Lotteries

The lottery ticket hypothesis posits the existence of winning tickets: sparse subnetworks that, when trained in isolation from their original initialization, match the accuracy of the full dense network. The predominant method for discovering such tickets, iterative magnitude pruning, alternates pruning with full retraining from scratch until convergence over many cycles. Similarly, deep active learning also retrains a model from scratch after each acquisition round as new labels become available. Despite this shared reliance on iterative retraining with a substantial computational overhead, the two paradigms have been studied separately. We observe that the iterative training loop inherent to pool-based active learning already provides the exact computational structure that iterative magnitude pruning exploits, and propose Improve & Prune (I&P), a method that integrates magnitude pruning into each active learning retraining cycle at practically no additional cost. This raises a key empirical question: can iterative magnitude pruning produce winning tickets under the non-stationary data regime of active learning? We investigate this question across multiple acquisition functions, architecture families, and image classification datasets, including an active fine-tuning scenario. Our results demonstrate that I&P yields sparse, deployable models at each active learning iteration. Those match the accuracy of their dense counterparts at sparsities up to 95%, effectively obtaining winning tickets as a byproduct of the active learning pipeline. These per-iteration sparse models can address two computational bottlenecks - per-round model retraining and acquisition scoring over the unlabeled pool - that currently prevent the practical adoption of DAL on large architectures and large unlabeled pools.

Institutions practising outcome-based education compute learning outcome attainment routinely, while reviews of curriculum analytics report an absence of evidence on how that computation informs decisions. This paper presents OBER+, an extension of a deployed institutional attainment platform that computes the step from a measured shortfall to an evaluated corrective action. Five connected stages accumulate attainment across deliveries of a course, signal a shortfall and a persistent shortfall, grade it on cutoffs the regulator already uses, record the decision against a catalogue of practices annotated with their evidence, log the change, and quantify the subsequent movement in the shortfall. A further rule compares successive statements of an outcome, so attainment is never read as a series across a point at which the outcome changed. Applying the rules to the live record of two real courses produced three results. Every outcome of a core course was substantively redefined between consecutive deliveries, with subject matter moving between outcome numbers, so a naive reading would have reported a twenty-five point collapse between quantities that do not refer to the same learning. Recomputing the platform's figures from its documented rule showed six of ten differing by more than rounding explains, in a pattern that identified a defect since reported to the institution. Across fifteen statement pairs from three transitions, five were identical character for character, and among the ten that were not, the outcome carrying a given number was nearest to a differently numbered earlier outcome in six, a result resting on an ordering of similarities and requiring no threshold and no labelling. The contribution is a computational design for outcome-based reporting, stated as rules any attainment platform can implement, with evidence of what they make visible in a live institutional record.

For provenance research and art market studies, auction catalogs are an essential resource to trace specific objects over time and space. While historical auction catalogs follow established domain conventions, their internal formatting remains highly variable, and their large-scale analysis is currently restricted by the lack of machine-readable representations of the auction lots. We propose a pipeline to automatically extract structured lot-level metadata from German Sales, a large database of historical auction and sales catalogs from the 19th and 20th centuries. Using a manually annotated test set of representative catalog pages, we evaluate Vision-Language Models (VLMs) under varying prompt strategies and constrained decoding frameworks. To reflect the practical constraints faced by cultural heritage institutions, including budget, compute resources, and data privacy requirements, we benchmark the methods across different deployment modes ranging from commercial providers to locally hosted, quantized models. We find that commercial endpoints establish the performance ceiling, while institutional gateways offer a viable, privacy-preserving alternative. Local deployments remain feasible, but strictly require enforcing the output structure during generation to guarantee a valid JSON format. While varying degrees of human-in-the-loop correction are still necessary, this work demonstrates that a VLM-based pipeline can successfully unlock historical auction catalogs for large-scale automated analysis.

We study the problem of formally explaining why a candidate was not selected by a given tournament rule, by identifying sub-tournaments in which the candidate loses independently of how the rest of the tournament is completed. We define destructive minimal supports as any minimal sub-tournament satisfying this property, which in formal explainable artificial intelligence corresponds to abductive explanations for the question "Why does the loser lose the tournament?". For six common tournament solutions (maximin, uncovered set and its weighted variant, top cycle, Copeland, and Borda) we provide characterizations of when a candidate is either a necessary loser or a possible winner, we determine the size of the smallest destructive minimal supports, complemented by polynomial-time algorithms for their computation except for the case of Borda and Copeland rules which we conjecture to also be polynomial.

Deep neural networks have shown impressive success in NLP tasks owing to their complex structure and huge number of edges. Achieving state-of-the-art performance in natural language processing with a large pre-trained model such as BERT is expensive and time-consuming, carries a large carbon footprint, and is difficult to realize on machines with minimal computational capability. This creates a barrier to training complex models for resource-constrained languages such as Bengali. However, in a complex neural model, not all edges are equally impactful, and the contributions of some of them can be neglected. Pruning promises to reduce the memory footprint of regular networks, shorten the training time of ever-growing networks, and increase inference efficiency without sacrificing comparable performance. In this work, we introduce BnBERT-iPET, a sparse few-shot language modeling approach for Bengali, and experimentally show that a lightweight few-shot-learned language model retaining only 10% of the edges of an initial model such as BERT can perform neck and neck with much larger models on challenging tasks for a resource-constrained language such as Bengali. By learning from few shots through iterative pattern exploiting training and achieving 90% sparsity with the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis pruning technique, our pruned BnBERT-iPET model proves to be a tough competitor to state-of-the-art language models such as Bangla Electra, Indic-BERT, and XLM-RoBERTa on downstream tasks over standard benchmark datasets of the Bengali language.

Reports on how sparsification, compression, and lottery tickets change model behavior have been mixed in the prior literature, with beneficial effects observed in some studies and adverse effects in others. Moreover, prior work has not considered actual deployment conditions, where decision logic is already fixed for the incumbent. To assess these mixed findings from a practical standpoint, we study the production-replacement question at the deployment level, namely whether an accuracy-matched lottery ticket or another sparse challenger can replace an incumbent dense model without reconfiguring downstream decision logic. We therefore audit a broad, protocol-specific panel of deployment-relevant behaviors spanning calibration, OOD response, class-level reliability, representations, and downstream policy decisions, and summarize clean-accuracy-excluded deviations with a behavioral-compatibility distance. Across extensive experiments, sparse candidates repeatedly recover dense-reference accuracy yet remain behaviorally different; in several study-band-matched settings, LTs also show lower corruption accuracy. In small-gap settings with fixed-threshold policy diagnostics, lottery-ticket replacement changes 7% to 10% of accept--review decisions. This churn creates precisely the burden that drop-in replacement is meant to avoid: reconfiguring and revalidating downstream decision logic. These findings establish the limits of clean-accuracy certification: Establishing compatibility with a fixed incumbent is distinct from attributing churn uniquely to sparsity or treating every measured deviation as harmful. Our theory explains the routing result: Even exact pointwise top-1 agreement cannot bound fixed-threshold decision changes, and small confidence shifts near the operating boundary can generate first-order routing churn.

Automated research systems use experimental scores both to deliver artifacts and to decide which ideas to retain, transfer, and pursue. Yet one run scores one implementation of an idea. Crediting that realization-level score as evidence about the parent mechanism creates the \emph{implementation lottery}, in which an idea-level conclusion depends on which plausible implementation was sampled. The mismatch is structural whenever one run updates beliefs about a mechanism. We estimate its magnitude. The \emph{Idea Reliability Audit} measures \emph{idea reliability} by validating and freezing candidate cards, sampling fresh-session implementations, using outcome-blind fidelity labels, and rerunning saved artifacts. It reports idea ICC and leave-one-implementation-out (LOO) winner reversal. Prior work generally repeats the task; we repeat the idea. Across 312 assignments on 13 tabular tasks and two coding-agent setups, implementation variance was more than five and ten times same-artifact rerun variance, respectively, and the winner from one implementation draw differed from the winner under the other-two mean in 25.6% and 43.6% of decisions. Reversal survives card-level filtering under two outcome-blind review rules. An exploratory diagnostic on three materials-regression workflows with a deterministic evaluator also finds implementation variation dominating the decomposition. These findings distinguish idea reliability from best-of-$N$ artifact utility. Before a score guides idea-level branching, transfer, or research memory, evidence should cover multiple implementations.

The Strong Lottery Ticket Hypothesis (SLTH) asserts that sufficiently overparameterized, randomly initialized neural networks contain sparse subnetworks that, even without any training, can match the performance of a small trained network on a given dataset. A key mathematical tool in the theoretical study of SLTH has been the Random Subset Sum Problem (RSSP). The SLTH has recently been extended to the quantized setting, where the network weights are sampled from a discrete set rather than from a continuous interval. These new results are however far from those in arbitrary-precision setting in several ways. In this work, we provide an analysis of the RSSP in the discrete setting, and use it to derive tight SLTH guarantees in the quantized case. Our analysis obtain tight bounds on the failure probability of finding a strong lottery ticket in the quantized regime, providing an exponential improvement over previous results. Most importantly, it unifies the literature by showing that both approximate representations in the continuous setting and exact representations in quantized settings naturally emerge as limiting cases of our results. This perspective not only sharpens existing bounds but also provides a cohesive framework that simultaneously handles approximation and rounding errors.

Model organisms (MOs) - language models trained to exhibit undesired or unnatural behaviours - are frequently used as testbeds for evaluating white-box interpretability techniques. Current MOs are typically constructed via post-hoc supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on behavioural transcripts or synthetic documents. Prior research has shown that interpretability methods can easily identify hidden behaviours in these MOs. However, recent work suggests that such post-hoc training methods may make interpretability unrealistically easy. We investigate this claim by constructing a suite of 54 $\verb|OLMo2-1B|$- and $\verb|gemma-3-1b-it|$-based MOs trained with seven different techniques, including standard post-hoc SFT, post-hoc DPO, and more realistic integration of MO data into the OLMo post-training DPO phase. We use these MO variants to benchmark activation oracles, activation steering, logit lens, and sparse autoencoders. Our findings show that (i) MO interpretability depends strongly on training objective, target behaviour, model architecture, and training data generation pipeline; (ii) substantial variance remains even after controlling for differences in the strength of target behaviour expression; and (iii) our more realistic $\textit{integrated training}$ often yields less interpretable MOs than standard post-hoc methods. Our results cast substantial doubt on the validity of current MOs as interpretability proxies.

Fine-tuning a vision-language-action model (VLA-JEPA) on a single GPU should be simple: load a pretrained checkpoint, run training, deploy. There is a hidden danger. Run the same fine-tuning code thirteen times -- same data, same architecture, different random seed -- and twelve runs produce a robot succeeding 91--94% of the time, while one run silently degrades to 65.2%: a 29 pp gap with no error message, no warning, and no way to predict which seed will fail. We call this the seed lottery. We trace the cause to output collapse: the action predictor quietly learns to produce nearly identical outputs regardless of what the robot sees. Existing weight-level methods (L2, EWC) are structurally blind to this collapse -- they penalize weight changes, but collapse occurs in directions weights can move freely without affecting outputs, a gap we formalize via the Jacobian null-space. Across 7 methods x up to 13 seeds x 3 LIBERO benchmarks, three output-level regularizers -- VICReg (n=12 seeds), Dropout (n=4), and a halved learning rate (n=5) -- each eliminate every catastrophic seed (0/21 combined collapses vs. 1/13 Baseline; F(12,11)=28.7, p<0.001), while weight-level methods (L2, EWC) preserve the lottery. The simplest fix is changing one number in your optimizer config.

Neural network pruning reduces model size by removing less important parameters while aiming to preserve predictive performance. Although the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis (LTH) shows that sparse subnetworks can match dense networks when trained from suitable initializations, its iterative pruning procedure requires multiple complete training cycles. This work evaluates progressive magnitude-based pruning as a single-cycle alternative. The method gradually increases sparsity during training using a linear schedule and updates pruning masks based on active weight magnitudes. We conduct systematic experiments on CIFAR-10 and MNIST across ResNet, VGG-style, and LeNet architectures, comparing the proposed method with representative iterative and initialization-based pruning baselines, including LTH, SNIP, and GraSP. On CIFAR-10, the method achieves 95.12% accuracy on ResNet-18 at 72.9% sparsity, compared with 90.5% reported for LTH. At extreme sparsity, it achieves 93.13% accuracy on a VGG-like architecture at 97% sparsity, compared with approximately 92.0% for SNIP, and 93.44% accuracy on VGG-19 at 97.97% sparsity, compared with 92.19% for GraSP at 98% sparsity. A sparsity-accuracy analysis on ResNet-18 further shows that accuracy remains within 0.1 percentage points of the dense baseline across 70--85% sparsity. These results indicate that progressive magnitude-based pruning provides an effective single-cycle approach for neural network sparsification under the evaluated settings.

Decision-making under risk is typically studied through single-shot lottery choices. Yet many real decisions involve combinatorial risk, where risk arises from multiple risky components, so the lottery over outcomes is induced rather than given outright and can be costly to evaluate exactly. We introduce an investment-allocation task to study decision under combinatorial risk, where investing in a component raises its success probability and thereby reshapes the outcome distribution. Participants favor the option with the larger probability increment, and, when increments are equal, the option with the higher initial success probability. Revealing the induced probability mass function (PMF) substantially changes behavior, making participants less responsive to combinatorial-risk features and reducing choice variance. To explain these patterns, we move beyond standard benchmarks and hand-crafted hypotheses with symbolic regression to discover compact descriptive models. The discovered models rely mainly on combinatorial-risk features, such as the after-investment success probability, rather than exact evaluation of the full induced distribution. Behavior under the displayed PMF is then well explained by augmenting this model with a prospect-theoretic residual model. The results show that people navigate combinatorial risk primarily through its core features, shifting toward lottery valuation only when the induced PMF is displayed.

Data-adaptive two-sample testing assesses if two samples come from the same distribution, using a discrepancy learned from the data (e.g., via kernel-based feature representations). Such methods typically rely on data splitting to decouple learning from testing and control type I error. However, this paradigm is ill-suited to few-shot settings with severe sample-size imbalance: abundant reference samples are available, while only a handful of query samples arrive. In this paper, we show how this imbalance can be leveraged constructively. Using abundant reference data, we learn reference-dependent representations that summarize salient structure of the reference distribution and provide informative signals for detecting departures. We incorporate a collection of representation families that capture both global and local structure, and adaptively weight them using only reference samples via an uncertainty-guided principle. Theoretically, we establish permutation-based type I error control and show consistency of the aggregated test: as the sample sizes grow, the test power converges to one whenever the representation set contains at least one consistent representation. Empirically, our aggregation achieves strong performance across a range of benchmarks while retaining type I error control.

Large language models (LLMs) now generate substantial production code, often for tasks with multiple valid algorithmic solutions. Incidental prompt cues, meaning contextual words or metadata outside the task specification, can steer which algorithm the model selects, even when all outputs pass the same tests. Prompt sensitivity is well studied as a tool to improve output quality. Here, output policy means algorithm choice under fixed correctness. We define algorithm steering as cue-induced shifts in algorithm-family distributions and run 46,535 controlled experiments across 11 tasks, 19 cue types (18 channels plus a memoization semantic-vs-surface ablation that preserves meaning while changing typography and punctuation), and 15 model configurations. We find large, systematic shifts in algorithm-family distributions (up to 100 pp), largely consistent with cue semantics, including in applied tasks such as rate limiting. Direct algorithm naming is the most reliable mitigation we tested. Accidental context therefore creates an "invisible lottery" over performance, security, and maintainability.

Modern language-model fine-tuning typically pairs each prompt with a single response, even though many prompts admit multiple valid completions. This effectively reduces a multi-modal conditional distribution to a one-sample view, a phenomenon we call the "mode lottery," where training emphasizes a subset of plausible modes while leaving others underrepresented. We study multi-response training (MRT), which retains multiple responses per prompt, and develop a principled account of when and why it helps. Our key insight is that prompts and responses are distinct statistical resources: additional prompts reduce uncertainty about the input distribution, while additional responses reduce uncertainty about the conditional output distribution. This yields a variance-budget tradeoff that predicts when retaining multiple responses is worthwhile, shows diminishing returns as prompt-level uncertainty dominates, and explains why large redundant corpora can exhibit an implicit multi-response effect. We further analyze response selection, and show that Random-K-of-N is the unbiased default for distributional fine-tuning, reward-based selection can induce mode collapse, and a submodular quality-diversity objective provides an efficient alternative with theoretical guarantees. Controlled simulations validate the predicted variance and selection effects, including a striking failure mode where reward-only selection produces gradients misaligned with the true objective. Across structured and real-world datasets, including a new multi-prompt, multi-response benchmark, MRT consistently improves distributional generalization, with the largest gains in high response-diversity, low prompt-redundancy regimes. MRT reframes response multiplicity as a data-allocation problem with clear guidance: when responses are cheap and diverse, keeping more than one is not a heuristic, but a statistically grounded choice.

Neural networks acquire structured representations at specific moments during training, yet identifying these transitions typically relies on retrospective, label-dependent metrics. We introduce a bifurcation theory of representation dynamics to detect these moments in real time. Analyzing a passive GMM probe attached to the evolving encoder, we show the onset of structure corresponds to a supercritical pitchfork bifurcation driven by the loss Hessian. The system exhibits a theoretically predictable zero-crossing ($β_c$) that, compared to the network's current state ($β$), yields a dynamic ratio $β(t)/β_c(t)$: a universal, label-free phase coordinate for representation dynamics, computable entirely from hidden states. We empirically validate four distinct transition regimes predicted by this coordinate across diverse settings: SAEs on language models (Pythia), SSL (CIFAR), and grokking (modular arithmetic). Crucially, under finite dissipation, macroscopic symmetry-breaking can lag the initial zero-crossing by orders of magnitude, which providing a rigorous dynamical account of the delayed escape observed in grokking. Microscopically, the bifurcation creates a shared unstable subspace, forcing collective symmetry breaking. We term this the "feature lottery" in SAE training: a feature's terminal interpretability becomes predictable remarkably early. By only 5% of training, early atom purity robustly predicts final convergence purity, with top-decile early atoms achieving over 12x the baseline purity at convergence. Beyond explaining concept emergence, $β/β_c$ provides a practical early-warning indicator for training health, detecting the onset of usable structure, the crystallization of feature identity, and representational collapse epochs before downstream metrics react.

Guaranteed display advertising is crucial for platform monetization, yet existing methods often operate under a single-slot assumption, limiting their ability to optimize allocation across multi-slot page views. In this paper, we propose a novel joint optimization framework for multi-slot GD allocation, addressing key challenges such as slot-level redundancy, contract imbalance, and exposure concentration. Our approach formulates the allocation as an offline bipartite matching problem with a contract roulette mechanism for slot exclusivity and Page View constraints for impression control, and incorporates a scalable allocation optimization algorithm for efficient large-scale deployment. Extensive online tests on the Meituan advertising platform demonstrate that our method significantly improves merchant ROI, platform revenue efficiency, and contract fulfillment robustness. Specifically, online A/B tests show a 28.99% increase in Average Revenue Per User under 70% traffic, and DID analysis further indicates improved contract stability, demonstrating the strong applicability and effectiveness of our framework in real-world advertising deployments.

Competitive selection processes, from scientific funding to admissions and hiring, use evaluations to score candidates, and eventually choose a subset of them based on those scores. Recently, many organizations have adopted partial lotteries, which randomize selection based on evaluation scores. However, existing lottery designs are inherently unstable, as a small change to a single candidate's score can cause large shifts in their selection probabilities. This instability undermines a key goal of lotteries: reducing the influence of fine-grained score distinctions near the decision boundary. We propose smoothness as a design principle for partial lotteries, formalizing it as a Lipschitz condition on the mapping from review scores over candidates to selection probabilities. We introduce the Clipped Linear Lottery, a simple mechanism in which selection probabilities scale linearly with estimated quality between an upper threshold, above which we always accept, and a lower threshold, below which we always reject. We prove that the Clipped Linear Lottery's worst-case regret matches a lower bound for any smooth selection rule up to a factor of $(1 - k/n)$, where $k/n$ is the acceptance rate. We compare smooth selection to other stability notions like Individual Fairness and Differential Privacy, showing that the Clipped Linear Lottery achieves a better smoothness-regret tradeoff than alternatives. Experiments on real peer review data from ICLR 2025, NeurIPS 2024, and the Swiss National Science Foundation demonstrate that existing lottery designs are highly unstable in practice even under perturbations to a single score. Our experiments also confirm the tightness of our theoretical analysis and show that our proposed Clipped Linear Lottery achieves a better smoothness-utility tradeoff than alternatives in practice.

The lottery ticket hypothesis posits that dense networks contain sparse subnetworks, ``winning tickets,'' that, when rewound to their initial weights and retrained in isolation, match the performance of the full model. We ask a more mechanistic question: what internal object does a winning ticket preserve? We work in a combinatorial, clause-structured toy setting that admits an interpretable feature-space representation with well-defined combinatorial distances between features. We show that winning tickets in weight space correspond to precursor locations in feature space that are already near, at initialization, to the final feature-channel codes. Dense SGD resolves these locations through structured selection: proximal locations either converge to final codes or are rejected, with rejection concentrated at more crowded neurons, implicating competition under superposition. A winning ticket is thus a family of compatible code locations that jointly balance proximity to final codes with low inter-feature interference. Sparse retraining often re-expresses the same clause/template family on a different row, so the preserved object is family-level rather than microscopic row identity. We validate this account with lightweight probes based on feature-space distance and motion; in our setting, these probes frequently outperform established weight-based ticket discovery methods in both accuracy and exact code recovery. Although these findings are grounded in a toy setting, they suggest that the lottery ticket structure is governed by hidden feature-space geometry rather than weight-space subnetwork identity.

Why does a Transformer that has memorized its training set wait thousands of steps before it generalizes? Existing accounts locate this delay in norm minimization, feature emergence, or the late discovery of sparse subnetworks. These explanations capture important parts of the transition, but ignore a constraint unique to attention-based models: if attention discards an informative token, no bounded downstream computation can recover it. We formalize attention as an implicit Bayesian posterior over the task dependency graph and prove that generalization requires two separable conditions: a familiar Goldilocks bound on MLP capacity, coinciding with norm-based theories of grokking, and a novel Bayesian structural condition requiring attention to place sufficient mass on every informative token. This decoupling explains delayed generalization as delayed structural inference. Early in training, the MLP memorizes through unaligned features, drives the cross-entropy loss near zero, and thereby starves attention of structural gradient. Weight decay must then erode memorization before the missing graph becomes learnable, yielding the known inverse-weight-decay delay, which we derive as a structural waiting time. We then prove that this explaining-away delay can be bypassed by a KL-based structural intervention, yielding an inverse-intervention-strength scaling law for the grokking time. Experiments on algorithmic sequence tasks isolate structure from capacity and show that this Bayesian ticket matches or outperforms lottery-ticket transfer.

Quantum machine learning (QML) aims to accelerate machine learning tasks by exploiting quantum computation. Previous work studied a QML algorithm for selecting sparse subnetworks from large shallow neural networks. Instead of directly solving an optimization problem over a large-scale network, this algorithm constructs a sparse subnetwork by sampling hidden nodes from an optimized probability distribution defined using the ridgelet transform. The quantum algorithm performs this sampling in time $O(D)$ in the data dimension $D$, whereas a naive classical implementation relies on handling exponentially many candidate nodes and hence takes $\exp[O(D)]$ time. In this work, we construct and analyze a quantum-inspired fully classical algorithm for the same sampling task. We show that our algorithm runs in time $O(\operatorname{poly}(D))$, thereby removing the exponential dependence on $D$ from the previous classical approach. Numerical simulations show that the proposed sampler achieves empirical risk comparable to exact sampling from the optimized distribution and substantially lower than sampling from the non-optimized uniform distribution, while also exhibiting exponentially improved runtime scaling compared with the conventional classical implementation. These successful dequantization results show that sparse subnetwork selection via optimized sampling can be achieved classically with polynomial data-dimension scaling on conventional computers without quantum hardware, providing an alternative to the existing quantum algorithm.

The volume of scientific manuscripts is growing faster than the capacity to evaluate them, yet the institutions that govern peer review have remained largely unchanged. The result is a widening mismatch: reviewer scarcity, noisier assessments, and declining confidence in editorial decisions. Every scientist wants better reviews, but review quality depends on the total burden, which no single author can shift. To isolate this tension, we provide a game-theoretic thought experiment: a voluntary lottery in which authors accept a chance of random pre-review rejection, reducing reviewer burden and improving the quality of surviving evaluations. We show that a Nash equilibrium emerges in which authors voluntarily enter the lottery. Scientists who care about the literature they read, not just the papers they publish, will opt in, raising the quality of published science for all.

Data videos are a powerful medium for visual data based storytelling, combining animated, chart-centric visualizations with synchronized narration. Widely used in journalism, education, and public communication, they help audiences understand complex data through clear and engaging visual explanations. Despite their growing impact, generating data-driven video stories remains challenging, as it requires careful coordination of visual encoding, temporal progression, and narration and substantial expertise in visualization design, animation, and video-editing tools. Recent advances in large language models offer new opportunities to automate this process; however, there is currently no benchmark for rigorously evaluating models on animated visualization-based video storytelling. To address this gap, we introduce DataReel, a benchmark for automated data-driven video story generation comprising 328 real-world stories. Each story pairs structured data, a chart visualization, and a narration transcript, enabling systematic evaluation of models' abilities to generate animated data video stories. We further propose a multi-agent framework that decomposes the task into planning, generation, and verification stages, mirroring key aspects of the human storytelling process. Experiments show that this multi-agent approach outperforms direct prompting baselines under both automatic and human evaluations, while revealing persistent challenges in coordinating animation, narration, and visual emphasis. We release DataReel at https://github.com/vis-nlp/DataReel.

Many high-stakes AI deployments proceed only if every stakeholder deems the system acceptable relative to their own minimum standard. With randomization over a finite menu of options, this becomes a feasibility question: does there exist a lottery over options that clears all stakeholders' acceptability bars? We study a query model where the algorithm proposes lotteries and receives only binary accept/reject feedback. We give deterministic and randomized algorithms that either find a unanimously acceptable lottery or certify infeasibility; adaptivity can avoid eliciting many stakeholders' constraints, and randomization further reduces the expected elicitation cost relative to full elicitation. We complement these upper bounds with worst-case lower bounds (in particular, linear dependence on the number of stakeholders and logarithmic dependence on precision are unavoidable). Finally, we develop learning-augmented algorithms that exploit natural forms of advice (e.g., likely binding stakeholders or a promising lottery), improving query complexity when predictions are accurate while preserving worst-case guarantees.

In this work, we revisit several key design choices of modern Transformer-based approaches for feed-forward 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) prediction. We argue that the common practice of regressing Gaussian means as depths along camera rays is suboptimal, and instead propose to directly regress 3D mean coordinates using only a self-supervised rendering loss. This formulation allows us to move from the standard encoder-only design to an encoder-decoder architecture with learnable Gaussian tokens, thereby unbinding the number of predicted primitives from input image resolution and number of views. Our resulting method, TokenGS, demonstrates improved robustness to pose noise and multiview inconsistencies, while naturally supporting efficient test-time optimization in token space without degrading learned priors. TokenGS achieves state-of-the-art feed-forward reconstruction performance on both static and dynamic scenes, producing more regularized geometry and more balanced 3DGS distribution, while seamlessly recovering emergent scene attributes such as static-dynamic decomposition and scene flow.