Maturation

Bone-marrow cytology is inherently structured: each cell belongs to a hematopoietic lineage, and many cell types lie on ordered maturation trajectories. Standard flat classifiers ignore this structure, treating a mild same-lineage confusion the same as a severe cross-lineage mistake and predicting only discrete labels. We propose HemaHier, an ordinal-hierarchical prediction head for a frozen or lightly adapted cytology foundation model. Its central component is a chain-conditioned maturity score that reads a single maturity value under a per-chain query, supervised only on biologically valid healthy chains, while dysplastic and off-chain cell types remain classes but are excluded from maturity supervision. Fine and lineage predictions are coupled through a shared posterior that guarantees hierarchical consistency, and a staged objective first stabilizes recognition, then adds lineage and maturity supervision. On three bone-marrow datasets under a shared ontology, HemaHier achieves competitive recognition while reducing biologically severe errors and adding a within-lineage maturity ordering that flat classifiers lack. Code is available at https://github.com/xmindflow/HemaHier.

Coding agents increase development velocity but also technical debt. Prior work reports only average effects across adopters, hiding wide differences between teams. We introduce RAMP (Repository AI Maturity Profile), a four-level cumulative maturity model grounded in version-controlled artifacts that teams commit to configure AI tools. RAMP runs from behavioral rules and coding standards through named agent definitions to multi-agent orchestration, with observed practice concentrated in the first three levels. Across 441 repositories the levels behave as a cumulative scale, and independent human annotation reproduces RAMP's repository-level labels on 97% of a held-out sample. Adoption is cumulative, forward-only, and set-and-forget: 73.8% of artifacts are committed once and never modified. Re-estimating an existing agent-adoption panel within each stratum, agents accelerate development regardless of maturity (28-38% more commits), but quality diverges: among agent-first repositories, where the contrast is identified, those without committed AI configuration show roughly twice the increase in cognitive complexity (+53% versus +27%) and 1.7x the increase in static-analysis warnings. Because maturity is observational, correlated engineering discipline or model capability may explain part of the gap; we present these findings as hypothesis-generating and release RAMP as a reusable instrument.

Governments increasingly fund indigenous foundation models to strengthen national AI capability, digital sovereignty, and multilingual computing. Assessing the progress of such national ecosystems is complicated by inconsistent benchmark reporting, proprietary evaluation methodologies, and rapidly evolving model releases. This paper presents a structured, benchmark-based comparative assessment of publicly benchmarked Indian foundation models against global frontier and comparable-scale models, across eight capability domains: general-purpose reasoning, coding and software engineering, agentic AI and computer use, cybersecurity, vision and image understanding, video and multimodal understanding, scientific research, and Indic language capability. Using only publicly reported benchmark results, we find that Indian models achieve strong scores on established benchmarks such as MMLU and MATH-500. However, these benchmarks are now widely regarded as saturated, and frontier developers no longer report them. Indian models participate far less frequently in newer, agentic, and domain-specialized evaluations. Benchmark participation is also highly uneven across Indian organizations. Among the models surveyed, Sarvam AI reports the broadest benchmark coverage by a substantial margin. We propose an exploratory four-dimension Benchmark Maturity Index (BMI), scoring each capability domain on standardization, participation, independent verification, and national coverage. We show that the BMI refines, and in some cases revises, the maturity judgments that a purely descriptive review would produce. We argue that many apparent capability gaps in the public record cannot be distinguished, on available evidence, from evaluation-ecosystem gaps. This has direct implications for how national AI programs should design monitoring and funding criteria.

Enterprises are deploying autonomous AI agents faster than they can govern them, and prevailing approaches stretch a single discipline, typically DevSecOps built for deterministic automation, across every scale of agency. We argue that agentic AI governance is four problems, not one, each with a mature governing science. The CASE framework assigns Control theory to the individual agent (intent as setpoint, guardrails as feedback, evaluation as observation), complex Adaptive systems theory to agent collectives (where emergence makes single-agent assurance non-compositional), Supervisory cybernetics to human-agent teams (where the Law of Requisite Variety shows unaided human oversight fails structurally), and Engineering operations to fleets (extending error budgets to decision quality so autonomy becomes a controlled variable). We formalize each layer, derive cross-layer coupling conditions, including a zero-touch deployment paradox where excellence at one-layer strains the others, and trace twenty-plus enterprise controls to their classical constructs. Three empirical studies validate the thesis: 82 percent of documented production agent failures are multi-layer trajectories; none of 22 ecosystem tools offers full Layer 2 (emergence) coverage; and all 35 scored public deployments fall in the lowest maturity band. We name this mismatch, risk realized at the emergence layer against capability barely offered and practice absent, the Emergence Gap. A five-level maturity model with a non-compensatory bottleneck-weighted index and assessment instrument operationalizes CASE as a scientific rather than process maturity model, grounded in production enterprise agentic platforms. As EU AI Act Article 14 makes effective human oversight a legal requirement, only architectures satisfying requisite variety can make oversight real rather than ceremonial.

Constraint Answer Set Programming (CASP) is a hybrid reasoning paradigm that combines Answer Set Programming (ASP) with Constraint Processing and Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT), enabling powerful declarative encodings of complex combinatorial search problems. This paper presents the design and implementation of EZSMTV3, an extensible SMT-based CASP framework that advances the translational approach to CASP solving. Building upon the foundation of the EZSMT+ system, EZSMTV3 introduces a more expressive input language, supports optimization via weak constraints, and offers foundations for streamlined integration of new constraint types. Rather than implementing custom search procedures, EZSMTV3 leverages state-of-the-art SMT solvers, such as CVC5, YICES, and Z3 to perform reasoning. The paper provides benchmarking results comparing EZSMTV3 with its CASP peers such as CLINGCON, CLINGO[DL], and CLINGO[LP], while showcasing its ability to handle mixed-domain constraints involving both integers and reals. The system provides a robust platform for future extensions and theoretical exploration within the CASP domain.

Large language model (LLM) agents are usually improved by changing prompts, models, or hand-written workflows, while the execution harness around the model is treated as fixed infrastructure. We argue that this harness is itself a learnable control layer. We formalize harness operation as a finite-horizon Harness MDP, where a lightweight controller selects structural execution actions while the LLM executor remains frozen. The controller is trained from offline rollouts using advantage-weighted regression with only terminal task-rubric rewards. We also separate final task quality from a post-hoc Harness Maturity Score, which measures whether the harness follows reliable execution patterns rather than only whether the final answer is correct. This separation gives a finite-buffer view of harness learning: final-quality gains require high-return support in the offline buffer, while process behavior can shift whenever it aligns with advantage-weighted actions. Across six controlled domains and two public-benchmark adapters, the learned controller consistently improves verification behavior and selectively improves final task quality, with the largest gains on adapted tau-bench retail, adapted AgentBench DB-Bench, and coding with a calibrated structural verifier. Ablations against behavior cloning and Forced CHECK show that the gains are not explained by imitation or by simply adding checks. These results identify harness control as a learnable layer for frozen LLM agents, while showing that offline support limits when better process control becomes better final answers.

Long-chain agent execution fails exponentially in environments designed for human tolerance: with per-step determinism $δ< 1$, $k$-step chain success degrades as $δ^k$. The AGI-to-ASI scaling debate (Genewein et al., 2026) has so far framed progress as a race between compute growth and a list of frictions (data wall, abstraction barrier, embodied bottleneck, multi-agent trust); we argue that environment determinism is a complementary binding axis cutting across all four, for the broad class of agentic AI tasks whose outcomes are verifiable economically, physically, or through multi-party settlement. Three formal results pin down the regime: a Determinism-Efficiency Bound on chain-task success, a Verifier-Goodharting Floor on flywheel ceilings under imperfect rewards, and a convergence condition for environment-side skill evolution. We operationalise the framework as a Supply Certainty Index (SCI) over five measurable properties, a five-level Determinism Maturity Model (DMM) as adoption ladder, and a falsifiable open-question programme (OQ1-OQ5) with explicit null results that would force retraction. The position is platform-agnostic. We engage three competing positions: sim-to-real sufficiency, alignment sufficiency, and AI-as-normal-technology.

People increasingly get answers straight from AI search engines like ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and Gemini rather than scrolling search results. Brands that once focused on search engine optimization (SEO) must now optimize for how these engines represent, cite, and recommend them -- a shift variously called Generative Engine Optimization (GEO), Answer Engine Optimization (AEO), and AI Search Visibility. We treat AEO and AI Visibility as part of GEO, and study how to measure brand visibility across AI engines: what they value when they cite a brand, which sources they rely on, and what content large language models surface. The hard case is everyone outside the already-authoritative top brands -- SMEs, D2C brands, creators, and early-stage startups. We analyze 100K+ prompt responses across 100+ brands tracked on Ranqo between March and May 2026. First visibility runs form a clear three-tier brand-stature ladder: global household names (e.g., Stripe, Nike) appear in 73% of relevant AI answers on their first run; established mid-market and regional brands (e.g., Olipop, Klaviyo) in 44%; niche and small brands in just 11% -- about 30 percentage points per step. When engines cite sources, about 78% go to corporate websites; among non-corporate sources YouTube leads, ahead of Reddit, editorial media, and Wikipedia. The highest-leverage page is the ranked "best-of" listicle, the most-cited content format at about 21% of all citations. Sentiment is the unstable signal: whether a brand is framed positively or negatively flips about 6.7 times more often than whether it is mentioned at all. These findings provide a first large-scale baseline for measuring GEO: AI brand visibility can be measured, differs by platform, and varies strongly by brand maturity. We close by proposing seven v1.1 protocols to test whether specific recommendations can causally improve AI visibility.

Artificial intelligence has driven rapid progress in medical imaging research, producing increasingly sophisticated algorithms and steady improvements on benchmark tasks. However, this algorithm-centric trajectory has also revealed a growing imbalance: while computational methods advance rapidly, the conceptual foundations that define imaging tasks, evaluation metrics, and clinical meaning sometimes remain underexamined. In this Perspective, we distinguish algorithmic innovation, which focuses on improving computational implementations and performance within a fixed problem definition, from conceptual innovation, which reframes what problems are posed, how success is measured, and why an approach is clinically relevant. We argue that prevailing incentive structures, training pathways, and publication norms disproportionately reward algorithmic novelty, particularly for early-career researchers, while at times undervaluing conceptual contributions that are essential for scientific maturation and clinical translation. Through representative examples from medical imaging AI, we show how insufficient conceptual grounding can lead to misaligned objectives, fragile generalization, and limited real-world impact. We conclude with actionable recommendations for researchers, mentors, reviewers, and journals to better recognize, support, and integrate conceptual innovation alongside algorithmic advances.

Agentic systems entering production typically operate as partially integrated assemblies where structural defects, not task-level errors, dominate the failure landscape. At this maturity level, task-level error detection may be infeasible: structural failure modes mask the signal that task-level monitors are designed to detect.We present a monitoring and triage methodology that decomposes agentic system evaluation into three dimensions (quality, suitability, efficiency) at three monitoring scopes (within-run, cross-run, structural), using variance as a characterization signal. Findings are routed through severity classification adapted from FMEA, concentrating human attention on the subset that warrants investigation. We evaluate on a synthetic testbed of 220 runs across 120 document bundles with controlled error injection.Three results emerge. Monitor scope determines failure type: within-run monitors surface deterministic stage defects (CV = 0.02), cross-run monitors surface stochastic integration consequences (CV = 1.25, 24% at L2), and a structural monitor identifies an integration gap with perfect consistency (CV = 0.00). Injected task-level errors are indistinguishable from clean baselines, confirming structural defects mask task-level signal. Deterministic triage routes 97% of findings to automated tracking, leaving the 2% reflecting variable behavior for human investigation.We propose, on Stage 1 evidence, a maturity-staging model in which monitoring transitions from structural characterization to error detection to reliability tracking as integration defects resolve. The taxonomy, CV-based scope characterization, and severity model transfer architecturally to document-driven, multi-stage agentic workflows in regulated industries; specific calibrations are domain-specific. Deploy monitoring early: the first thing it finds is the most important thing to fix.

Learning discriminative visual representations from distributed, heterogeneous data is a fundamental challenge in Federated Learning (FL). Prototype-based methods address statistical heterogeneity by sharing class-level representations across clients but create a distance-dependent gradient pressure that is particularly severe during early training rounds: alignment pressure applied to immature global prototypes, aggregated from noisy local representations, generates large gradients that suppress the emergence of local discriminative structure. The result is a poorly organized embedding space and degraded recognition performance, particularly under severe non-IID conditions. We propose FedSAP, a framework that stabilises federated representation learning through two complementary mechanisms: a deterministic alignment curriculum that delays global alignment until local representations become stable and a geometry-driven proxy separation loss that enforces inter-class structure on the unit hypersphere using the existing prototype bank without introducing additional parameters or communication overhead. Together, these mechanisms produce compact, well-separated class clusters without altering the underlying communication protocol between federation's participants. Experiments across three benchmarks and varying degrees of heterogeneity show gains of up to 4 percentage points over the prototype-based baselines evaluated, with improvements most pronounced under high heterogeneity. The representational nature of our framework further enables a straightforward extension to semi-supervised settings, where unlabelled data is incorporated with minimal modification, underscoring the generality of scheduled alignment as a design principle.

While Reasoning Language Models (RLMs) are rapidly emerging as powerful tools for scientific research, their impact is primarily concentrated in "hard science" fields. The slow -- or lack of -- adoption of RLMs in other branches of science is causing a widening gap in research productivity. In this survey, we provide the first comprehensive analysis of RLM adoption across 28 scientific disciplines following the classification used by the European Research Council (ERC), spanning the Social Sciences and Humanities, Physical Sciences and Engineering, and Life Sciences. We examine how RLMs are developed, evaluated, and applied across disciplines. Furthermore, we introduce a maturity-oriented assessment framework based on available domain-specific development and evaluation resources, revealing substantial disparities in RLM maturity that become even more pronounced when only publicly available resources are considered. Finally, we highlight current implementation paradigms that are gaining popularity across disciplines, current challenges, and future directions in enabling RLM adoption across science.

Enterprise data platforms face an enduring tension between domain self-service and holistic governance. The data mesh paradigm proposed decentralized domain ownership as a remedy, but pure implementations frequently underdeliver: teams inherit new responsibilities without the platform maturity, tooling, or coordination mechanisms needed to exercise them effectively. This paper argues that the flexibility-versus-control trade-off can be relaxed through an AI-augmented hub-and-spoke model layered on a modern lakehouse architecture. A central hub (Center of Excellence) provides shared platform services, policy automation, and AI-enabled governance, automatically standardizing data products, generating quality rules, drafting data contracts, and reviewing changes for regressions. Domain spokes own business semantics, product backlogs, and local iteration cadence, progressively assuming greater responsibility as they mature. The same LLMs that automate governance tasks also lower the barrier for domain practitioners to develop genuine cross-functional expertise spanning business and data engineering, enabling spoke teams to take on greater end-to-end ownership without proportionally increasing their dependence on the hub. Natural-language conversational interfaces further democratize access for business users, exposing historically underutilized enterprise data. On the organizational side, we propose a staged framework that shifts ownership from hub to spokes, avoiding both centralized bottlenecks and uncoordinated decentralization. We evaluate the architecture through three outcome metrics: data product adoption, time-to-find, and time-to-insight, that tie platform success to measurable business value rather than internal activity.

Accurate fruit maturity identification is essential for determining harvest timing, as incorrect assessment directly affects yield and post-harvest quality. Although ripening is a continuous biological process, vision-based maturity estimation is typically formulated as a multi-class classification task, which imposes sharp boundaries between visually similar stages. To examine this limitation, we perform an annotation reliability study with two independent annotators on a held-out tomato dataset and observe disagreement concentrated near adjacent maturity stages. Motivated by this observation, we model maturity as a latent continuous variable and predict it probabilistically using a distributional detection head, converting the distribution into class probabilities through the cumulative distribution function (CDF). The proposed formulation maintains comparable performance to a standard detector under clean labels while better representing uncertainty. Furthermore, when controlled label noise is introduced during training, the probabilistic model demonstrates improved robustness relative to the baseline, indicating that explicitly modeling maturity uncertainty leads to more reliable visual maturity estimation.

The accurate quantification of brain age from MRI has emerged as an important biomarker of brain health. However, existing approaches are often restricted to narrow age ranges and single-modality MRI data, limiting their capacity to capture the coordinated macro- and microstructural changes that unfold across the human lifespan. To address these limitations, we develop a multi-modal brain age framework to characterize the integrated evolution of brain morphology and white matter organization. Our model adopts a two-stage architecture, where modalities are processed independently and integrated via late fusion in both stages: first to estimate a probability distribution over six developmental stages, and then to predict age via probability-weighted stage-specialized experts. Experiments on nine datasets spanning fetal to elderly stages demonstrate competitive in-domain performance and out-of-domain generalization, with our method reducing MAE by 13% and 78% over existing baselines and multi-modal integration yielding 12-13% gains. Analysis of ADNI clinical groups further suggests the potential of the predicted brain age gap to characterize Alzheimer's-related brain aging.

The integration of complementary medicine into oncology represents a paradigm shift that has seen to increasing adoption of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) as an adjuvant to radiotherapy. About twenty-five years since the formal institutionalization of integrated oncology, it is opportune to synthesize the trajectory of evidence for TCM as an adjuvant to radiotherapy. Here we conduct a large-scale analysis of 69,745 publications (2000 - 2025), emerging a cyclical evolution defined by coordinated expansion and contraction in publication output, international collaboration, and funding commitments that mirrors a define-ideate-test pattern. Using a theme modeling workflow designed to determine a stable thematic structure of the field, we identify five dominant thematic axes - cancer types, supportive care, clinical endpoints, mechanisms, and methodology - that signal a focus on patient well-being, scientific rigor and mechanistic exploration. Cross-theme integration of TCM is patient-centered and systems-oriented. Together with the emergent cycles of evolution, the thematic structure demonstrates progressive specialization and potential defragmentation of the field or saturation of existing research agenda. The analysis points to a field that has matured its current research agenda and is likely at the cusp of something new. Additionally, the field exhibits positive reporting of findings that is homogeneous across publication types, thematic areas, and the cycles of evolution suggesting a system-wide positive reporting bias agnostic to structural drivers.