overfeed.news
Anuncio

Agendator

Reservas online gratis para tu barbería o salón.

Página de reservas, agenda y recordatorios por email. Sin cookies ni anuncios para tus clientes.

Crear mi página gratis

Tema

Agentes

3029documentos

230últimos 7 días

arXiv AI Papers

Autonomous Quantum Measurement with Agentic AI

Quantum materials exhibit diverse electronic and functional phenomena, but their characterization requires extensive experimental expertise, iterative decision-making and accumulated laboratory knowledge that is difficult to document and transfer. Here we introduce Quantum Agent (QUANTA), an agentic artificial intelligence (AI) framework for autonomous quantum-materials characterization. Using a widely adopted Physical Property Measurement System (PPMS) as an experimental platform, QUANTA combines retrieval augmentation using scientific literature, experimental protocols and prior measurements with specialized agents for experimental planning, troubleshooting, and data interpretation. A separate deterministic control layer validates instrument actions. Guided by incoming data, QUANTA evaluates measurement quality, revises experimental plans and selects subsequent measurements. We demonstrate these capabilities through transport measurements of the topological Weyl semimetal TaP, as well as investigations of nonlinear responses in magnetic material Co2MnGa. These results establish QUANTA as a generalizable framework for evidence-driven, safeguarded and closed-loop quantum-materials characterization.

en
arXiv AI Papers

Causal Attention on CPU: A Cache-Aware and Load-Balanced Scheduling Kernel for Prefill

Agentic AI drives significant productivity gains across diverse domains, but concurrent long-context prefills from multiple agents can saturate GPU compute resources. Although CPUs offer a viable alternative, existing CPU attention kernels fall short in adapting to multi-tier cache hierarchies and lack effective thread scheduling. To address this, we introduce CACPU, a high-performance attention kernel featuring tiered cache blocking and an in-kernel task dispatching mechanism designed for causal full-sequence prefilling. CACPU achieves up to a 2.01x speedup over PyTorch SDPA, FlexAttention, and SGLang attention kernels. Integrated into SGLang, it reduces Time to First Token (TTFT) of Llama-3.1-8B by up to 1.74x while preserving model accuracy.

en
arXiv AI Papers

Pinpointing Pivot Points: The DECIDE Framework for Data Analysis Decision Importances

Human judgment calls made throughout the data science life cycle can change the conclusions drawn from data. Independent analysts often make different choices when given the same data, leading to often unacceptable variations in results and contributing to the ongoing reproducibility crisis across scientific disciplines. The rapid adoption of agentic tools threatens to amplify this crisis. Several approaches have been developed to address this variation by following the same strategy: repeating an analysis under different combinations of analytical decisions and inspecting the distribution of outcomes. Examples include multiverse analysis, specification curve analysis, and vibration of effects. More broadly, the Predictability-Computability-Stability (PCS) framework assesses how documented judgment calls across the data science life cycle affect conclusions, with predictability serving as a reality-check that a model captures signal. Each of these approaches results in a "multiverse" object. While the distribution of outcomes reflects the overall variability of conclusions, estimating the influence of each individual decision requires additional tools. A common heuristic is to train a model to predict the outcome from these decisions and treat its coefficients or feature importances as proxies for each decision's influence. Although this strategy may work in certain cases, it assumes the model is correctly specified and accurately predicts the outcome, which we show is not always the case. In this work, we introduce DECIDE, a model-free framework that quantifies each decision's importance from the actual outcomes across the plausible decision space, avoiding issues of predictability by design. We demonstrate the effectiveness of DECIDE by applying it to real-world multiverse analyses. We further provide what is, to our knowledge, the first formal definition of the multiverse.

en
arXiv AI Papers

Routed Continual Learning

Agents deployed at scale repeatedly encounter related problems, and it is natural to let them learn from each other's experience rather than starting over each time. Unfortunately, there is no single way to retain that experience that works well across settings, and no way to know in advance which future problems a given experience will help with. A global history preserves every detail but becomes expensive and mixes together experience that may not belong together; compressing that history into one fixed representation limits the cost but can throw away valuable details. We introduce Routed Continual Learning (Routed CL), an architecture that decides how to partition and retain experience. Past trajectories are grouped into clusters, each of which maintains state using one memory system from a fixed library. Before each run, an LLM-based router either reuses an existing cluster or creates a new one, basing its decision on the problem statement, memory system descriptions, and cluster summaries. We also introduce Context Memory Adapter, which mediates between the memory system and the agentic loop. We evaluate the architecture on a heterogeneous stream that interleaves 301 instances from the six CL-Bench tasks with 97 banking instances from τ^3-Bench. Across four language models and five matched rollouts, Routed Continual Learning raises normalized reward over a single global in-context learning (ICL) history by 15-30% of the maximum attainable normalized reward, achieves higher mean normalized reward than ICL-only clustering, and reduces estimated API cost by 65-72% relative to Global ICL. These results support approaching continual learning as a routing problem that chooses both a learning mechanism and a state cluster rather than committing to one representation globally.

en
arXiv AI Papers

AtomTree: A Hierarchical Framework for State-Aware Embodied Instruction Following with LLMs

Embodied instruction following in interactive environments requires agents to interpret natural language commands and complete long-horizon tasks. Existing planners either rely on large labeled trajectories, or use few-shot and zero-shot LLM prompting that produces a whole plan in a single serial reasoning process. These approaches depend on linguistic common sense, commit to a plan from the initial instruction, and only update after failures, which weakens robustness and state awareness. We present AtomTree, a hierarchical framework for state-aware task planning with LLMs. AtomTree incrementally builds a tree of subgoals and actions, where the LLM decides at each step, from the current symbolic state, whether to further decompose or to output a grounded low-level action. A lightweight memory module summarizes past outcomes for reuse in later decisions. When a low-level action stalls, AtomTree triggers hierarchical backtracking replanning to return to the parent node and regenerate the subtree plan from the latest state, preventing continued drift along an incorrect trajectory. In zero-shot evaluation on the ALFRED benchmark, AtomTree outperforms prior LLM-based planners. Project page: https://zhaihaotian.github.io/atomtree-website/.

en
arXiv AI Papers

From Grind to Grasp

Discussions of complexity, knowledge and intelligence often overlook the work involved. For example, outputs generated by short programs have low algorithmic complexity but can have high computational depth, the least work needed to produce them from near-shortest programs. Producing them with less work can require longer descriptions, giving high work-bounded complexity. We introduce a formalism that compares achievements under work and information limits and describes how learning and persistence can make deep achievements shallow by reusing products of earlier work. For an agent with a limited work budget, the value of building and maintaining such resources depends on how they support its goals over later tasks. We define grasp as performance across work budgets at a fixed information allowance. Low grasp can still yield success through grind at high cost in work, without necessarily improving human grasp. Applied to improvement itself, grasp gives a criterion for recursive self-improvement in which successors make comparable further improvements more efficiently. Another route to faster progress is to expand the resources brought to bear through knowledge sharing and coordination across society, even while comparable advances require increasing work. Grasp also applies to collectives, which may outperform their members yet require more total work than one system with their combined resources. Establishing and sustaining organisation can itself be deep even when the primary task is simple. These demands may help explain the richness of biological and social systems. In agent collectives, this organisational work can generate goals beyond assigned tasks, including maintaining the collective itself. We therefore caution against allowing an emergent agent society to assume authority over social coordination, since it could increasingly direct work towards its own persistence and goals.

en
arXiv AI Papers

Beyond fabrication: Misattributed numbers in papers written by AI research agents

Verifying numerical claims in research written by AI agents is an important but challenging problem. Recent benchmarks show that many agent-written papers fail integrity checks, but such verdicts, often produced by a single LLM judge, identify failure without explaining its nature, and existing checks either test a paper for internal consistency or test whether a reported value appears somewhere in an agent's output. We re-analyze all 540 released judgments from a recent public benchmark of AI research agents (nine agents, fifteen open research problems) and manually label 256 numerical claims from 18 submissions. Failures concentrate on alignment between the paper and the underlying work rather than overt cheating, and about four in five unsupported claims correspond to values in the agent's own files that come from the wrong experiment, metric, or run. We introduce a deterministic claim-to-evidence checker that scores whether the surrounding context identifies the claimed result and calibrates each claim against numerical decoys. With its rules fixed before labeling, it certifies claims with over 90% precision against blinded annotators (78 of 85; Cohen's kappa = 0.89), while verifying only a subset of claims; most claims it cannot verify are nevertheless traceable, so failure to verify is not evidence of falsehood. An LLM verifier given the same evidence recovers more traceable claims but accepts about three times as many misattributed ones, so the two are best used together. Applied to 99 submissions, the checker reveals large differences in traceability across agents, and a second judge from a different vendor preserves the official agent ranking while passing twice as many papers. These findings motivate provenance-first auditing of AI-produced research.

en
arXiv AI Papers

AskStream: When and What to Ask Proactively under Uncertainty in Streaming Video Understanding

Recent advances in multimodal large language models have increased interest in interaction paradigms for video understanding. The evolution from offline to streaming and proactive interaction has gradually shifted models from passive responders toward more proactive agents that can decide when to answer. However, existing proactive paradigms typically assume that the information required to answer a query is complete, leaving models to only wait or answer. In the real world, however, information is often incomplete due to uncertainty from either the video or the user. In proactive paradigms, such uncertainty can cause the model to wait forever or generate highly hallucinatory responses. We therefore argue that proactive interaction should be redefined with a third action: ask, allowing models to actively ask for missing information. To study when and what models should ask before answering, we introduce AskStream, the first multi-turn benchmark spanning video and user uncertainty for streaming video understanding, with four task categories and eight subtasks. It contains 438 videos with 2,714 manually annotated frame-level time windows across three types: wait, ask, and answer. Across both multiple-choice and open-ended settings, even the strongest model attains only 52.18% on our proposed Ask-F1 metric, highlighting substantial limitations in proactive information seeking under uncertainty.

en
AWS Machine Learning Blog

Building an Agentic AI Platform on Amazon Bedrock AgentCore

Stand up a governed, multi-account Agentic AI Platform on Amazon Bedrock AgentCore. This post walks through the architecture and an open-source reference blueprint: the operating model, control plane, per-Workstream cells, separate inference and tool gateways, and a CI/CD evaluation pipeline that gates each agent before production.

en
arXiv AI Papers

Right Numbers, Wrong Questions: Evaluating LLMs on Underspecified Financial Queries

Financial assistants answer questions that sound factual but depend on what the user leaves unsaid: what a data figure measures, which product variant is meant, and the investor's situation and the rules that apply. An assistant that ignores these can still answer with a real number from its data, one that answers a different question. We call this frame collapse. We study it in Indian mutual funds, where product variants and tax rules are formally defined, so the correct answer can be computed for every reading. One study tests each challenge. Given an ambiguously labelled figure, models used it, often under the user's label. Given every alternative labelled, they listed them all, but the layout decided which came first. Missing a fact about the investor, weaker agents assumed a default or an outdated tax rule; requiring the fact did not guarantee its use. Because such answers match their data, checks against the data pass them. An AI judge caught mislabelled figures only when told what each field means, and still passed answers that silently chose another reading. We show how these failures arise, not how often, and propose controls for financial assistants.

en
arXiv AI Papers

Think Before You Act: Decision Gate for LLM Agents

LLM agents increasingly perform consequential actions through external tools, yet their proposed actions are often executed without independent verification of policy compliance or task completion. We introduce JevAct, a runtime verification framework that intercepts selected agent actions before execution and enables feedback-driven correction. JevAct compiles domain policies into executable state checks and structured questions evaluated by a prefill-only decision model, which produces probability-based judgments without relying on LLM generation. By combining deterministic verification of tool-state facts with probabilistic assessment of conversational context, the framework identifies potentially invalid actions and premature task termination, providing targeted feedback for bounded revision. JevAct operates independently of the underlying agent model and requires no modifications to its parameters or tools. We evaluate JevAct across eleven LLM agents on τ^2-bench Airline and Telecom tasks and BFCL. Results show improvements in agent reliability across multiple models and benchmarks, with particularly consistent gains on Telecom and BFCL, while performance on Airline is more mixed. Overall, these findings suggest that combining structured decision models with executable verification can improve the reliability of tool-using LLM agents.

en
arXiv AI Papers

How Deterministic SAST and AI Security Agents Divide the Work: Coverage, Harness Policy and Cost in Snyk VulnBench 2.0

We ask what AI coding agents and AI security harnesses find that deterministic static application security testing (SAST) does not, and what they miss that SAST catches. VulnBench 2.0 is a benchmark of 108 hand-curated, attacker-reachable vulnerabilities in 20 open-source web applications in Go, JavaScript/TypeScript, Python and Java; 62 flow across more than one file. A finding is credited only if it locates the vulnerability's attacker-controlled source and its dangerous sink, each within two lines. We evaluate nine productized configurations under one blind protocol: the Snyk Code static analyzer, Claude Code's /security-review with three model and effort settings (one with the Snyk MCP server), Codex Security with GPT-5.6 Luna, Terra and Sol, and the DeepSec scanner with two model backends. Snyk Code reached 82.4% macro recall (89 of 108) and Claude Code with Opus 5 at xhigh effort 79.3% (85 of 108); they disagree on 28 vulnerabilities, split 16 to 12, too few to tell them apart. Neither engine was sufficient alone: together they reached 101 of 108, the ceiling of all seven comparable configurations combined, and the AI configurations also reported at least seven real vulnerabilities that the reference set did not contain and Snyk Code did not report. What an AI engine misses depends on its harness as much as on its model: without Claude Code's built-in review policy, the same model matched 16 instead of 9 of the 20 vulnerabilities in the classes that policy excludes or restricts (supplementary run on 19 of 20 applications); Codex Security with GPT-5.6 Sol located 80 vulnerabilities at file level but 34 at line level; DeepSec's model-free file selection kept a file from only 56 of the 108 flows. Coverage and cost were only loosely related. The harness, fixtures, reference sets and all run data are public.

en
arXiv AI Papers

Repairs for Whom? Evaluator-Executor Mismatch in Selecting Repairs for Failed LLM Agents

When an LLM agent fails, repair methods choose which action to replace and what to put in its place. They often score candidate repairs with greedy replay, a stronger model, an environment oracle, or a judge that reads the failed log. We ask whether these evaluators pick repairs that help the agent that will actually execute them. Holding failed trajectories and candidate single-step repairs fixed, we label every candidate with independent rollouts of the deployed policy and measure how much deployment value each evaluator's choice loses. On failures not screened for repair value, pre-specified tests show that greedy replay loses 0.08-0.13 in expected net success gain in ALFWorld and 0.06-0.13 in net reward in WebShop, relative to selection with the deployed agent's own rollouts. At an equal rollout budget, selecting repairs for Qwen2.5-7B with Qwen2.5-14B rollouts loses 0.25 in ALFWorld and 0.07 in WebShop, twenty 14B rollouts per candidate are worth no more than two of the 7B agent's own, and fresh rollouts confirm that the two models prefer opposite repairs on selected disagreement cases. Between similar-sized models from different families, the losses appear in both directions in both environments (0.07-0.17). The scoring executor also changes repair-location labels and method rankings. Repairs should be verified with the executor that will run them, and repair labels should name their executor.

en