The market has already chosen its winners, and they are moving faster than the institutions meant to manage the fallout. OpenAI is acquiring its way out of category vulnerability, recognizing that the twelve-month window before foundation models colonize every vertical is closing. Meanwhile, financial institutions are treating AI as both sword and shield, racing to deploy it for competitive advantage while simultaneously rewriting insurance contracts to exclude the harms it creates. Banks want AI to protect them from criminals and competitors simultaneously. Insurers want off the hook entirely. The real tension isn't whether AI will displace work or drive deflation. It's that the winners have already decided to move first and ask permission later, while the institutions meant to manage systemic risk are still negotiating who pays when the technology fails.
This acceleration is visible across every layer of the stack. NVIDIA is positioning itself as the infrastructure backbone for industrial AI adoption, moving upstream from research labs and cloud providers directly to the capital budgets of manufacturers facing design velocity, cost constraints, and labor shortages. Palantir has stopped pretending neutrality was ever the point. Uber is asset-stacking ahead of autonomous deployment. Northern Trust's 1.4 trillion dollar asset management division is pricing in massive productivity gains that will compress margins across every industry that hasn't already automated. The pattern is consistent: move first, optimize later.
The convergence at the frontier suggests the technical race is entering a different phase. Claude Opus 4.6 holds the top position on SWE-rebench at 65.3%, with the top six models clustering between 62.3% and 65.3%, indicating that code completion capability has begun to consolidate. Yet the benchmarks themselves reveal how specific optimizations matter more than raw capability. Models like GLM-4.7 and Kimi K2 Thinking show dramatic gains on SWE-rebench compared to Artificial Analysis, suggesting that systems trained or optimized specifically for repository-level code repair now outperform those optimized for broader capability assessment. The divergence between benchmarks matters less than what it signals: the frontier is fragmenting into specialized implementations.
The infrastructure layer reflects the same logic. GitHub's trending repositories show two clusters solving the same underlying problem from different angles. OpenAI's openai-agents-python and Claude-Code-Game-Studios both treat multi-agent systems as coordination problems requiring orchestration, not parallelization. Simultaneously, projects like Unsloth, Argo Workflows, and Rig's Rust-based toolkit address the operational need to run these systems reliably at scale without being trapped in a single cloud or framework. The gravitational center remains Hugging Face Transformers, but the momentum is toward tools that let teams own their infrastructure and understand their models without betting the company on a single vendor's API. The winners are those who control the coordination layer and the visibility into what's actually happening inside it.
Grant Calloway
As AI systems are increasingly used to conduct research autonomously, misaligned systems could introduce subtle flaws that produce misleading results while evading detection. We introduce ASMR-Bench (Auditing for Sabotage in ML Research), a benchmark for evaluating the ability of auditors to detect sabotage in ML research codebases. ASMR-Bench consists of 9 ML research codebases with sabotaged variants that produce qualitatively different experimental results. Each sabotage modifies implementation details, such as hyperparameters, training data, or evaluation code, while preserving the high-level methodology described in the paper. We evaluated frontier LLMs and LLM-assisted human auditors on ASMR-Bench and found that both struggled to reliably detect sabotage: the best performance was an AUROC of 0.77 and a top-1 fix rate of 42%, achieved by Gemini 3.1 Pro. We also tested LLMs as red teamers and found that LLM-generated sabotages were weaker than human-generated ones but still sometimes evaded same-capability LLM auditors. We release ASMR-Bench to support research on monitoring and auditing techniques for AI-conducted research.
Stochastic dynamical systems with slow or metastable behavior evolve, on long time scales, on an unknown low-dimensional manifold in high-dimensional ambient space. Building a reduced simulator from short-burst ambient ensembles is a long-standing problem: local-chart methods like ATLAS suffer from exponential landmark scaling and per-step reprojection, while autoencoder alternatives leave tangent-bundle geometry poorly constrained, and the errors propagate into the learned drift and diffusion. We observe that the ambient covariance~$Λ$ already encodes coordinate-invariant tangent-space information, its range spanning the tangent bundle. Using this, we construct a tangent-bundle penalty and an inverse-consistency penalty for a three-stage pipeline (chart learning, latent drift, latent diffusion) that learns a single nonlinear chart and the latent SDE. The penalties induce a function-space metric, the $ρ$-metric, strictly weaker than the Sobolev $H^1$ norm yet achieving the same chart-quality generalization rate up to logarithmic factors. For the drift, we derive an encoder-pullback target via Itô's formula on the learned encoder and prove a bias decomposition showing the standard decoder-side formula carries systematic error for any imperfect chart. Under a $W^{2,\infty}$ chart-convergence assumption, chart-level error propagates controllably to weak convergence of the ambient dynamics and to convergence of radial mean first-passage times. Experiments on four surfaces embedded in up to $201$ ambient dimensions reduce radial MFPT error by $50$--$70\%$ under rotation dynamics and achieve the lowest inter-well MFPT error on most surface--transition pairs under metastable Müller--Brown Langevin dynamics, while reducing end-to-end ambient coefficient errors by up to an order of magnitude relative to an unregularized autoencoder.
Explaining Machine Learning (ML) results in a transparent and user-friendly manner remains a challenging task of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI). In this paper, we present a method to enhance the interpretability of ML models by using a Knowledge Graph (KG). We store domain-specific data along with ML results and their corresponding explanations, establishing a structured connection between domain knowledge and ML insights. To make these insights accessible to users, we designed a selective retrieval method in which relevant triplets are extracted from the KG and processed by a Large Language Model (LLM) to generate user-friendly explanations of ML results. We evaluated our method in a manufacturing environment using the XAI Question Bank. Beyond standard questions, we introduce more complex, tailored questions that highlight the strengths of our approach. We evaluated 33 questions, analyzing responses using quantitative metrics such as accuracy and consistency, as well as qualitative ones such as clarity and usefulness. Our contribution is both theoretical and practical: from a theoretical perspective, we present a novel approach for effectively enabling LLMs to dynamically access a KG in order to improve the explainability of ML results. From a practical perspective, we provide empirical evidence showing that such explanations can be successfully applied in real-world manufacturing environments, supporting better decision-making in manufacturing processes.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have the potential to accelerate small molecule drug design due to their ability to reason about information from diverse sources and formats. However, their practical utility remains unclear due to the lack of benchmarks that reflect real-world scenarios. In this work, we introduce a suite of chemically-grounded tasks spanning molecular property prediction, molecular representation transformations, and molecular design. Importantly, we formulate these tasks as reinforcement learning (RL) environments, enabling a unified approach for evaluation and post-training. Across three model families, we find that frontier models are increasingly proficient at chemical tasks, but that there is significant room for improvement, especially in experimental settings with low data. Critically, we show that RL-based post-training can substantially improve performance. A smaller model post-trained on our environments becomes competitive with state-of-the-art frontier models, despite a significantly weaker base model. This suggests a practical route toward employing LLMs in drug discovery; by combining carefully-designed evaluation tasks with targeted post-training, we can both elucidate and close critical capability gaps.
Although most of the automated theorem-proving approaches depend on formal proof systems, informal theorem proving can align better with large language models' (LLMs) strength in natural language processing. In this work, we identify a primary bottleneck in informal theorem proving as a lack of insight, namely the difficulty of recognizing the core techniques required to solve complex problems. To address this, we propose a novel framework designed to cultivate this essential reasoning skill and enable LLMs to perform insightful reasoning. We propose $\mathtt{DeepInsightTheorem}$, a hierarchical dataset that structures informal proofs by explicitly extracting core techniques and proof sketches alongside the final proof. To fully exploit this dataset, we design a Progressive Multi-Stage SFT strategy that mimics the human learning process, guiding the model from basic proof writing to insightful thinking. Our experiments on challenging mathematical benchmarks demonstrate that this insight-aware generation strategy significantly outperforms baselines. These results demonstrate that teaching models to identify and apply core techniques can substantially improve their mathematical reasoning.
This paper explores the response of Large Language Models (LLMs) to user prompts with different degrees of politeness and impoliteness. The Politeness Theory by Brown and Levinson and the Impoliteness Framework by Culpeper form the basis of experiments conducted across three languages (English, Hindi, Spanish), five models (Gemini-Pro, GPT-4o Mini, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, DeepSeek-Chat, and Llama 3), and three interaction histories between users (raw, polite, and impolite). Our sample consists of 22,500 pairs of prompts and responses of various types, evaluated across five levels of politeness using an eight-factor assessment framework: coherence, clarity, depth, responsiveness, context retention, toxicity, conciseness, and readability. The findings show that model performance is highly influenced by tone, dialogue history, and language. While polite prompts enhance the average response quality by up to ~11% and impolite tones worsen it, these effects are neither consistent nor universal across languages and models. English is best served by courteous or direct tones, Hindi by deferential and indirect tones, and Spanish by assertive tones. Among the models, Llama is the most tone-sensitive (11.5% range), whereas GPT is more robust to adversarial tone. These results indicate that politeness is a quantifiable computational variable that affects LLM behaviour, though its impact is language- and model-dependent rather than universal. To support reproducibility and future work, we additionally release PLUM (Politeness Levels in Utterances, Multilingual), a publicly available corpus of 1,500 human-validated prompts across three languages and five politeness categories, and provide a formal supplementary analysis of six falsifiable hypotheses derived from politeness theory, empirically assessed against the dataset.
Composite score across coding, math, and reasoning
| # | Model | Score | tok/s | $/1M |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Opus 4.7 | 57.3 | 53 | $10.00 |
| 2 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | 57.2 | 132 | $4.50 |
| 3 | GPT-5.4 | 56.8 | 85 | $5.63 |
| 4 | GPT-5.3 Codex | 53.6 | 93 | $4.81 |
| 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 | 53 | 59 | $10.00 |
Agentic coding on real-world software engineering tasks
| # | Model | Score |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Opus 4.6 | 65.3% |
| 2 | gpt-5.2-2025-12-11-medium | 64.4% |
| 3 | GLM-5 | 62.8% |
| 4 | gpt-5.4-2026-03-05-medium | 62.8% |
| 5 | GLM-5.1 | 62.7% |
FinceptTerminal is a modern finance application offering advanced market analytics, investment research, and economic data tools, designed for interactive exploration and data-driven decision-making in a user-friendly environment.
AI You Control: Choose your models. Own your data. Eliminate vendor lock-in.
Enterprise Architecture Governance & Vendor Procurement Toolkit
A lightweight, powerful framework for multi-agent workflows
🤗 Transformers: the model-definition framework for state-of-the-art machine learning models in text, vision, audio, and multimodal models, for both inference and training.
LichtFeld Studio: Where reality and the digital world blend.
⚡️SwanLab - an open-source, modern-design AI training tracking and visualization tool. Supports Cloud / Self-hosted use. Integrated with PyTorch / Transformers / verl / LLaMA Factory / ms-swift / Ultralytics / MMEngine / Keras etc.
⚙️🦀 Build modular and scalable LLM Applications in Rust
A minimalist Typescript ChatGPT App based on the Skybridge framework