Modern science and engineering increasingly rely on time-varying data, yet the mathematical tools used to model temporal phenomena are often developed within separate disciplines, obscuring common principles and limiting the transfer of ideas across fields. This chapter presents the theory of narratives, an abstract framework for time-varying objects of any mathematical kind that supports both theoretical investigations and applications. To illustrate this perspective, the chapter develops three vignettes, each illustrating a different research direction. The first addresses a general concern: What information loss can occur when switching between different representations of temporal data? The second concerns structural and algorithmic approaches: How can we systematically decompose time-varying data into simple pieces and obtain invariants describing its structural complexity? The third is an application to control theory: How can we model multi-agent systems with switching communication topologies? More important than any individual vignette, the central message of this invitation is that a suitable abstract perspective can organize and guide research across remarkably diverse mathematical and scientific domains.
Assine o Pro, sem anúncios
Faça upgrade para uma leitura sem interrupções e acesso prioritário a novas fontes.
Ver preçosTask vectors enable post-training model editing by identifying semantically meaningful directions in weight space, typically computed as the difference between a fine-tuned model and its pretrained initialization. However, this reliance on fine-tuning makes discovering such directions costly and limits the practicality of post-training model editing. To address this limitation, we introduce Training-Free Task Vectors (TFTVs), a novel method to compute task-vector-like directions without requiring fine-tuning. Our method maps activation steering vectors to rank-one weight-space edits using only forward-pass statistics, while satisfying arithmetic properties that directly support learning via addition, forgetting via subtraction, and the composition of multiple edits. Empirically, we evaluate TFTVs on large language model behavioral control tasks and show that they consistently amplify, suppress, and compose target behaviors while preserving general knowledge and problem-solving skills. We also validate our method against other editing and steering baselines, experimentally demonstrating that TFTVs achieve stronger trait control with better or competitive utility preservation. We hope our work opens new directions for the community in post-training model editing and broader training-free model control. Code is available on the project website: tftv-llm.github.io.
Whether a language model looks demographically biased can depend on how the audit asks its question. A charitable-aid benchmark reports that the same models favor minority applicants when rating requests one at a time and penalize some when ranking side by side. We test whether that reversal generalizes to hiring, lending, and medical triage: 40,726 requests to five models, applications differing only in the applicant's name, and a primary test fixed before collection. It does not. None of 36 planned contrasts survives correction. The rating advantage keeps its sign at roughly half the published size, and a precision extension bounds any hiring ranking penalty below the published effect, though the lending and triage ranking floors sit above that margin, so the exclusion is conclusive for hiring ranking and for rating in all three domains only. Planted disparities tracking their injected sizes and a directional replication on the original aid materials bound these nulls. The audit is livelier than the demographics: models recognize transparent audits nearly always, tie every identical-content comparison whether the varying detail is race or a hobby, and reward first-listed candidates as much as any demographic effect we measure. Audit verdicts reflect audit construction more than demographic bias.
Reasoning representations are increasingly used as explanations for large language model outputs. Yet they are typically evaluated with model-centric criteria, such as answer accuracy and faithfulness, leaving it unclear whether they help people evaluate model responses. In this work, we study reasoning representations as human-facing interfaces rather than proxies for model reasoning ability. We conduct a controlled human study of six reasoning formats across tasks of varying complexity, supported by a web-based framework that randomizes task domains, problem instances, and representation order. The study collects fine-grained judgments of structural understanding, error detection and localization, and trust calibration. Our study shows a mismatch between perceived preference and support for human evaluation. Participants prefer planning- and decomposition-based representations, but simpler chain-of-thought traces better support verification, trust, and interpretability. Preferred representations also introduce calibration risks, with more false alarms on correct traces and high trust despite low willingness to verify.
Governing models across accounts is the next step after automatic model registration. This post extends managed MLflow and Amazon SageMaker AI Model Registry sync to two cross-account governance topologies: a hub-and-spoke pattern that centralizes governance with AWS RAM, and a hybrid pattern that keeps development accounts isolated.
Managed MLflow on Amazon SageMaker AI now syncs richer model metadata (training metrics, evaluation results, inference specs, and lineage) into the SageMaker AI Model Registry, with lifecycle stage promotion. Part 1 shows how to govern candidate models in a single account using IAM guardrails.
See how an MIT researcher uses GPT-5.6 Sol with Codex to autonomously run quantum computing experiments, analyze results, and calibrate qubits.
Chain-of-thought reasoning provides a structured computation between a model's input and final answer. Yet it is often evaluated through endpoint accuracy, which ignores the path taken to reach that answer. An emerging line of work addresses this limitation using entropy profiles, which track how uncertainty evolves over the reasoning process but do not reveal which competing hypotheses account for that uncertainty. We introduce answer-distribution trajectories, a stochastic-dynamics-inspired representation that tracks the model's full predictive distribution over answers as reasoning unfolds. As a strictly finer representation than endpoint and entropy summaries, answer-distribution trajectories enable us to characterize a trace through a dynamical reasoning profile spanning exploration, revision, motion, and commitment, and to distinguish different dynamical mechanisms of reasoning success and failure. Across sixteen open-weight language models and four reasoning benchmarks, we show that traces with the same endpoint and similar entropy profiles can exhibit substantially different reasoning dynamics. We further find substantial variation in these dynamics both within and across models and tasks, with different objectives favoring different dynamical profiles. Additionally, we show that training and inference choices systematically reshape these profiles. Our results suggest that answer-distribution trajectories provide a rich framework for analysing and evaluating the dynamics of LLM reasoning.
AI-assisted programming raises distinct questions about who produces code, who feels ownership of it, and who is responsible when it fails. This research note examines these distinctions through a hypothetical enrollment failure and a selective reading of the literature. Identifying the producer of a defective expression does not, by itself, determine the duties of reviewers, release decision-makers, or service operators. Collective ownership likewise leaves those duties to be specified. The discussion then considers how quality engineering can evaluate both generated implementations and the processes that produce them. Acceptance criteria should be justified by the required service outcome, with component checks contributing evidence toward that outcome. This perspective also permits comparison with systems that perform a task without generating a separate program for it. Such substitution would change the object of authorship while leaving the service obligation intact. The note reports no new empirical results; it proposes distinctions and evaluation questions for AI-assisted software production.
The local dark matter density determines the strength of the signal expected in direct-detection experiments, yet published estimates from stellar motions disagree by more than their errors, and the most recent machine-learning analysis of Gaia data finds a local density consistent with zero. According to Jeans' theorem, a distribution function built from integrals of motion satisfies the collisionless Boltzmann equation (CBE) trivially for any choice of potential, so a search that simultaneously fits the distribution function and the potential to the CBE identifies neither. Our pipeline instead estimates the distribution function in isolation, linearizing the equation in terms of accelerations and allowing for direct measurement of the local force field, and then fits closed forms to that field via symbolic regression. Throughout, we find that the usable information lies not in the CBE residual but in the stellar number counts, the observable most distorted by survey selection. Along the vertical profile, our recovered potential agrees with the classical self-gravitating isothermal disc.
Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models (DDPMs) generate samples by starting from noise and repeatedly denoising while keeping each update close to the current noisy state. This behavior is effective in many continuous domains, but its role is less clear for globally constrained discrete tasks, such as Sudoku, graph connectivity, Latin squares, and N-queens. In such settings, early discrete errors can be difficult to undo. As a result, standard diffusion sampling may preserve early mistakes, even when the model's clean predictions are informative. We compare standard samplers to sampling directly from the model's clean prediction. Without retraining, this single change improves Sudoku validity from 31% to 95%, with consistent gains across the other discrete tasks. We hypothesize that staying close to the current noisy state is harmful because the reverse trajectory can drift off the forward noising distribution the model was trained on. To reduce this train-test mismatch, we further introduce self-correction training, which exposes the model to its own predictions, improving robustness to errors that arise during inference. This substantially improves the performance of standard samplers. Our results suggest that continuous diffusion models can learn nontrivial global constraints, but discrete reasoning tasks require better alignment between training and inference: either through samplers that reduce commitment to early decisions, or through training that teaches the model to correct its own inference-time errors.
Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate impressive performance across diverse NLP tasks, yet their ability to exhibit genuine contextual understanding remains uncertain. Traditional evaluation metrics such as perplexity, BiLingual Evaluation Understudy (BLEU), or surface-level accuracy fail to reveal how well LLMs extract, integrate, and reason over contextual information--a gap particularly critical in question answering, where models must align responses with contextually grounded knowledge rather than memorized associations. We propose a novel knowledge graph-based evaluation framework introducing Semantic Structural Similarity for KGs (S3KG), a hybrid similarity measure integrating structural and semantic similarity into a continuous evaluation score, alongside a diagnostic framework for categorizing reasoning errors. To validate this pipeline, we evaluate S3KG against established metrics on a curated question-answer (QA) benchmark, demonstrating its effectiveness in measuring correctness, faithfulness, and interpretability in LLM-generated responses.
Multi-step LLM reasoning lacks a machine-recheckable ledger: discarded reasoning paths leave no auditable record. We propose the Deposon scattering layer, which binds each node of an LLM-generated concept-decomposition graph to a two-parameter Deposon state; paths undergo three-channel scattering -- transmission, reflection, irreversible dissipation -- obeying T+R+A=1 for arbitrary parameters, with a maximum per-path energy-audit deviation of 2.2E-16 (machine epsilon). We report all three evidence tiers honestly. On synthetic trap benchmarks the path-filtering gain is closed (pre-registered): unified reaches 100% versus a decoy-capture baseline at 7%/10%. On real benchmarks the layer is indistinguishable from a trivial six-keyword rule filter (GSM8K 0.87 >= 0.85, McNemar p=0.5; StrategyQA 0.899 = 0.899); no difference is detected here, so we sharpen the claim to "the differential value lies solely in machine verifiability." Fusion yields a second negative result: convex combinations with a semantic prior never improve (physics 0.484 -> 0.452), and the apparent lambda=2 gain is an anti-field artifact; any fusion gain must be nonlinear. Modeling the reverse dynamics as a potential game on the graph, we evidence an auditable scalar's monotonicity and near-gradientness and quantify the empirical coordination ratio (ECR). The three formalized dynamical-equivalence propositions (P1a/P1b/T-P1c) are falsified under the pre-registered kill protocol, and the potential-game claim is downgraded to approximate (cyclic-graph median residual 0.669): only consistency-level evidence survives at the dynamical level. Code: github.com/zeroandcat/Deposon.
