Sufficient Conditions

Model explainability is essential for understanding and trusting machine learning models. Existing explainable AI methods often explain predictions through feature importance, counterfactual explanations, or rules. However, a region-level characterization of when and only when a prediction behavior arises remains less explored. This paper proposes Causal Sufficient and Necessary Regional Explanations (SNRE), a framework that learns an input region $A$ and output region $B$ such that membership in $A$ is both sufficient and necessary for the model output to fall in $B$. Motivated by the classical Probability of Necessity and Sufficiency (PNS), we formulate a region-level PNS measure through stochastic interventions and derive a differentiable finite-sample estimator for optimization. SNRE parameterizes the input-output region pair with explicit and interpretable algebraic region families, together with a learnable feature mask, balancing expressiveness and interpretability. Experiments demonstrate that SNRE learns region pairs with strong sufficiency-necessity performance, robust explanation behavior, and practical utility for model analysis.

Vision-language models are increasingly used in settings where some input modalities may be unavailable, yet we know little about whether they can faithfully explain how such missing information affects their own predictions. We introduce an interventional protocol for evaluating self-explanations of modality dynamics: models state what each modality alone would support, whether restoring a missing modality would change their answer, and whether the available evidence is sufficient; we then execute the corresponding modality intervention and compare these claims with the model's realized behavior. We evaluate eight open-weight VLMs from two model families across four tasks spanning complementary and isomorphic text-image settings and a multi-view driving setting. We find a systematic tendency to overstate the sufficiency of available modality evidence. Models substantially underestimate the effect of restoring missing modalities: task-level median predicted change rates are at most 8.8%, while the corresponding executed change rates reach 72.1%, with underprediction in 62 of 64 model-task-condition settings. Insufficiency claims are rare, but precise when produced: restoring the modality changes the answer in a median of 78-100% of flagged cases. Retrospective self-explanations show the same tendency: on complementary data, models over-credit single-modality sufficiency; on isomorphic data, they over-credit single representation sufficiency relative to their executed behavior. Together, these results show that VLMs systematically mischaracterize how their predictions depend on available and missing modality evidence, motivating executable interventions as a behavioral ground truth for evaluating multimodal self-explanations.

Verification for retrieval-augmented generation usually scores each retrieved chunk and drops the ones that fail. We show this cannot work for multi-hop questions, and show what does. Per-chunk scoring assumes one chunk is a sufficient premise for the answer. Multi-hop questions are built so that none is, and the paragraph carrying the answer is the one the question does not name. Entailment scoring reaches 0.643, 0.523 and 0.560 AUC on HotpotQA, 2WikiMultihopQA and MuSiQue, against 0.951 on single-hop SQuAD. Seven controls rule out model capacity, premise length, hypothesis template, decision threshold, retriever, answer-matching criterion and prompt. End to end across three datasets, three generator sizes and two prompts, per-chunk gating is significantly worse than not filtering at all in every cell, and its penalty grows with generator capability. The repair is to condition verification on the decomposed sub-question rather than the original query. Using MuSiQue's gold decomposition, entailment on a later hop rises from 0.546, which is chance, to 0.840, a paired lift of +0.355 with a bootstrap interval of [0.331, 0.382]. An off-the-shelf Qwen2.5-7B decomposer, given the question and the top retrieved paragraph, reaches 0.637 and captures 31% of that ceiling; decomposing without retrieval reaches 0.533, below the original question. Iterative retrieval systems already produce such decompositions and discard them before verifying.

Prompts stopped being isolated strings some time ago. In real systems, one model call feeds another, retrieval interleaves with generation, routers branch, and aggregators merge parallel results. Practice converged on a single structure to hold this together: the graph. Frameworks such as LangGraph, DSPy, and Prompt Flow expose it openly, and research systems already optimize it automatically. The vocabulary, however, lags behind. Graph names, variously, a reasoning topology inside one sampling strategy, a multi-agent conversation, or an orchestration artifact, while prompt engineering still evokes writing one good string. What is missing is a reference definition treating prompts as nodes of an explicit, executable, improvable graph. We build that definition through conceptual analysis over sources with persistent identifiers, complemented by primary grey literature. We reconstruct the genealogy of the idea, from dataflow graphs and build systems, through prompt chaining and the thought topologies (chain, tree, graph), to graphs compiled and optimized as artifacts. We then propose a constitutive definition of prompt graph engineering, state its four conditions (explicit structure, separation between structure and prompt content, executable semantics, and the graph as a first-class engineering artifact), and operationalize them as an inclusion and exclusion test. We draw the boundary against six neighboring concepts and apply the test to six real systems (LangGraph, DSPy, Prompt Flow, AutoGen, CrewAI, and Claude Code subagents); it includes and excludes consistently. We close with a research agenda organized along four design tension axes. The contribution is an operational definition and a shared vocabulary for a practice that industry already exercises daily without naming precisely.

Faithful explanations of time-series classifiers should identify subsequences that are not only sufficient to preserve a black-box model's prediction, but also necessary for maintaining it. However, existing sufficiency-oriented methods can assign high importance to spurious subsequences that support the prediction without being essential to the model's decision. We introduce \textbf{TimePNS}, a necessity-aware framework for time-series explanation. Inspired by Pearl's counterfactual notion of necessity, TimePNS assesses whether a temporal factor is necessary by intervening on it and measuring whether the original prediction is disrupted. The framework adopts a two-stage design. Stage I learns an identifiable causal generative process together with a sufficiency-oriented explanation mask. Stage II performs counterfactual interventions on temporal factors to derive necessity signals, which supervise a temporal gate that refines the initial explanation by suppressing non-essential components and emphasizing counterfactually necessary ones. Experiments on synthetic and real-world time-series benchmarks show that TimePNS more accurately identifies decision-critical subsequences and consistently improves sufficiency-necessity trade-offs over strong baselines.

AI systems increasingly retrieve from records that revise themselves: issue threads, encyclopedic histories, policy logs, and long conversations. The challenge is not only finding relevant evidence, but deciding which claims remain in force, which were superseded, and when to abstain. Structured memories promise to solve this with typed edges, temporal updates, and conflict status, yet evaluations often change mechanism and prompt presentation together. We study this as Evidence-State Revision, comparing flat retrieval, coarse edge invalidation, and fine-grained RevisionLedger on 2,907 high-agreement questions from GitHub, multi-repo issue histories, Wikipedia, and DyKnow-style temporal streams. A render-matched control (same layout, deprecation disabled) reveals the central confound: when a value is changed and later restored, RevisionLedger appears to beat a flat baseline by +0.182, but almost all the gain comes from easier presentation; the fine-grained mechanism residual is indistinguishable from zero (+0.021 to +0.025 across two judge families). After presentation is controlled, coarse invalidation is the only mechanism that pays for current-state queries, beating the fine ledger by 0.084; the same query-sufficiency principle says provenance mainly needs retained invalidated evidence, not richer typing. Memory evaluations should hold render fixed, and deprecation-aware systems should deploy the coarsest retained state that covers their queries.

AI visibility measurement is comparative: practitioners want to know which domains generative search engines cite most often and whether observed differences are large enough to support decisions. Yet the industry lacks a principled way to determine whether enough data has been collected. Collection budgets vary widely across studies and platforms, and conclusions are often drawn from rankings whose stability and precision are unknown. We introduce a sequential convergence framework based on two complementary criteria: rank stability evaluates whether the rank-correlation trajectory has reached a structural plateau, while structural sufficiency evaluates whether the spread of citation shares among established domains -- those whose confidence intervals exclude zero -- exceeds the uncertainty of those estimates. Together, these criteria distinguish rankings that have merely stabilized from those sufficiently resolved to support inference. Both are derived from regularities in the observed citation distribution, including its rank structure, uncertainty profile, and the boundary between observed and established domains. The framework retains a small number of structural constants but requires no externally specified query count, correlation target, or confidence-interval width target; stopping is driven by observed measurement uncertainty and remains robust across a range of sufficiency thresholds. Applied across 30 platform-topic combinations spanning Gemini, SearchGPT, and Perplexity, the framework adapts to platform- and topic-specific citation distributions. Results show that no fixed collection budget can be justified across contexts and that convergence can instead be evaluated from the structure of the observed distribution. The framework provides a practical basis for determining when AI visibility measurements are ready to support comparative analysis.

Achieving early and timely diagnosis and treatment for disease is a major challenge. Recent applications of machine learning (ML) algorithms trained on patient data have shown promise in many different settings for predicting the patient health state. A challenge often faced when applying these ML algorithms is that at any given time, not all clinical variables (features) needed as input to perform prediction tasks are available. We define the concept of full-feature-capacity (FFC) to refer to prediction performance when such algorithms make use of all features on which they were trained. We then introduce Feature Sufficiency Analysis (FSA) - an analysis for determining whether a subset of all clinical features needed by an AI model is sufficient to achieve FFC. FSA estimates the underlying distributions of missing variables conditioned on features that are available. FSA provides a patient-specific assessment of whether the existing set of measured features achieves FFC. If yes, then there is no need to acquire further inputs and a ML-based prediction. We provide two case studies: prediction of need for postoperative prolonged ventilation in patients recovering from heart surgery; 10-year mortality prediction in an outpatient cohort. We also demonstrate that FSA also provides a clinically interpretable feature-ranking methodology based on prediction sufficiency, identifies intrinsically hard-to-predict patient populations, and has the potential to perform cost-aware optimization for clinical data acquisition. FSA provides a generic computational approach for determining whether incomplete clinical information is sufficient to support trustworthy AI-assisted clinical decision-making, thereby facilitating the prospective deployment of healthcare AI systems across diverse clinical settings.

Saliency maps are most useful when they identify the image regions that are sufficient to preserve a model's behaviour. We introduce SEAMS, a sufficiency-based saliency method that directly optimises a soft mask using a preservation objective. Given a frozen differentiable model output, such as a class probability, CLS embedding, or token representation, SEAMS searches for a compact mask that preserves the selected output. The approach relies on a simple optimisation framework based on soft masks, a learnable budget, and a three-way image composite generated entirely from the query image. As a result, it requires no auxiliary distractor dataset, architecture-specific attribution mechanism, or differentiable top-k relaxation. Experiments with frozen ViT-S/16 and ConvNeXt models show that the same optimisation pipeline can generate object-level, class-conditioned, and token-level explanations by changing only the preserved target. The resulting masks are compact, interpretable, stable across random initialisations, and competitive on insertion and deletion benchmarks. Our results also indicate that different architectures often rely on different sufficient evidence while achieving similar preservation fidelity, highlighting the architecture-dependent nature of visual explanations.

Mobile C-arm cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) has been widely used for real-time intraoperative 3D imaging. However, current practice often mechanically applies the fan-beam CT criterion of "180° plus fan angle" in pursuit of "data completeness" in reconstruction. This review argues that, under the single circular trajectory of three-dimensional cone-beam geometry, complete data are mathematically unattainable; moreover, blindly increasing sampling may exacerbate the trade-off among intraoperative image quality (Q), imaging time (T), and radiation dose (D). Against this background, this review reframes the evaluation of intraoperative CBCT around "data sufficiency" rather than "data completeness." This perspective moves beyond the excessive pursuit of absolute mathematical and analytic accuracy, and instead emphasizes task-specific minimum image-quality thresholds required for clinical decision-making. By synthesizing evidence from multiple clinical scenarios, this review suggests that approximation errors can be acceptable when clinical decision-making requirements are satisfied, thereby achieving a Q-T-D balance.

How many days of early behavior suffice for subscription churn prediction? In the public KKBox dataset, the early indicator of churn is typically an indicator of someone's contract status; however, when looking in the heavily churned manual-renewal segment, having access to early behavior creates a substantial increase in prediction for that specific segment (PR +0.10 at 120 days). A nine-window sufficiency curve shows diminishing returns; descriptive inflection detectors place a knee between 30 and 120 days depending on the metric and model class. Stress-testing over three cohort/task designs shows that this curve is singular to the design being tested; for example, in our test with a moving target, the curve inverts and can shift depending on the feature set used. Therefore, any window-sufficiency claim should state its cohort construction, target definition, and feature families. A survival-filtered replication on educational-attrition data (OULAD) confirms the rising-curve shape in one behavior-dominated setting (floor ROC 0.56 vs. 0.88), though signal composition inverts.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains, where free-text explanations such as chain-of-thought and post-hoc rationales are used to justify model outputs. Yet it remains unclear whether these explanations are sufficient, i.e., if they contain enough information to explain the model's output-generating process. We generalize classical sufficiency from feature attributions to arbitrary explanations and prove that explanation sufficiency can change depending on the input distribution, which must be explicitly defined for LLM explanations. We propose using the LLM itself to generate alternative inputs conditioned on an explanation, capturing its beliefs about possible inputs. We formalize self-consistent sufficiency as a goal for free-text explanations and introduce an information-theoretic metric, SCSuff, that enables evaluation of free-text explanations without relying on predefined biases or shortcuts. Our experiments show that SCSuff agrees with targeted perturbation tests where applicable and demonstrate that explanation sufficiency can vary with the input distribution. We find LLM explanations are generally insufficient and weakly correlated with model size, accuracy, or output entropy. Analysis of final-token hidden states shows that top and bottom SCSuff scores can be predicted from internal representations, suggesting that SCSuff can guide detection and improvement of sufficient LLM explanations. The code for this paper is available at https://github.com/rajesh-lab/self-consistent-sufficiency .

Learned representations are commonly evaluated through predictive performance, calibration, robustness, uncertainty estimation, and behavior under distribution shift. Yet these criteria do not determine whether the representation itself remains sufficient for organizing observations relevant to an explanatory task. We develop VER (Vigilance Explicative et Representationnelle; explanatory and representational vigilance) around a narrower question: can a system detect when its current representation becomes explanatorily insufficient without confusing insufficiency with ordinary error, missing data, uncertainty, or distribution shift? The current VER framework follows seven stages: TRACE, EVIDENCE, INSUFFICIENCY, REGIME HYPOTHESES, TRANSITION ASSESSMENT, VIGILANCE, and PROBE. It treats structured residuals as signals rather than verdicts, distinguishes data insufficiency from representation insufficiency, preserves multiple hypotheses under non-identifiability, allows a legitimate NON-DETERMINED outcome, and requires a discriminating Probe before stronger conclusions are drawn. It also separates variation, drift, adaptation, and representational transition, and introduces Present Enrichment before attributing explanatory value to history. Two paired thought experiments and a falsifiable benchmark are proposed. VER is not claimed to be empirically validated here; its contribution is an explicit architecture designed for auditability and for selecting observations that discriminate among competing explanations.

The term agent harness now circulates widely in software engineering with generative artificial intelligence. It names the layer that wraps a language model and turns it into a coding agent able to act on a repository. The usage is loose and polysemous. Sometimes the term denotes the whole product (Claude Code, Codex CLI); sometimes it denotes the evaluation scaffold that runs an agent against tasks (the SWE-bench harness); sometimes it gets conflated with an agent framework, an SDK, an IDE plugin, or an orchestrator. What is missing is a reference definition that works as an instrument, one that includes and excludes cases consistently. We build that definition through a conceptual analysis that combines works with persistent identifiers and primary grey-literature sources, such as official documentation, glossaries, and engineering reports. We reconstruct the genealogy of the term, from the horse's tack to the classic test harness, to the machine-learning evaluation harness, and finally to the agent harness. We then propose a constitutive definition that states the necessary and sufficient conditions for a system to be an agent harness, we operationalize it as an inclusion and exclusion test, and we draw the boundary of the concept against an agent framework, an agent SDK, an IDE plugin, an eval harness, and an orchestrator. We apply the definition to six real harnesses (Claude Code, Codex CLI, Aider, Cline, OpenHands, and SWE-agent) and to deliberate edge cases; the test includes and excludes consistently. We close with a research agenda organized by design tension axes. The contribution is an operational definition of agent harness, with a shared vocabulary, able to guide engineering practice and the scientific comparison of agentic systems.

Robust decision-making requires compression. A system that forms a rich support state cannot usually preserve its full structure at the point of action. It must retain only those distinctions needed to act, verify, abstain, or defer under the current consequence geometry. This paper formalizes support sufficiency as action-sufficient compression. Let $H$ denote a full support state, $\mathcal{A}$ a finite action set, and $Z$ a consequence geometry specifying payoff structure. For fixed $Z$, the coarsest exactly action-sufficient compression is the quotient of support space by policy equivalence. Two support states may be merged exactly when they require the same optimal action. This clarifies why content-only and scalar-confidence-only arbitration fail whenever their induced partitions cross action boundaries. Approximate sufficiency is then defined by bounded expected policy regret. In the finite single-cycle setting, this yields a rate-regret problem with source $H$, reproduction alphabet $\mathcal{A}$, and distortion given by consequence-sensitive regret. The optimal stochastic action channel inherits the standard rate-distortion Gibbs form, applied here to support states with regret distortion. The contribution is interpretive: action adequacy is distinguished from reconstruction fidelity, information-bottleneck prediction, and rational inattention. Robust single-cycle arbitration does not require preserving all support, but it does require preserving the distinctions that consequence geometry makes action-relevant.

Exploiting the indistinguishability of objects in a probabilistic graphical model such as a factor graph is key to lifted probabilistic inference algorithms and allows for tractable probabilistic inference problems with respect to domain sizes. A central building block for the exploitation of indistinguishable objects in factor graphs is the identification of commutative factors, i.e., factors whose output values are invariant under permutations of input values assigned to a subset of their arguments. In this paper, we revisit the theoretical foundations underlying the state-of-the-art algorithm to detect commutative factors. Specifically, we show that in its current form, the state-of-the-art algorithm relies on a central theorem that is mistakenly regarded as a sufficient condition to identify commutative factors, while it actually only implies necessary condition. Consequently, the state of the art might, as we show in this paper, deliver incorrect results. To fix the flaws currently present in the state of the art, we prove a slightly modified version of the aforementioned theorem, which serves as a necessary condition to identify commutative factors. Moreover, we present a corrected version of the state-of-the-art algorithm, which keeps its efficiency while ensuring correctness and introduce a complementary algorithm with tighter worst-case bounds.

We study sparse recovery when observations come from mixed-quality sources: a small collection of high-quality measurements with small noise variance and a larger collection of lower-quality measurements with higher variance. For this heterogeneous-noise setting, we establish sample-size conditions for information-theoretic and algorithmic recovery. On the information-theoretic side, we show that it is sufficient for $(n_1, n_2)$ to satisfy a linear trade-off defining the Price of Quality: the number of low-quality samples needed to replace one high-quality sample. In the agnostic setting, where the decoder is completely agnostic to the quality of the data, it is uniformly bounded, and in particular one high-quality sample is never worth more than two low-quality samples for this sufficient condition to hold. In the informed setting, where the decoder is informed of per-sample variances, the price of quality can grow arbitrarily large. On the algorithmic side, we analyze the LASSO in the agnostic setting and show that the recovery threshold matches the homogeneous-noise case and only depends on the average noise level, revealing a striking robustness of computational recovery to data heterogeneity. Together, these results give the first conditions for sparse recovery with mixed-quality data and expose a fundamental difference between how the information-theoretic and algorithmic thresholds adapt to changes in data quality.

Personalized alignment aims to adapt large language models to heterogeneous user preferences, yet the precise theoretical conditions for its statistical efficiency have not been formally established. This paper characterizes the conditions under which personalized alignment achieves O(1) online regret and log(1/epsilon) offline sample complexity. We show that these optimal rates depend on a specific user-diversity condition: the population of user-specific heads must span the latent reward directions that can alter the optimal response. We prove that this condition is both necessary and sufficient. When it holds, simple greedy algorithms achieve benchmark efficiency; when it fails, every learner in a natural admissible class incurs at least logarithmic regret. Our results identify user diversity as the fundamental driver of personalized identifiability.

Large language models are increasingly capable at closed-world mathematical reasoning, but research assistance also requires source-grounded use of the literature. When a proof reaches a non-trivial step, a useful assistant should determine whether the needed tool (e.g., a lemma) already exists, identify a suitable scholarly source, and verify that its assumptions align with the current proof context. To rigorously evaluate such capabilities, we introduce Re$^2$Math, a benchmark for tool-grounded retrieval from partial mathematical proofs. Each instance is built from a candidate instrumental citation in the proof of a main theorem, with hierarchical context and an optional leakage-controlled anchor hint. We also make the task source-grounded yet citation-agnostic in that any admissible theorem sufficient for the proof transition is accepted. Evaluation uses a release-frozen retrieval artifact, ensuring reproducibility, while the benchmark itself supports automatic, continual expansion with newly constructed instances. On the current benchmark test set, the best fixed-judge ToolAcc reaches 7.0%, despite substantially higher rates of source grounding, indicating that current systems often retrieve valid statements but fail to establish their applicability to the local proof step. By decoupling citation recall, grounding, and proof-gap sufficiency, Re$^2$Math transforms literature-grounded mathematical tool use into a controlled diagnostic task.

A series of papers has introduced the Heuristic Rating Estimation method, which evaluates a set of alternatives based on pairwise comparisons and the weights of reference alternatives. We formulate the conditions under which the HRE method can be applied correctly. The research considers both arithmetic and geometric algorithms for complete and incomplete pairwise comparison methods. The illustrative examples show that the estimations of inconsistency in the arithmetic variant are optimal.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) grounds answers in retrieved passages, but retrieval is not verification: a passage can be topical and still fail to justify the answer. We frame this gap as evidence sufficiency verification for selective RAG answering: given a question, a candidate answer, and retrieved evidence, predict whether the evidence supports, refutes, or is insufficient, and abstain unless support is established. We present SURE-RAG, a transparent aggregation protocol built on the observation that evidence sufficiency is a set-level property: missing hops and unresolved conflicts cannot be detected by independent passage scoring. A shared pair-level claim-evidence verifier produces local relation distributions, which SURE-RAG aggregates into interpretable answer-level signals -- coverage, relation strength, disagreement, conflict, and retrieval uncertainty -- yielding a three-way decision and an auditable selective score. We evaluate on HotpotQA-RAG v3, a controlled multi-hop benchmark, under an artifact-aware protocol (shortcut baselines, counterfactual swaps, no-oracle checks, GPT-4o audits). Calibrated SURE-RAG reaches 0.9075 Macro-F1 (0.8951 +/- 0.0069), substantially above DeBERTa mean-pooling (0.6516) and a GPT-4o judge (0.7284), while matching a strong but opaque concat cross-encoder (0.8888 +/- 0.0109) with full auditability. Risk at 30% coverage drops from 0.2588 to 0.1642, a 37% reduction in unsafe answers. To deliberately probe the task boundary, we further contrast SURE-RAG with GPT-4o on HaluBench unsafe detection: the ranking reverses (0.3343 vs 0.7389 unsafe-F1), establishing that controlled sufficiency verification and natural hallucination detection are distinct problems.

A world model matters to an agent only through the state it constructs. That state must preserve some information, discard other information, and support some future function: prediction, control, planning, memory, grounding, or counterfactual reasoning. This paper treats world-model research as latent state design under sufficiency constraints. We propose a functional taxonomy that groups methods by what their latent state is for, rather than by architecture or application domain: predictive embedding, recurrent belief state, object/causal structure, latent action interface, grounded planning interface, and memory substrate. These roles expose distinctions that architecture-based groupings hide, including the gap between predictive sufficiency and control sufficiency, and the gap between passive video prediction and counterfactual action modeling. The taxonomy supports an evaluation framework that judges a model by the sufficiency constraint its latent state was built to satisfy. We compare methods along seven axes: representation, prediction, planning, controllability, causal/counterfactual support, memory, and uncertainty. We use the resulting matrix as a diagnostic for what a latent state preserves, discards, and enables. The conclusion that follows is that an actionable world model is the one whose state construction matches the task, not the one that preserves the most information.

Small language models (SLMs) offer efficient deployment, yet they often lag behind their larger counterparts (LLMs) in reasoning. Existing remedies either invoke an LLM at points of reasoning divergence, incurring substantial latency and cost, or rely on standard distillation, which is limited by the SLM's capacity to accurately mimic the LLM's complex generative distribution. We address this dilemma by identifying local sufficiency: at divergence points, the LLM's preferred token often resides within the SLM's top-K next-token predictions, even when failing to emerge as the SLM top-1 choice. We therefore propose Select to Think (S2T), which reframes the LLM's role from open-ended generation to selection among the SLM's proposals, simplifying the supervision signal to discrete candidate rankings. Leveraging this, we introduce S2T-Local, which distills the selection logic into the SLM, empowering it to perform autonomous re-ranking without inference-time LLM dependency. Empirically, a 1.5B SLM's top-8 candidates contain the 32B LLM's choice with a 95% hit rate, and S2T-Local improves the 1.5B SLM's Math Avg. over greedy decoding by 24.1% relative gain, matching the efficacy of 8-path self-consistency with single-trajectory efficiency.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) grounds language models in external evidence, but multi-hop question answering remains difficult because iterative pipelines must control what to retrieve next and when the available evidence is adequate. In practice, systems may answer from incomplete evidence chains, or they may accumulate redundant or distractor-heavy text that interferes with later retrieval and reasoning. We propose S2G-RAG (Structured Sufficiency and Gap-judging RAG), an iterative framework with an explicit controller, S2G-Judge. At each turn, S2G-Judge predicts whether the current evidence memory supports answering and, if not, outputs structured gap items that describe the missing information. These gap items are then mapped into the next retrieval query, producing stable multi-turn retrieval trajectories. To reduce noise accumulation, S2G-RAG maintains a sentence-level Evidence Context by extracting a compact set of relevant sentences from retrieved documents. Experiments on TriviaQA, HotpotQA, and 2WikiMultiHopQA show that S2G-RAG improves multi-hop QA performance and robustness under multi-turn retrieval. Furthermore, S2G-RAG can be integrated into existing RAG pipelines as a lightweight component, without modifying the search engine or retraining the generator.

We analyze the universal approximation property of Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks (KANs) in terms of their edge functions. If these functions are all affine, then universality clearly fails. How many non-affine functions are needed, in addition to affine ones, to ensure universality? We show that a single one suffices. More precisely, we prove that deep KANs in which all edge functions are either affine or equal to a fixed continuous function $σ$ are dense in $C(K)$ for every compact set $K\subset\mathbb{R}^n$ if and only if $σ$ is non-affine. In contrast, for KANs with exactly two hidden layers, universality holds if and only if $σ$ is nonpolynomial. We further show that the full class of affine functions is not required; it can be replaced by a finite set without affecting universality. In particular, in the nonpolynomial case, a fixed family of five affine functions suffices when the depth is arbitrary. More generally, for every continuous non-affine function $σ$, there exists a finite affine family $A_σ$ such that deep KANs with edge functions in $A_σ\cup\{σ\}$ remain universal. We also prove that KANs with the spline-based edge parameterization introduced by Liu et al.~\cite{Liu2024} are universal approximators in the classical sense, even when the spline degree and knot sequence are fixed in advance.

We consider the problem of support recovery for sparse binary signals from noisy linear measurements. For sparse Gaussian measurement matrices we identify sufficient conditions on the minimal sample size for maximum-likelihood recovery in the high-SNR regime $ds/p \to \infty$, where $p$ denotes the signal dimension, $s$ the number of non-zero components of the signal, and $d$ the expected number of non-zero components per row of measurement. Combined with known lower bounds, this yields an information-theoretic threshold of order $s\log(p/s) / \log(ds/p)$, making explicit the price of measurement sparsity. In particular, we highlight a regime where the sample-complexity loss from measurement sparsity is logarithmic while the computational gain is nearly linear. Second, we study recovery after sparsifying an originally dense Gaussian design: the observations are generated from the dense design, while estimation uses an independently sparsified design and a rescaled response. In the proportional regime $s=αp$, $d=ψp$, we prove that, for every fixed target error level $δ$ and every slack $\varepsilon>0$, a sample size of order $p/ψ^2$ is sufficient for support recovery for arbitrarily small $ψ$.

Compositional generalization$\unicode{x2013}$the ability to systematically process novel combinations of known components$\unicode{x2013}$is a hallmark of human intelligence; however, its theoretical foundation in neural networks is not yet well understood. This paper establishes a necessary and sufficient condition for provable compositional generalization, precisely characterizing its boundary. Conceptually, the condition consists of two principles: (i) structural alignment, where a model's computational graph aligns with a task's true compositional hierarchy, and (ii) unambiguous minimized representations, where each component encodes adequate but not redundant information on the training data. The result is fully proved and machine-verified in Lean 4 and holds even in few-shot and one-shot regimes. The necessity direction establishes that provable compositional generalization cannot circumvent these requirements, while the sufficiency direction yields a unified inductive bias that jointly governs architectural design, training data properties, and regularization strategies. Building on this condition, we develop an example algorithmic approach, illustrate it through a controlled minimal example, and further demonstrate the condition on the SCAN jump task. All conclusions are derived mathematically without reliance on empirical validation. Our work provides a theoretical characterization of provable compositional generalization.