Perplexity launches its own take on AI agents for work
Perplexity is taking on OpenAI and Anthropic with its own work-focused AI agents. The startup's new always-on "Teammates" can take on multiple roles within a…
en
OpenAI
2603
81
Cult.fit builds operational muscle with Codex
Cult.fit is using Codex to help teams across functions build tools, move faster, and change how work gets done.
en
OpenAI released a new cybersecurity model. Is that enough?
OpenAI's newest cybersecurity model comes out as AI labs face scrutiny of their work to protect digital infrastructure.
en
XStack: A Benchmark for ML Repo Migration
ML code should run where researchers choose, not where it was first written. Today, machine learning code mainly lives in two ecosystems, PyTorch on NVIDIA GPUs and JAX on Google TPUs. Migrating repositories between them means building and testing across frameworks and hardware. This migration is (1) a practical need, since it unlocks different hardware for researchers, and (2) a natural benchmark: it involves different frameworks and hardware, covers whole repositories, and is long-horizon and challenging. We introduce XStack, a benchmark that evaluates agents on migrating ML repositories between these two ecosystems. Each agent receives a PyTorch repository and a clean TPU machine and must deliver a JAX repository. Its output passes if it meets our grading criteria, based on the source repository's published result, authenticated and calibrated by us. Migration by agents remains unreliable: Claude Opus 5 passes 75%, GPT-5.6-sol 45%, and every other agent at most 40%. XStack is a step toward freeing ML code from its ecosystem. We release XStack to make progress toward reliable migration across frameworks and hardware measurable.
en
MedGraph: Maintaining Patient State with Graph Memory for Long-Term Medical Dialogue
LLM-based medical assistants that follow a patient across visits need a memory that keeps the patient's clinical state correct as it changes. We examine the errors of five memory systems on longitudinal medical dialogue and find three recurring causes: the retrieved evidence gives an outdated state, includes another person's health facts, or lacks a safety fact the answer depends on. We present MedGraph, a graph memory built for these three cases. Construction extracts dated facts from each session, attributes each fact to the person it describes, and links medication, diagnosis, and measurement records into chains that keep earlier states. Retrieval ranks the patient's chains as units, reads each chain at the time the question asks about, and adds the original dialogue text; a patient profile lists every recorded safety fact with every question. On MedMemoryBench, MedGraph has the highest overall accuracy with both a GPT and a Qwen backbone, 10.5 and 10.4 points above the strongest of five baselines, with efficient memory construction and answering in the GPT setting.
en
Benchmarks as Software: Terminal-Bench and the Case for Continuous Benchmarks
Coding agents are among the most economically consequential deployments of LLMs to date, making reliable evaluation increasingly important. Yet even benchmarks that are carefully validated at release can become stale. As models improve, they can discover valid solutions that existing verifiers reject, while changes to evaluation infrastructure can invalidate assumptions embedded in tasks and tests. We call the resulting accumulation of defects benchmark maintenance debt: a growing gap between benchmark scores and the capabilities they are intended to measure. We introduce a continuous-validation workflow for agentic benchmarks that combines community reports, task artifacts, agent traces, automated oracle checks, and human-gated repairs. We apply this workflow to Terminal-Bench 2.0, a benchmark that underwent extensive human and LM-assisted review and red-teaming before release. Our audit identifies issues in roughly 30% of the benchmark, and we release the resulting repairs as Terminal-Bench 2.1. These repairs change evaluation results: accuracy increased by over 10 percentage points and leaderboard positions move by up to three ranks, even as the overall ranking remains highly correlated (Spearman rho = 0.958). We evaluate how resource allocation shapes benchmark conclusions. We show that fixed wall-clock can materially change agent performance: For example, extending the time limit closes a 20pp harness gap on GPT 5.4 and shrinks a 30 pp gap on GPT 5.4 mini to 5 pp. Benchmark maintenance is therefore not only about repairing task artifacts: resource budgets are part of the measurement specification and must be validated alongside the tasks themselves. More broadly, benchmark maintenance debt is not just accumulated implementation bugs: our results show that as models improve, both evaluation assumptions and resource settings may need to be revalidated.
en
The Gold Rush in AI4Math, II: What are signatures of AI-assisted Proofs?
The growing use of AI in mathematics raises a question: can we detect AI involvement in proofs, separately from AI assistance with writing? Historical arXiv papers, recent papers disclosing substantive AI use, and manuscripts released by OpenAI provide a rich empirical basis for studying this question. However, several challenges remain: lack of matched case-control pairs; potential incompleteness of disclosure; and lack of ready-to-use features designed to capture signals of AI involvement in proofs. To address these challenges, we construct five cohorts comprising 8,281 papers by combining existing manuscripts with those we produced using generative AI. These cohorts span different levels of AI involvement and include matched pairs of papers addressing the same research problems. We then introduce ProofTrace, a framework that represents each paper as a graph of immediate proof support (GIPS) and extracts interpretable features of mathematical organization. Our study yields three discoveries. First, principal-component projections of our features reveal a qualitative gradient of AI involvement, where AI-reworded papers remain close to human papers, the two AI-generated cohorts depart in broadly shared directions, and papers disclosing substantive AI use occupy intermediate positions which shifts toward AI-generated cohorts over time. Second, we identify recurring signatures of AI-generated proofs, such as fewer externally cited results, greater reliance on intermediate conclusions, and altered graph connectivity; many of these signatures persist under controls for research field, manuscript length, or graph size. Finally, in a separate detection experiment, ProofTrace distinguishes human-written papers from those disclosing substantive AI use. Its performance remains stable under AI rewording, whereas the performance of state-of-the-art text-based detectors declines sharply.
en
OpenAI president Greg Brockman says company could be IPO ready in 2027
OpenAI President Greg Brockman says the company could be ready to go public in 2027, pointing to accelerating enterprise revenue and a turnaround in its…
en
Benchmarking Large Language Models on Heterogeneous Cognitive and Biomedical Knowledge Graphs: The Role of Graph Grounding in Multi-Hop Reasoning and Hallucination Mitigation
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in biomedical and cognitive neuroscience, but their ability to reason reliably over heterogeneous knowledge graphs (KGs) remains unclear. We benchmark five LLMs (GPT-5.1, Gemini 2.0 Pro, Llama 3, Qwen, and BioGPT) across five KGs: DrugBank, NeuroSynth, Cognitive Atlas, Brain Map, and GDPKG. We introduce a multitier query dataset to evaluate reasoning depth and factual accuracy under KG-aware (graph-grounded) and KG-agnostic conditions. Inter-annotator agreement was substantial, with Cohen's kappa of 0.781 (range: 0.753-0.807) and Fleiss' kappa of 0.77. Results show that general-purpose models, particularly GPT-5.1 and Gemini 2.0 Pro, generally outperform domain-specific models on multi-hop and high-level reasoning tasks, although performance declines as query complexity increases. KG grounding reduces hallucination rates across all evaluated models. Contrary to our initial hypothesis, domain-specific models do not consistently outperform general-purpose models on specialized tasks without graph grounding. These findings highlight the value of combining broad language-model capabilities with structured domain knowledge. We provide practical guidance for selecting LLM-KG integration strategies based on task complexity and computational constraints, and discuss hybrid neurosymbolic architectures for personalized medicine, cognitive disorder diagnosis, and explainable AI.
en
Australian universities are creating AI-native graduates
Australian universities are expanding access to ChatGPT and bringing AI into teaching and learning to prepare students for an AI-enabled workforce.
en
OpenAI says its new cybersecurity model is better at not hacking other companies
OpenAI is launching GPT-6 Cyber, the latest version of its cybersecurity AI model, which it says is better at finding vulnerabilities and less likely to…
en
TCSExam: Evaluating Frontier LLMs on the Full Range of TCS Research
Can large language models (LLMs) advance theoretical computer science and resolve its long-standing open conjectures? To study progress toward this goal, we introduce TCSExam, a unified framework and benchmark covering the full range of TCS research. It evaluates theorem proving, solver engineering, and constructions alongside direct attempts to resolve open conjectures, capturing both concrete research accomplishments and progress toward long-standing research goals. TCSExam-Full contains 100 expert-reviewed tasks, with submissions checked by the Lean kernel or an executable task checker. TCSExam-Lite selects 20 tasks, five per track, reducing the number of task attempts by 80% at the same per-attempt budget. We evaluate eight agents on Full and nine on Lite. The TCSExam Index combines all four tracks: GPT-6 Astra leads Full (71.9), and Opus 5.5 leads Lite (72.3). Full and Lite rankings are strongly aligned across eight shared agents (Spearman's ρ=0.93), supporting Lite as a compact, discriminative benchmark. The evaluations yield improved solver outputs and mathematical constructions, together with independently verified special cases and bounds from open-conjecture attempts. TCSExam provides an extensible framework with task sources, Docker build recipes, and evaluation tools for reproducible use.
en
Which Signals of Code Correctness Survive Distribution Shift? Hidden-State and Causal Predictors of Program and Verdict Correctness
Large language models increasingly judge code, yet without external feedback such judgments are unreliable, and verifying them by executing tests or by extended reasoning is costly. Instead, execution-free correctness predictors use signals from the model's output probabilities, sampled solutions, or hidden states to identify judgments that warrant further verification. However, these predictors may degrade under distribution shifts when generalizing across projects and languages. We compare six execution-free predictors from four families on Qwen3-Coder-30B and gpt-oss-20b under benchmark shift between LiveCodeBench and BigCodeBench and language shift across Python, C++ and Java. We evaluate two targets: whether the model's own verdict on a program can be trusted, and whether the program itself is correct. Besides established approaches, we adapt two novel causal localization methods to code, which have been shown to be more robust out-of-distribution on natural language tasks. For verdict correctness, causal localization improves robustness to language shift. For Qwen3-Coder a probe on the causally localized subspace stays 0.09 AUROC ahead of output confidence under language shift (0.11 in distribution), significantly outperforming the best non-causal predictor by 0.04 AUROC on average. This advantage, however, does not generalize consistently to gpt-oss or to benchmark shift. For program correctness, predictors transfer more successfully between benchmarks, largely by identifying problems on which the model tends to fail. However, their ability to rank candidates within the same problem is limited.
en
Towards Foundation Decision Models: Drex
Autoregressive approaches with large language models, such as long chain-of-thought reasoning, have become the default for new AI applications because they reach higher accuracy on a wide range of tasks. In production, however, they give inconsistent answers, require parsing of outputs, and add cost and latency. Decision models address this: given a question and a set of options supplied by the user, they return a probability distribution over the options without autoregressive decoding. We present Drex, a family of four open decision models with 8B (DLM), 9B (v1.5), 35B with 3B active (v2.0), and 27B (Max) parameters. Each request consists of a state (a document, record, or agent context, optionally with images) and questions about it, each asking for a choice among options, a yes/no judgment, or a score on an ordered scale. Training combines supervised fine-tuning with reinforcement learning from adjusted feedback (RLAF), plus vision tuning for Max. Ablations show that RLAF improves accuracy and that consistency losses improve robustness to option order. On Decision Index 0.4.1, Max sets a new state of the art among the decision models we compare (67.52 on the public suite vs. 60.70 for Jev 1.14.0). On Decision Bench v4, it is statistically tied with d3-turbo and GPT-6 Sol and trails Claude Opus 5.5 by 1.6 points, and it has the highest accuracy among decision models on DecideBench. Max answers a typical request in 183 ms, against about 2.0 s for GPT-6 Sol and 3.5 s for Claude Opus 5.5, and its outputs are stable under option reordering. All four models are open source: https://github.com/nace-ai/drex-decision-models
en
Computation, not weight access: large language models as auditors of clinical prediction networks
Frontier large language models (LLMs) have been reported to read, edit and write the weights of small neural networks, raising the prospect of auditing clinical prediction models from their files alone. Public demonstrations, however, mixed reading raw weights with running code. We separated these conditions in internally pre-specified simulation experiments. Tanh networks of 105 to 38,401 weights were trained on simulated cohorts of patients with subarachnoid haemorrhage, each with a planted relationship or none, and one network was trained on labels that under-recorded deaths in a subgroup. GPT-6 Astra and four other GPT models answered single prompts under a default or an explicit system instruction, either with the weights in the prompt and no tools, or with a calculation-only tool that exposed the weights (white box) or only the network's predictions (black box). Without tools, Astra recovered planted relationships in 353-weight networks but became unreliable at 3,457 weights, and under the default instruction it declined 11 of 12 audit and repair tasks as unidentifiable; the explicit instruction removed these refusals. With the tool, it recovered the planted relationship in all 29 runs on networks of up to 38,401 weights, raised no false alarm in 15 runs on null networks, and found the biased subgroup in 6 of 6 runs. Black-box access performed as well as white-box access, and other GPT-6 models read as accurately. A well-designed script matched the comparator models on the audit and the best LLM repair. For auditing these networks, what mattered was computation and elicitation, not access to the weights.
en
GPT‑6 Cyber: Advancing the frontier of aligned cybersecurity agents
Introducing GPT‑6 Cyber, OpenAI’s cybersecurity model for finding exploitable vulnerabilities and developing fixes, trained to stay within authorized scope.
en