truncating 39 of 100 Claude runs. An earlier draft catalogued these as safety refusals; on full-log audit they are upstream API failures, not model-level refusals. Despite this, Claude achieved full exploitation in 61 of 100 runs; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite in 85; GPT-4o-mini in 56 while deploying 98 unique attack strategies; qwen2.5-coder:14b in 25. Failure modes are model-distinctive: Claude through API truncation (39 runs), qwen through premature completion (52), GPT-4o-mini through iteration-budget exhaustion (23). Cross-service credential reuse appeared only in configurations retaining the most conversation history (qwen 57%, GPT-4o-mini 49%, cloud models 0% on 5-exchange windows). Cross-model exploitation rate differences are statistically significant (p < 0.001) with large effect sizes; qwen vs. Gemini SQL injection rates differ at Cohen's h = 1.12. First-exploit timing fell within a 15-30 second wall-clock range. To our knowledge, this is the first study to measure autonomous LLM attack behavior at N=100 per model across a multi-service target.