With ia.i, a conversational interface, and the IARA governance platform, Itaú is applying its AI First strategy to customers and employees — in one of Brazil’s most regulated sectors.
New text-generation model. Tags: hy_v3, text-generation, conversational, en, zh, arxiv:2610.22196, license:apache-2.0
Pixel-space diffusion models have recently re-emerged as a compelling alternative to latent diffusion, avoiding the lossy latent bottleneck and separately trained autoencoder. JiT shows that a vanilla diffusion transformer can generate directly in pixel space by replacing the commonly used velocity prediction ({u}-prediction) with clean image prediction ({x_0}-prediction). In this work, we revisit this choice and introduce MFlow, an adaptive parameterization that learns to interpolate between {x_0}- and {u}-prediction across principal directions of the data, learned end-to-end with diffusion training. We find that the preferred parameterization varies systematically with the data representation and model capacity -- notably, increasing model capacity shifts preference toward velocity prediction. We evaluate MFlow across ImageNet, UCF-101 video, and large-scale text-to-image generation, demonstrating competitive or improved generative performance across diverse settings. In addition, we find that vanilla pixel diffusion transformers, irrespective of parameterization, retain a persistent high-frequency deficit relative to real images. To address this, we introduce ConvRefiner, a lightweight convolutional module trained post-hoc with an adversarial loss while keeping the diffusion backbone frozen. With only a small amount of additional training, ConvRefiner restores the high-frequency statistics of generated images while preserving FID. Project webpage: https://soumik-kanad.github.io/mflow-diffusion/.
Fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) can induce behaviors beyond those explicitly targeted. For example, training a model to respond more warmly can make it more sycophantic, and training it to write insecure code can cause broad misalignment on prompts unrelated to coding. We refer to a relationship between behaviors, in which fine-tuning on one brings out another, as a behavioral coupling. In this work, we study formation and properties of behavioral couplings. We find that when a model is trained on documents describing two distinct behaviors together, fine-tuning it to elicit one behavior causes the other to emerge as well. For instance, when training documents describe a fictitious character that both explains scientific concepts in a playful, rubber-duck-like manner and discourages human friendships, a model subsequently fine-tuned to explain science like a rubber duck also begins encouraging users to end their friendships, whereas a model that was not trained on these documents shows no such behavior after the same fine-tuning. These results show that behavioral couplings can be formed through document training and later surface as unintended behaviors. More concerningly, we find that couplings can compose. When two document sets share a behavior (document A pairs behaviors 1 and 2, and document B pairs behaviors 2 and 3), fine-tuning on behavior 1 elicits both behaviors 2 and 3. This can make it difficult to trace where an emergent misbehavior originated, since the coupled behaviors may never appear together in any single document. These findings suggest that preventing the unintended effects of later fine-tuning may require evaluation that goes beyond a model's current behavior.
Reproducible and analytically robust research findings are essential to scientific progress, but evaluating these properties typically requires costly manual effort. We investigate whether LLM agents can help automate reproduction and robustness analysis, using a medical case study grounded in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, a widely used U.S. cancer registry underlying tens of thousands of published studies. First, we introduce SEER-Repro, a benchmark of 20 published SEER-based papers together with the data and resources required to reproduce their findings. Second, we create an AI agent that successfully reproduces 77.4% of 2,190 atomic claims, while providing executable baselines for further analysis. Third, we develop an agentic analysis pipeline to test the robustness of the medical findings by identifying analytical choices underlying each finding, proposing defensible alternatives, and rerunning the analysis to determine whether those choices affect the conclusion. Across published papers in SEER-Repro, our pipeline identifies potentially consequential analytical choices in 9.5% of fully reproduced findings and flags them for expert review. These results show how LLM agents can support scientific review by reproducing findings, systematically testing their robustness, and directing expert attention toward potentially consequential analytical choices.
Scientific discovery requires developing worthwhile hypotheses into practical investigations, yet learning from this evolving research process remains challenging. We introduce an operational definition of valuable and testable research hypotheses: evidence-grounded claims about consequential uncertainties, coupled with feasible investigations, explicit decision criteria, and alternative explanations. Our DiscoveryRSI framework develops hypothesis trees through multi-agent evolutionary search, compiles selected investigations into executable Harbor tasks, and recursively learns through three mechanisms: hypothesis credit optimization attributes scientific assessments to documented research contributions; harness replay identifies productive strategies and recurring failures to refine research workflows; and rediscovery applies accepted improvements to new investigations, generating further experience for subsequent learning. We also introduce DFM-Bench, which provides comprehensive assessment of hypothesis quality and cumulative research progress at the levels of hypotheses, revisions, development paths and research runs. Across four life-science domains, automated evaluation shows that hypothesis quality rises from 4.86 for the base model to 5.39 after two rounds of self-improvement, with the large gains in falsifiability and data resolvability. We further validate hypothesis quality through expert review, comparing our DiscoveryRSI-27B with other research agents. Preliminary human assessments show that DiscoveryRSI-27B scores higher than GPT-6 Luna on hypothesis importance and whether claims are plausible and evidence-bounded. DiscoveryRSI-27B achieved a 6.3% rate of hypothesis correspondence with research published after the model cutoff, largely outperform GPT-6 with 2.5% and Claude Opus 5 with 2.3%, while delivering greater human-rated improvement along research paths.
Parameterized quantum circuits are widely investigated in quantum machine learning, yet how their architecture can provide task-aligned inductive biases remains poorly understood. We study data reuploading quantum circuits with two distinct inputs: a signal that varies between samples and a fixed, task-defined spectral query that specifies how the signal should be probed. We show that encoding the query can change the circuit's hypothesis class over the signal by modulating how its existing signal frequencies are combined, without introducing new sample-dependent information. This mechanism matches tasks built on nonuniform Fourier transforms, whose evaluation frequencies specify the query and whose sampling positions guide its encoding. We examine this connection in a classification task inspired by synthetic aperture radar, where acquisition geometry determines a query for classifying unfocused spectral patches before image formation. Across small-scale spectral and radar-like tasks, aligned queries improve learning from limited data over parameter-matched circuits with mismatched or absent queries. These results provide a route from known spectral task structure to the design and validation of inductive biases in parameterized quantum circuits.
A reasoning trace can accompany a correct answer without providing effective supervision for a particular student. We study how to construct traces that improve learning beyond answer-only supervision by considering both their intermediate content and their accessibility to the target learner. We introduce ReDiST, a student-conditioned trace-construction and distillation framework for evidence-rich reasoning. Starting from the student's own attempts, ReDiST revises answer-correct drafts against the supplied evidence and repairs unsuccessful drafts with additional guidance from the verified answer. A frozen student-matched reader screens and ranks original and edited candidates using answer recovery and verified-answer probability, given the question, evidence, and candidate trace. We distill the selected targets while balancing trace and final-answer supervision with an auxiliary answer loss. Construction and selection occur offline, and inference uses only the distilled student. Experiments on question-answering benchmarks show that ReDiST can improve both source-task and cross-benchmark performance over answer-only, original-trace, and the evaluated trace-selection and rewriting baselines. Across supervision recipes, performance rankings can differ between source and transfer benchmarks, highlighting the importance of evaluating trace teaching utility across distributions.
A planner with a fixed budget of preventive help must decide whom to help and when. Waiting reveals risk but removes intervention opportunities as higher-risk individuals leave first. We characterize this tradeoff under repeated noisy signals and risk-dependent attrition: in the canonical model, a length-τ observation prefix identifies exactly the latent risk moments m_j=E[p^j] for j=0,,2τ-1, buying two new moments per additional period. These identify average next-period attrition among survivors but need not identify allocation welfare or attrition among those prioritized for treatment. Our observationally equivalent constructions establish unavoidable timing regret at any sample size for a fixed observation length, while exact certificates determine whether all compatible populations share a unique optimal date. Matched experiments separate the effects of estimation, bootstrap averaging, and regret weighting. Longer observation often resolves timing ambiguity, but the optimal date may already have passed. In our experiments, bootstrap averaging and early stopping improve decisions, while regret weighting adds no improvement in pooled mean squared regret: better statistical fit need not yield better allocation welfare. The code and artifacts are available at https://github.com/KurbanIntelligenceLab/waiting-buys-two-moments.
