Learners

A learner probes at most $k$ of $n$ arms each round, receives the maximum of their rewards in $[0,1]$, and competes with the best fixed arm. When does the probing advantage pay for learning? We determine two minimax laws. Under independent stochastic rewards with winner feedback (the maximum and a winning label), or on arbitrary fixed sequences given a single signed contrast between block maxima, the minimax regret has order $Φ_{n,k}(T)=\min\{\frac{n-k}{n}T,\frac{n-k}{k}\}$, $2\le k<n$. Under winner feedback, both arbitrary joint i.i.d. rewards and fixed sequences have minimax regret of order $R_{n,k}(T)=\frac{n-k}{n}\min\{T,\frac{n+T}{k},\sqrt{\frac{nT}{k}}\}$. Both laws have universal constants and anytime upper bounds. The first reduces regret to a pure coverage cost: same-round contrasts absorb the stability cost, and independence permits exact resampling whose gains fund sample advancement. The second adds a learning cost that becomes comparable to coverage at horizon $n$; beyond $nk$, numerical maxima improve over labels alone. The lower bound allows every adaptive action size.

We continue the study of relatively smart learning, introduced by Dughmi and Pour (2026), which asks a supervised learner to compete, marginal by marginal, with every distribution-fixed error guarantee soundly certifiable from unlabeled data. They showed that the One-Inclusion Graph (OIG) learner is relatively smart with a quadratic sample-complexity blowup, and that no relatively smart learner can do better, leaving open whether ERM or another natural or tractable learner achieves comparable guarantees. They also left open whether the blowup can be restricted to unlabeled data. Our firs results shows that ERM---and in fact any proper consistent learner---is relatively smart for binary classification in the distribution-free setting. We show that a small certifiable error with $m$ samples implies a similarly small error on the uniform distribution over a random sample of size $O(m^2)$, yielding a cover of size at most $2^{m+1}$ on that sample. This suffices to control the error of proper consistent learners with $O(m^2)$ samples. We then show that semi-supervised relatively smart learning is information-theoretically possible with a quadratic blowup only in unlabeled sample complexity and no blowup in labeled sample complexity. The learner uses a natural generalization of OIG to a leave-most-out transductive problem, where labels of part of a finite pool are revealed and the remaining labels are predicted. Finally, this label efficiency comes at a cost in simplicity and tractability. If the hypothesis class is accessed only through an agnostic ERM oracle, any semi-supervised relatively smart learner with substantially sub-quadratic labeled-sample blowup requires super-polynomially many oracle calls. This holds even when the marginal is given explicitly, and thus also yields an intractability result for distribution-fixed learning that may be of independent interest.

We characterize the sharp structure-agnostic minimax risk for coefficient estimation in the partial linear model when the outcome and treatment nuisances are learned by two distinct black-box learners, which resolves the open problem in double machine learning posed by Gu (2025). For each nuisance $q\in\{μ,π\}$, we characterize the available learner by an approximation-error budget $a_q$ and a stochastic-error budget $s_q$, with the latter controlled through localized Rademacher complexity. Writing $\mathcal E_n$ for the minimax mean-squared error, we show that $$\mathcal E_n\asymp1\wedge\left\{\frac1n+\left(a_μa_π+\min\left\{a_πs_μ+s_π^2,\,a_μs_π+s_μ^2\right\}\right)^2\right\}.$$ The main new ingredient is a novel lower bound for the general two-learner problem. Our proof constructs four finite-mixture testing experiments using orthogonal code functions. Across these experiments, the hidden perturbations are placed outside both learner classes, outside only the treatment learner class, outside only the outcome learner class, or inside both learner classes. These four configurations capture, respectively, the interaction between the two approximation errors, the two asymmetric interactions between one learner's approximation error and the other learner's learning error, and the joint estimation difficulty of learning both nuisances. Combining the four resulting lower bounds yields the displayed rate, which matches the latest upper bound in Gu (2026). Our result shows that standard double machine learning can overstate the intrinsic difficulty of target estimation and provides a target-specific principle for learner selection: approximation error and stochastic complexity must be jointly balanced across the two nuisance learners rather than optimized separately.

The hype around generative AI seems to promise unprecedented productivity (and learning) gains. However, these technologies' increasing agentic features seem to push learners towards individualism (or individual isolation), over-reliance, and dependence on them. Human-centered design approaches (e.g., value-sensitive design) assume that, by unearthing human needs, preferences, and values, technology researchers/designers may avoid such dangers, which are driven by wider systemic factors like economic incentives or inherent human limitations (e.g., our tendency to seek, in the moment, the easiest path of action). Yet, so far these efforts seem insufficient to guide our design of educational technology that avoids the aforementioned dependency and isolation dangers, while finding widespread adoption. This paper presents an alternative, more emancipatory vision for future educational AI technology, oriented towards learner flourishing while considering the wider complex systems they inhabit, including tentative design principles and an overall design methodology. Yet, many open questions remain before this vision can be realized.

Artificial intelligence is changing the form of applied English materials from fixed paper sequences to adaptive learning systems that can diagnose learners, recommend tasks, and provide formative feedback. This paper studies the structure and application of a new practical English textbook driven by artificial intelligence. A five-layer architecture is proposed: knowledge mapping, learner profiling, task generation, feedback orchestration, and teacher-side governance. A prototype was tested on 186 non-English-major undergraduates for eight weeks of teaching. Compared with a static digital textbook, the proposed system increased the unit completion accuracy from 72.4% to 84.9%, raised the average score for speaking tasks by 10.8 points, and reduced the teacher's correction time by 31.6%. Therefore, an AI-driven textbook can maintain the stability of the curriculum while providing personalised learning paths, rich practice materials and traceable classroom data.

Clinical prediction can saturate for two different reasons: a fitted learner may fail to extract available information, or the recorded variables may impose a population frontier. We separate these quantities through the \emph{learner gap} and the \emph{measurement-channel ceiling}. Optimal balanced accuracy is characterized by total-variation separation, yielding architecture invariance, a sharp partial-identification result under replacement contamination, a cross-fitted ceiling estimator, and exact conditions for multimodal decision improvement. We add two finite-sample diagnostics, namely a label-permutation optimism floor and an underfit curve, and validate the audit on three real cohorts: UCI readmission ($n=99{,}343$), BRFSS diabetes ($n=253{,}680$), and NHANES HbA1c ($n=10{,}219$). Well-tuned gradient boosting nearly reaches the estimated frontier in UCI and BRFSS, whereas deliberately or practically deficient learners retain large gaps. NHANES yields a null difference between questionnaire and measured marginal frontiers but a significant joint complementarity gain, refining the simplistic claim that an objective modality must dominate. Across all cohorts, modest AUROC gains coexist with substantially larger Bayes decision-flip rates, and several architectures estimate similar frontiers while their achieved balanced accuracy differs sharply. A PRISMA-guided synthesis of 104 clinical tasks then shows that the same channel-level regularities recur across more than 18 disease categories: a broad but non-universal structured-clinical region, diminishing same-channel gains across model families, and higher performance when measurement channels change. The framework converts saturation from an empirical observation into an auditable decision: improve the learner when headroom remains; improve measurement when it does not.

Agents that learn from experience improve at optimization modeling by storing solved trajectories and reusing them as skills. A wrong trajectory that enters the library can be retrieved again and again, and on a stream of new problems there is no ground-truth answer to decide with. Existing learners admit trajectories by matching known optima or labels, and label-free substitutes such as execution success or agreement at one instance can admit wrong models. We introduce ADMITOR, a label-free admission gate. It generates models from three model families, runs each on the stated problem and on instances with resampled parameters, keeps the largest group of models whose optimal values agree on every instance across families, and applies a threshold fitted on solver-verified problems to accept, abstain, or escalate, with a finite-sample bound on the false-discovery rate among accepted values. Inside a state-of-the-art skill learner, ADMITOR raises candidate-level admission precision to 0.927, against 0.871 for majority vote over the host's own samples and 0.726 for execution success, and its library, the smallest of the four, reaches the highest macro accuracy over five public benchmarks, 58.4 against 54.8 for majority vote. An ablation on the same records shows that the gain comes from the accepted value being external to the learner and unanimous across families; on this stream, resampling never changed an accepted value and only reduced coverage. The false-discovery bound holds on the calibration set but not on the benchmark stream: an audit of every false certificate traces most of them to benchmark texts that omit or round the numbers needed to reproduce the labeled answer, and a label-free check of the extracted numbers against the text flags most of these cases.

User modeling is a critical task in a variety of personalized systems. Recognizing their effectiveness in learning from graph-structured data, Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), particularly Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs), are increasingly employed for user modeling. However, existing approaches typically treat different relation types in a graph as homogeneous, limiting their ability to capture richer semantics and construct more informative user models. While multi-relational GNNs (MR-GNNs) have been adopted for representation learning and recommendation, their application for user modeling remains unexplored. Moreover, existing GNN-based user modeling approaches ignore the user interaction sequence. To address these research gaps, in this work we propose MR-ConceptGCN, a novel fully unsupervised approach focused on concept-based sequential learner modeling using multi-relational GCNs (MR-GCNs). MR-ConceptGCN effecively combines Personal Knowledge Graphs (PKGs), MR-GCNs, and the pre-trained language model SBERT to obtain enhanced relation- and semantic-aware representations of the PKG items. The enriched embeddings of the knowledge concepts that a learner did not understand when interacting with learning materials in CourseMapper are then used to construct a sequential learner model that combines long-term and short-term learner interactions. We report the results of an online user study (n = 31), demonstrating the benefits of MR-ConceptGCN in terms of several important user-centric aspects including accuracy, usefulness, diversity, and satisfaction with an educational recommender system.

This full paper in the research-to-practice track presents methods for assessing student teams in tabletop exercises (TTXs). TTXs enable learner teams to prepare for workplace tasks and practice crisis responses, such as resolving cybersecurity incidents. While assessment is essential for determining how well teams achieve learning objectives, the complex, open-ended nature of TTXs often leads to delayed or incomplete feedback. TTX learning platforms can record teams' actions and communication; yet, leveraging these data to assess performance is underexplored. To address this gap, we compared two post-TTX team assessment methods -- clustering and large language models (LLMs) -- using an original dataset from 81 participants across two countries. We evaluated these methods against instructor-assigned scores based on standardized rubrics. Clustering grouped teams that approached TTX tasks similarly, enabling instructors to deliver faster, targeted feedback to teams within a cluster. This method was valid and reliable, with low computational requirements. LLMs used the standardized rubrics to assess teams' communication. While GPT-4o frequently disagreed with instructor scores, GPT-5.2 demonstrated considerably lower error. The researched methods have been integrated into INJECT, an open-source TTX learning platform, to support scalability and teaching practice. To encourage community adoption, we publicly share all datasets, software tools, and a full-fledged TTX scenario.

Algorithmic collusion among pricing algorithms has raised concerns about sustained supra-competitive prices and their implications for social welfare. Existing work has largely focused on the probability that reinforcement-learning algorithms converge to cooperative strategies, typically under the assumption that exploration vanishes over time. Motivated by the observation that algorithms deployed in practice are likely to continue exploring in order to remain adaptive to changing environments, we study learning dynamics under constant exploration. In this setting, the relevant question is no longer whether an algorithm converges to a particular strategy profile, but rather what fraction of time the algorithms spend playing cooperative strategies. Even in the benchmark case of the repeated Prisoner's Dilemma with one-period memory, this yields high-dimensional stochastic learning dynamics, for which a complete analytic treatment is intractable. We show that cooperative strategies can be dominant in this time-averaged sense and derive a boundary predicting when such dominance arises, based on the expected dynamics of the Q-learning process. Extensive simulations show that this boundary is a strong predictor for non-defection-dominated behaviour under epsilon-greedy Q-learning.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have demonstrated remarkable abilities when analyzing images, yet translating these capabilities to few-shot image classification remains challenging. To bridge this gap, we present DeCoDe, a simple yet effective technique that enables off-the-shelf MLLMs to act as strong few-shot classifiers without any additional training. Our approach builds on the idea of few-shot classification as a set of pairwise image comparisons, decomposing the task into a set of binary decisions. Given a query image and a support image from a candidate class, the MLLM is prompted to decide whether the two images depict the same class. The logit corresponding to an affirmative response is then used as a similarity score to assign the query image to the most likely class. While this already yields good results, we show that providing additional high-level information, such as the data domain, to the model further improves performance. Our evaluation provides an extensive analysis of various inference variants on a suite of twelve datasets, six established and six newly curated few-shot benchmarks spanning across diverse domains. The results show that the proposed simple decomposition technique can turn off-the-shelf MLLMs into powerful few-shot learners, significantly outperforming current state-of-the-art few-shot methods on both standard and novel domains. Code is available at https://github.com/yunhanwang1105/DeCoDe.

Predicting biomolecular properties from limited labeled data is a central bottleneck in protein engineering and small-molecule design. As strong pretrained encoders now supply rich fixed-length representations, the difficulty has shifted from representation learning to building a data-efficient predictor for the few-shot regime. Tabular foundation models such as TabPFN and TabICL are unlikely candidates for this role: they are in-context learners pretrained on synthetic tables drawn from random causal graphs, a generative prior with no obvious correspondence to the processes that produce protein sequences or molecular graphs. That this tabular, causal inductive bias should transfer to biomolecular data at all is counter-intuitive, yet we find it does. Treating each method as a predictor-representation pair, we evaluate across two domains. We find that on protein fitness regression tasks these in-context learning models coupled with ESM Cambrian representations achieve or exceed state-of-the-art results on ProteinGym, and outperform task-specific supervised regressors on a diverse esterase catalytic activity dataset. For small-molecule classification with ECFP/RDKit descriptors, no single predictor-representation pairing dominates across TDC ADMET, MoleculeNet, FS-Mol, and DrugOOD, but they are competitive with the existing task-specific state-of-the-art. Crucially, on both protein and small-molecule few-shot tasks, these predictor-representation pairs offer strong performance. We conclude that tabular foundation models can be strong biomolecular predictors, but only when coupled with expressive representations.

Dyslexic learners increasingly use artificial intelligence (AI) tools to support reading, writing, organisation, and study-related tasks. However, their lived experiences with these tools remain largely underexamined. This paper proposes DysLexLens, a low-resource LLM framework, designed to analyse dyslexic learners experience with AI through online forum discussions. DysLexLens is designed as an end-to-end, evidence-traceable architecture which transforms noisy social media posts into a dictionary-driven corpora, provides knowledge-graph (KG)-based question reasoning, generates verifiable query responses, and enables response evaluation through quantitative and human-grounded assessment. DysLexLens has four key features. First, it employs a dictionary-driven filtering method to construct a more focused Reddit corpus on dyslexia and AI, filtering out noisy and weakly related posts to improve the relevance of data collected from low-resource forum contexts. Second, it integrates LLM-assisted semantic analysis with KG-based query reasoning to uncover meaningful patterns. Third, it has quantitative evaluation metrics (RAGAS and Query Robustness) to measure LLM-generated response performance. Fourth, it provides structured qualitative validation guidelines for assessing response quality, with a specific focus on hallucination and evidence alignment. We demonstrate the effectiveness of DysLexLens using dyslexia-related Reddit forum data and 30 questions. The results show its potential generalisability to other low-resource forum data contexts. DysLexLens, sample data, questions and evaluation results are available at Github to support reproducibility.

Modern image classifiers widely adopt global average pooling (GAP) followed by a linear classification head. This linearity ensures that the image-level logits equal the average of logits obtained by applying the classification head pointwise to the feature grid prior to GAP. Consequently, standard classifiers may inherently retain spatial class evidence that remains recoverable even when the image-level prediction is incorrect. This structure naturally suggests a multiple-instance learning (MIL) interpretation, where an image is viewed as a bag of spatial instances. Within this formulation, we demonstrate that standard classifiers trained with a single label per image can still learn the intended classification task in multi-object scenes. We further exploit this property to decompose image-level logits into a prediction grid, providing a post-hoc diagnostic to extract spatial class evidence that GAP otherwise obscures. Our systematic evaluation reveals that off-the-shelf models consistently recover the ground-truth class within foreground regions. The MIL interpretation further suggests that common classifier failures reflect known limitations of mean aggregation.

We give a short proof that the majority vote of three independent consistent classifiers is an optimal learner in the realizable PAC setting. This proves optimality for the simplest voting scheme, while simplifying both the algorithmic structure and the probabilistic analysis of previous voting learners, including the algorithm of S. Hanneke and the analysis of bagging by K. Green Larsen.

LLMs and LLM agents should improve when given feedback, but identifying when they are able to do so is difficult: feedback is heterogeneous, domain-specific, and difficult to control. We approach this challenge by asking LLMs to perform regular-expression induction, a classical symbolic learning problem where precise mechanisms for feedback exist in the form of counterexamples. In counterexample-guided learning, a learner (LLM) proposes candidate regular expressions from positive/negative-labeled strings, and the teacher (verifier) returns counterexamples showcasing the difference between the candidate and target languages. We identify novel counterexample-guided refinement strategies that enable effective regex learning, such as regularization and symbolic counterexample clusters. We also explore agentic strategies such as reflection and repair loops. Empirically, we find that verifier feedback substantially improves sample efficiency on challenging regex-induction tasks, reducing the number of labeled examples required and enabling learning of complex target expressions where standard prompting fails. For example, on the hardest task groups, our counterexample-guided framework improves success from 3.2% to 38.1% and from 38.9% to 74.1% on two different regex domains. These results suggest that LLMs can benefit from rich feedback beyond treating it as additional data, opening the door for robust verifier-guided methods for LLM-based program synthesis and formal reasoning.

A common assumption in strategic classification is that the classifier is public knowledge. However, it remains unclear whether, and why, a system would choose to commit to full disclosure. We study a setting in which regulation requires the system to disclose some, but not all, of the information. This induces a learning task in which the learner must jointly optimize the classifier and the uncertainty surrounding it. To this end, we adopt from robust mechanism design the notion of ambiguity, which in our setting allows the learner to reveal a set or range of possible classifiers, while privately choosing which of them to ultimately realize. We investigate how ambiguity affects the learning task, develop efficient algorithms for computing best-responses and training, and empirically explore strategic learning and its outcomes in this novel setting and using our approach.

This study evaluates the pedagogical viability of LLM-generated English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learning content. Utilising log data from Japanese junior high school students practicing on a grammar drilling application, we analysed how different question modalities impact student performance and whether theoretical localised CEFR difficulty tiers accurately predict empirical task difficulty. Results reveal a clear performance hierarchy: multiple-choice questions carried the lowest cognitive load, cloze tasks posed the greatest barrier to active recall, and drag-and-drop exercises incurred the heaviest time penalties. Furthermore, learner data validated the CEFR-J grammar framework, showing a steady decline in accuracy and increased response times as proficiency levels advanced. These findings demonstrate that LLMs can successfully generate learning content, while highlighting the need for developers to strategically sequence question modalities to transition learners from passive recognition to active linguistic production.

AI-augmented classrooms generate rich teacher and student feedback before graded outcomes become available, yet these signals can be difficult to translate into timely instructional decisions. We propose an interpretable decision layer: a transparent mechanism that ranks course topics requiring attention without using grades or post-hoc outcome labels. The approach combines three signals: student learning difficulty prevalence, disagreement between learner self-reports and observed difficulties, and unresolved teacher concerns. The output is a ranked set of topic priorities with per-topic decision records explaining each ranking. In one graduate CS course offering ($n=5$ instructor interviews; $n=279$ survey responses), prioritized topics aligned with instructor concerns (top-5 overlap 3/5; Spearman $ρ=0.80$) and student-reported topic difficulty ($ρ=0.46$, $p=.048$). Multi-signal integration also surfaced learners not identified through individual signal sources alone (AUC $=0.96$ vs. $0.91$ for gap prevalence alone). Reflective thinking, help-seeking, and self-efficacy provided additional evidence that student behavioral signals align with learning-related constructs. While preliminary, these findings suggest that transparent coordination mechanisms may help support human-AI co-agency when feedback is incomplete.

When treatment effects are naturally expressed as ratios -- as in medicine, pricing, and marketing -- the ratio-based CATE $τ(x) = E[Y|W=1,X=x] / E[Y|W=0,X=x]$ is the appropriate estimand. Yet existing estimators either impose a log-linear parametric structure or apply generic regression without robustness guarantees for this functional. We introduce the Q-Learner, which decomposes $τ(x)$ into a product of two odds ratios, reducing ratio-CATE estimation for binary outcomes to two propensity classification tasks. We further derive doubly robust augmentations for both S/T- and Q-style ratio learners and characterize their distinct robustness properties. In benchmarks on seven RCT datasets, the Q-Learner is the most consistently competitive method in low-conversion regimes, where its propensity-only construction sidesteps the imbalanced regression that hurts outcome-based estimators. On four observational datasets, where propensity must be estimated and confounding cannot be ruled out, the DR learners introduced here decisively come out on top, making them practitioners' natural default for confounded observational data.

Recent research in educational data mining, especially knowledge tracing, has focused on predicting learners' future knowledge states to support adaptive instruction. However, in many real-world educational settings, learning data are often available only as single-time-point assessments without temporal information, making existing time-series-based approaches difficult to apply. In this paper, we propose a novel framework for predicting future skill acquisition using only snapshot data. Specifically, we address the problem of predicting the next skill to be acquired from skill mastery patterns estimated by cognitive diagnostic models (CDMs). In the absence of temporal information, we exploit inclusion relations among learners' skill sets to induce a pseudo-temporal ordering, interpreting expanding skill sets as a proxy for learning progression. To efficiently approximate unobserved acquisition paths, we introduce a neural model that captures latent skill acquisition dynamics through expected skill increments. Experiments on both synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate that the proposed method consistently outperforms baseline approaches, with particularly strong advantages as the skill space becomes larger. These results indicate that meaningful skill acquisition patterns can be inferred from snapshot data alone, providing a practical framework for adaptive learning support in data-constrained educational environments.

Pairwise Ranking Prompting (PRP) elicits pairwise preference judgments from an LLM, which are then aggregated into a ranking, usually via classical sorting algorithms. However, judgments are noisy, order-sensitive, and sometimes intransitive, so sorting assumptions do not match the setting. Because sorting aims to recover a full permutation, truncating it to meet a call budget does not produce a dependable top-K. We thus reframe PRP reranking as active learning from noisy pairwise comparisons and show that active rankers are drop-in replacements that improve NDCG@10 per call in the call-constrained regime. Our noise-robust framework also introduces a randomized-direction oracle that uses a single LLM call per pair. This approach converts systematic position bias into zero-mean noise, enabling unbiased aggregate ranking without the cost of bidirectional calls.

What makes a word difficult to learn, and how does the difficulty depend on the learner's native language? We computationally model vocabulary difficulty for English learners whose first language is Spanish, German, or Chinese with gradient-boosted models trained on features related to a word's familiarity (e.g., frequency), meaning, surface form, and cross-linguistic transfer. Using Shapley values, we determine the importance of each feature group. Word familiarity is the dominant feature group shared by all three languages. However, predictions for Spanish- and German-speaking learners rely additionally on orthographic transfer. This transfer mechanism is unavailable to Chinese learners, whose difficulty is shaped by a combination of familiarity and surface features alone. Our models provide interpretable, L1-tailored difficulty estimates that can be used to design vocabulary curricula.

Unlearning in large language models (LLMs) aims to remove harmful training data while preserving overall utility. However, we find that existing methods often hallucinate, generate abnormal token sequences, or behave inconsistently, raising safety and trust concerns. According to prior literature on LLM honesty, such behaviors are often associated with dishonesty. This motivates us to investigate the notion of honesty in the context of model unlearning. We propose a formal definition of unlearning honesty, which includes: (1) preserving both utility and honesty on retained knowledge, and (2) ensuring effective forgetting while encouraging the model to acknowledge its limitations and respond consistently to questions related to forgotten knowledge. To systematically evaluate the honesty of unlearning, we introduce a suite of metrics that cover utility, honesty on the retained set, effectiveness of forgetting, rejection rate and refusal stability in Q&A and MCQ settings. Evaluating 9 methods across 3 mainstream families shows that all current methods fail to meet these standards. After experimental and theoretical analyses, we present ReVa, a representation-alignment procedure that fine-tunes feature-randomized unlearned models to better acknowledge forgotten knowledge. On Q&A tasks from the forget set, ReVa achieves the highest rejection rate after two rounds of interaction, nearly doubling the performance of the second-best method. Remarkably, It also improves honesty on the retained set. We release our data and code at https://github.com/renjiegu.

Large language models (LLMs) are widely used for tutoring, feedback generation, and content creation, but their broad pretraining makes them hard to constrain and poor substitutes for controllable learners. Educational systems often require inspectable and editable knowledge states: educators want to know what a system assumes the learner knows, and learners benefit when the system can justify actions in terms of explicit skills, misconceptions, and strategies. Inspired by cognitive architectures, we propose Cognitive Agent Compilation (CAC), a framework that uses a strong teacher LLM to compile problem-solving knowledge into an explicit target agent. CAC separates (i) knowledge representation, (ii) problem-solving policy, and (iii) verification and update rules, with the goal of making bounded problem solving more inspectable and editable in educational settings. We present an early proof of concept implemented with Small Language Models that surfaces key design trade-offs, particularly between explicit control and scalable generalization, and positions CAC as an initial step toward bounded-knowledge AI for educational applications.

This paper presents the Personalized Thinking Model (PTM), a hierarchical and interpretable learner representation designed for AI supported education. PTM organizes evidence from learner journals into a five-layer structure covering behavioral instances, behavioral patterns, cognitive routines, metacognitive tendencies, and self-system values. PTM is grounded in Marzano's New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives and tries to clone learner's thinking model and build cognitive twin. It was constructed using a pipeline that combines large language model inference (Gemini 2.5 Pro), sentence embeddings, dimensionality reduction, and consensus clustering. This paper evaluates PTM fidelity through three methods applied to 40 participants in a seven-week study. First, automatic evaluation using atomic information point matching yielded an overall F1 score of 74.57% before human-in-the-loop (HITL) refinement and 75.48% after refinement. Second, user evaluation using a Likert scale produced mean ratings of 4.26 and 4.30 on a five-point scale for pre and post-HITL conditions respectively. Third, semantic alignment verification showed that topic coherence increased from 0.436 at the behavioral layer to 0.626 at the core value layer, while lexical overlap with journal vocabulary decreased from 0.114 to 0.007 across those same layers. These results suggest that the PTM produces outputs with acceptable fidelity, was generally perceived by users as reflecting their thinking, and showed a pattern consistent with semantic abstraction across layers.

Recent studies have shown that large generative models can solve vision tasks they were not explicitly trained for. However, existing evidence relies on closed-source models~(Veo~3, Nano Banana Pro) or requires task-specific instruction tuning, leaving open whether publicly available image-editing models possess zero-shot vision abilities out of the box. We conduct a systematic evaluation of three open-source image-editing models -- Qwen-Image-Edit, FireRed-Image-Edit, and LongCat-Image-Edit -- on dense visual prediction tasks \emph{without any fine-tuning}. We benchmark monocular depth estimation on NYUv2 and DIODE, surface normal estimation on NYUv2, and semantic segmentation on Cityscapes, covering both geometric and semantic scene understanding. Results show that open-source image-editing models exhibit non-trivial zero-shot visual understanding. On NYUv2 surface normals, FireRed-Image-Edit achieves a mean angular error of $17.69^\circ$, surpassing the fine-tuned Marigold ($20.86^\circ$) and matching the instruction-tuned Vision Banana ($17.78^\circ$) without any task-specific training. On NYUv2 depth estimation, LongCat-Image-Edit obtains $δ_1{=}0.822$ with affine alignment, and Qwen-Image-Edit leads on DIODE Indoor ($δ_1{=}0.868$). On Cityscapes semantic segmentation, Qwen-Image-Edit reaches 25.7 mIoU at the 19-class level and 49.5 mIoU at a coarser 7-category level. By comparing three independently trained editors, we test whether zero-shot vision ability is an emergent property of image-editing pretraining rather than a model-specific artifact. Code, evaluation scripts, and all results are publicly released to serve as a reproducible baseline for future work.

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

AI-powered language learning tools increasingly provide instant, personalised feedback to millions of learners worldwide. However, this feedback can fail in ways that are difficult for learners--and even teachers--to detect, potentially reinforcing misconceptions and eroding learning outcomes over extended use. We present a portion of L2-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating AI systems in language education that includes (but is not limited to) six critical dimensions of effective feedback: diagnostic accuracy, awareness of appropriacy, causes of error, prioritisation, guidance for improvement, and supporting self-regulation. We analyse how AI systems can fail with respect to these dimensions. These failures, which we argue are conducive to "explainability pitfalls," are AI-generated explanations that appear helpful on the surface but are fundamentally flawed, increasing the risk of attainment, human-AI interaction, and socioaffective harms. We discuss how the specific context of language learning amplifies these risks and outline open questions we believe merit more attention when designing evaluation frameworks specifically. Our analysis aims to expand the community's understanding of both the typology of explainability pitfalls and the contextual dynamics in which they may occur in order to encourage AI developers to better design safe, trustworthy, and effective AI explanations.

Diffusion models are primarily trained for image synthesis, yet their denoising trajectories encode rich, spatially aligned visual priors. In this paper, we demonstrate that these priors can be utilized for text-conditioned semantic and open-vocabulary segmentation, and this approach can be generalized to various downstream tasks to make a general-purpose diffusion segmentation framework. Concretely, we introduce DiGSeg (Diffusion Models as a Generalist Segmentation Learner), which repurposes a pretrained diffusion model into a unified segmentation framework. Our approach encodes the input image and ground-truth mask into the latent space and concatenates them as conditioning signals for the diffusion U-Net. A parallel CLIP-aligned text pathway injects language features across multiple scales, enabling the model to align textual queries with evolving visual representations. This design transforms an off-the-shelf diffusion backbone into a universal interface that produces structured segmentation masks conditioned on both appearance and arbitrary text prompts. Extensive experiments demonstrate state-of-the-art performance on standard semantic segmentation benchmarks, as well as strong open-vocabulary generalization and cross-domain transfer to medical, remote sensing, and agricultural scenarios-without domain-specific architectural customization. These results indicate that modern diffusion backbones can serve as generalist segmentation learners rather than pure generators, narrowing the gap between visual generation and visual understanding.

Large language models (LLMs) often fail to meet the pedagogical needs of K-12 English learners in non-native contexts due to a proficiency mismatch. To address this widespread challenge, we introduce a proficiency-aligned framework that adapts LLM outputs to learner abilities, using China's national curriculum (CSE) as a representative case. Our framework enables precise control over lexical complexity through a four-tier grading system, supported by a comprehensive suite of new resources: graded vocabulary lists and a multi-turn dialogue corpus. Our core technical contribution is the \textbf{DDPO} algorithm,Diversity Driven Policy Optimization, a multi-turn GRPO-based approach designed to preserve dialogue diversity while holistically optimizing dialogue quality. This method significantly outperforms conventional approaches, achieving low out-of-vocabulary rates and high diversity while enhancing conversational naturalness and pedagogical value. While grounded in the CSE, our framework is designed for flexibility and can be readily adapted to other educational standards. Our models, data, and code will all be open-sourced, providing a scalable platform for personalized English speaking practice that effectively addresses the unique challenges faced by K-12 learners in non-immersive environments.

The capabilities of generative AI in mathematics education are rapidly evolving, posing significant challenges for research to keep pace. Research syntheses remain scarce and risk being outdated by the time of publication. We present a Living Meta-Analysis (LIMA) on the effects of generative AI-based interventions for learning mathematics. We update the literature base every two months and apply a cumulative Bayesian multilevel meta-regression model. This paper reports results from the fifth version, including 34 studies, 7 of which were newly included since the fourth version. Results indicate an increasingly positive effect (g = 0.57, CrI [0.36, 0.79]) and no evidence in favor of a publication bias. Moderator analyses indicate that effects vary by integration mode and intervention duration: Larger effects were observed when generative AI supplemented teacher instruction and in longer interventions. Moderate evidence for stronger effects was observed in studies involving younger learners and more recent technology. For other moderators, evidence is still inconclusive.