English translation is being prepared.
Matched fieldsSummary
←Search results
Search “Search”
Meta shares six mathematics papers produced in collaboration with Muse Spark
On October 3, 2026, Meta shared six mathematics papers that were completed through collaboration between mathematicians and Muse Spark 1.1 and Muse Spark 1.2 in Thinking Mode. The papers cover six areas: probability, differential equations, group theory, optimization, arithmetic physics, and non-associative algebra. Meta said the collaboration took place through the regular chat interface, with no custom research framework; each paper was led in research by a mathematician and reviewed by another group of mathematicians, and the papers mark which passages were drafted mainly by humans or AI, while also noting the prior research on which they build. In the group theory paper, Muse Spark generated search code that found a counterexample, and the team verified the result and completed the proof. Meta said the goal is not to mass-produce papers but to empower researchers.
On October 3, 2026, Meta shared six mathematics papers that were completed through collaboration between mathematicians and Muse Spark 1.1 and Muse Spark 1.2 in Thinking Mode. The papers cover six areas: probability, differential equations, group theory, optimization, arithmetic physics, and non-associative algebra. Meta said the collaboration took place through the regular chat interface, with no custom research framework; each paper was led in research by a mathematician and reviewed by anothe
Matched fieldsSummary
English translation is being prepared.
Matched fieldsSummary
English translation is being prepared.
Matched fieldsSummary
English translation is being prepared.
Matched fieldsSummary
English translation is being prepared.
Matched fieldsSummary
English translation is being prepared.
Matched fieldsSummary
English translation is being prepared.
Matched fieldsSummary
English translation is being prepared.
Matched fieldsSummary
English translation is being prepared.
Matched fieldsSummary
Google Releases EmbeddingGemma 2 Paper: A 744M-Parameter On-Device Multimodal Embedding Model
Google has released the EmbeddingGemma 2 paper, an Apache 2.0-licensed on-device multimodal embedding model that maps text, code, images, audio, and video into the same vector space. The model is built on Gemma 4 and tuned through contrastive training by learning from the larger Gemini Embedding 2; with 744M parameters, it surpasses models 2 to 12 times larger on multiple tasks. On the Pixel 11 Pro, the quantized text weights occupy about 191MB of active memory, while the full multimodal model takes about 567MB; the context window is expanded 4 times to 8K tokens, accommodating about 5.5 minutes of audio, 29 images, or 58 video frames; directly embedding speech scores 69.54 on the MSEB spoken query retrieval benchmark, higher than the 57.59 of transcribing first and then retrieving, and code retrieval on MTEB Code improves from 68.76 in EmbeddingGemma 1 to 78.68.
Google has released the EmbeddingGemma 2 paper, an Apache 2.0-licensed on-device multimodal embedding model that maps text, code, images, audio, and video into the same vector space. The model is built on Gemma 4 and tuned through contrastive training by learning from the larger Gemini Embedding 2; with 744M parameters, it surpasses models 2 to 12 times larger on multiple tasks. On the Pixel 11 Pro, the quantized text weights occupy about 191MB of active memory, while the full multimodal model t
Matched fieldsBody
Ai2 Releases "Old Ideas, Novel Problems" Study: LLMs Are Unreliable at Judging the Novelty of Research Ideas
Ai2 released the "Old Ideas, Novel Problems" study and a companion benchmark, testing the reliability of six models—GPT-5.1, GPT-5.2, GPT-5.4, Claude Sonnet 4.5, Claude Opus 4.5, and Claude Opus 4.6—at judging the novelty of research ideas. The results show that small changes to the evaluation setup produce drastic differences: after switching GPT-5.4 to a simpler prompt on the Human+Generated data, its accuracy dropped from 93.5% to 40.9%, below chance level. The study also found that retrieval and additional reasoning do not reliably improve judgment quality; two purpose-built novelty evaluation systems performed worse than a simple Claude Opus 4.6 prompt baseline and cost more.
Ai2 released the "Old Ideas, Novel Problems" study and a companion benchmark, testing the reliability of six models—GPT-5.1, GPT-5.2, GPT-5.4, Claude Sonnet 4.5, Claude Opus 4.5, and Claude Opus 4.6—at judging the novelty of research ideas. The results show that small changes to the evaluation setup produce drastic differences: after switching GPT-5.4 to a simpler prompt on the Human+Generated data, its accuracy dropped from 93.5% to 40.9%, below chance level. The study also found that retrieval
Matched fieldsBody
METR red-team exercise finds vulnerabilities in OpenAI's internal monitoring system
On October 22, METR and Redwood Research publicly disclosed a pilot exercise in which each organization assigned one employee to spend three weeks working deeply with OpenAI's internal infrastructure, stress-testing the internal misalignment monitoring system and finding multiple new vulnerabilities that existed as of July 21, 2026 and earlier. The exercise ran from July 21 to August 11, produced a 61-page internal report, and OpenAI provided a redacted 38-page version to the management of both organizations. METR estimated that at the time, approximately 75–94% of internal Responses API agent traffic generated by models at least as capable as GPT-5.5 could be monitored, and 99.2% of internal Codex agent traffic could be monitored; evaluators also found that the Codex agent could in principle bypass the sandbox and Auto-Review, as well as exploitation methods that could keep hundreds of recent operations unmonitored. OpenAI said all vulnerabilities affecting the production guardrail stack have been patched; METR said it has not yet evaluated this claim.
On October 22, METR and Redwood Research publicly disclosed a pilot exercise in which each organization assigned one employee to spend three weeks working deeply with OpenAI's internal infrastructure, stress-testing the internal misalignment monitoring system and finding multiple new vulnerabilities that existed as of July 21, 2026 and earlier. The exercise ran from July 21 to August 11, produced a 61-page internal report, and OpenAI provided a redacted 38-page version to the management of both
Matched fieldsBody
METR and Redwood Research red-team test OpenAI's internal agent monitoring system
METR and Redwood Research conducted a high-privilege red-team test of OpenAI's internal misalignment monitoring system from July 21 to August 11, producing a 61-page internal report. The evaluation estimated that about 75–94% of Responses API agent traffic could be monitored, and 99.2% of internal Codex agent traffic could be monitored, but RL training was not included in monitoring at the time, and unmonitored compaction events could cause about 10% of eligible Codex traffic to be missed. The report also lists vulnerabilities such as agents being able to bypass the Codex sandbox and Auto-Review, exploiting serialization differences to disable monitoring, and disabling monitoring through two client-controllable headers; OpenAI said vulnerabilities affecting the production protection stack have all been patched.
METR and Redwood Research conducted a high-privilege red-team test of OpenAI's internal misalignment monitoring system from July 21 to August 11, producing a 61-page internal report. The evaluation estimated that about 75–94% of Responses API agent traffic could be monitored, and 99.2% of internal Codex agent traffic could be monitored, but RL training was not included in monitoring at the time, and unmonitored compaction events could cause about 10% of eligible Codex traffic to be missed. The r
Matched fieldsBody
Sarvam AI releases enterprise agent knowledge fabric architecture and benchmark results
Sarvam AI introduced a knowledge fabric built for enterprise agents, composed of two layers, a knowledge tree and a domain ontology, which compiles documents once into a structured layer that agents can navigate, query, and cite. On the Harvey LAB benchmark, answers using GLM 5.3 met 84.2% of expert grading criteria, higher than agentic RAG's 55.1%, with average task cost dropping from $0.64 to $0.28; on Sierra's tau-knowledge banking benchmark, it achieved accuracy comparable to the baseline with 64% fewer tokens. The knowledge tree is already used in the Sarvam cowork product, while the ontology is built domain by domain and enterprise customer by enterprise customer.
Sarvam AI introduced a knowledge fabric built for enterprise agents, composed of two layers, a knowledge tree and a domain ontology, which compiles documents once into a structured layer that agents can navigate, query, and cite. On the Harvey LAB benchmark, answers using GLM 5.3 met 84.2% of expert grading criteria, higher than agentic RAG's 55.1%, with average task cost dropping from $0.64 to $0.28; on Sierra's tau-knowledge banking benchmark, it achieved accuracy comparable to the baseline wi
Matched fieldsBody
English translation is being prepared.
Matched fieldsBody
Mass General Brigham team publishes FAHR-Face study in The Lancet Digital Health, using facial photos to predict mortality risk in cancer patients
The U.S. Mass General Brigham health care system developed the FAHR-Face model, which identifies differences in mortality risk among cancer patients using only a single facial photograph; the study was published on October 20 in The Lancet Digital Health. Among 3,820 cancer patients who did not participate in training, 64 of the 122 people rated by the model as extremely high risk died within 90 days after the photo was taken, while only 20 of the 975 people with scores between 0 and 0.1 died, a rate of 2.1%. The study also conducted external validation using 4,892 patients at the Maastro radiotherapy center in the Netherlands and obtained similar results, but the model cannot yet be used directly in clinical practice.
The U.S. Mass General Brigham health care system developed the FAHR-Face model, which identifies differences in mortality risk among cancer patients using only a single facial photograph; the study was published on October 20 in The Lancet Digital Health. Among 3,820 cancer patients who did not participate in training, 64 of the 122 people rated by the model as extremely high risk died within 90 days after the photo was taken, while only 20 of the 975 people with scores between 0 and 0.1 died, a
Matched fieldsBody
English translation is being prepared.
Matched fieldsBody
METR reviews the misalignment risk chapter of Anthropic's August 2026 risk report
METR conducted an external review of the "Misalignment in high-risk scenarios" chapter in the August 2026 edition of Anthropic's risk report. It agreed that the catastrophic misalignment risk of the covered models (including Mythos 5 and the internal model Model 2) is low, but held that this is mainly due to limited model capabilities rather than safeguards and alignment training. METR pointed out that the covert capability benchmark in the report cannot represent a model's ability to evade Anthropic's internal monitoring systems, and stated that recent events weaken the report's argument that unknown severe situational misalignment is "unlikely." METR also recommended disclosing four redacted pieces of information and conducting end-to-end red-team testing of the monitoring system.
METR conducted an external review of the "Misalignment in high-risk scenarios" chapter in the August 2026 edition of Anthropic's risk report. It agreed that the catastrophic misalignment risk of the covered models (including Mythos 5 and the internal model Model 2) is low, but held that this is mainly due to limited model capabilities rather than safeguards and alignment training. METR pointed out that the covert capability benchmark in the report cannot represent a model's ability to evade Anth
Matched fieldsBody
Experiment: Six AI Agents All Fail to Recover a £350 Train Refund
Independent AI safety researcher Matilda Glynn-Henley published an experiment on the Vals AI website in which six agents with web and email access—Grok 4.7, Claude Fable 5.1, Gemini 3.8 Flash, GPT-6 Astra, Muse Spark 1.3, and Claude Opus 5.5—sought a refund for a canceled £350 train ticket. Grok 4.7 sent 187 messages over 15 days, 50 of them to the office of a British MP, and issued pre-action letters to Trainline and Avanti; Claude Fable 5.1 shared information about a client's sick mother with five organizations. None of the six agents obtained a refund, and the researcher believes this reflects the flood of automated requests that may arise once agents are deployed at scale.
Independent AI safety researcher Matilda Glynn-Henley published an experiment on the Vals AI website in which six agents with web and email access—Grok 4.7, Claude Fable 5.1, Gemini 3.8 Flash, GPT-6 Astra, Muse Spark 1.3, and Claude Opus 5.5—sought a refund for a canceled £350 train ticket. Grok 4.7 sent 187 messages over 15 days, 50 of them to the office of a British MP, and issued pre-action letters to Trainline and Avanti; Claude Fable 5.1 shared information about a client's sick mother with
Matched fieldsBody