https://arxiv.org/api/2NVF4xv/pfQwsJCd/k4IihUY+4c 2026-11-12T03:27:29Z 212409 0 15 http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14519v1 2026-11-10T18:59:54Z

Foundation models pretrained on large natural-image collections are increasingly adapted for medical image segmentation, in the expectation that they will replace models trained for each task. Most comparisons, however, use data from the training distribution and a single task-specific baseline whose configuration is rarely justified, and therefore provide limited evidence of performance at new clinical sites. It also remains unclear how much of a foundation model must be adapted, and what determines this. We adapted a foundation model, DINOv2, with strategies ranging from tuning only its bias terms to full fine-tuning, and compared it with U-Nets and ResU-Nets trained from scratch. Experiments covered colonoscopy, breast ultrasound and dermoscopy, with testing on held-out data from the training source and on independent datasets from other institutions. The adapted foundation model generalised better on every external dataset. Within the training distribution, the task-specific models remained competitive when training data were abundant, and delineated boundaries more precisely, while the foundation model more often missed small lesions. Only a small fraction of the foundation model required adaptation, and the capacity needed was determined by the imaging domain rather than by the adaptation method. A widely used polyp test set was also found to duplicate images from another benchmark. Foundation-model adaptation is therefore warranted where models must work across sites, with capacity selected on the target domain.

2026-11-10T18:59:54Z Emre Kutlusan Yongmin Li http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.09928v2 2026-11-10T18:59:47Z

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) exhibit strong visual understanding, yet the internal features that cause these behaviors remain difficult to identify, audit, or control. While applicable to post-hoc inspection, hidden states that are decomposed into interpretable feature directions using sparse autoencoders (SAEs) neither readily isolate which features are changed by multimodal training, nor are they directly useful for targeted control. We introduce MMDiff, a multimodal model-diffing framework that trains multimodal SAEs and turns them into feature-level interfaces for discovering and controlling multimodal behavior. MMDiff supports three uses: (i) feature isolation, by diffing a base-LM SAE against its multimodal-adapted counterpart to identify features altered by multimodal training; (ii) task-specific feature detection, via per-token contrastive firing analysis that isolates causal features; and (iii) feature-level control, by causally removing or steering the discovered feature directions. We train multimodal SAEs for three MLLM families, LLaVA-MORE, PaliGemma 2, and InternVL3.5, and evaluate on visual-spatial understanding, multimodal safety, and OCR. MMDiff discovers sparse, causally specific features whose removal selectively degrades target behaviors by an average of 12% on spatial tasks and 17% on OCR, and reduces attack success rate by 24% on multimodal safety attacks, with no impact on VQA performance. Steering these features improves spatial and OCR accuracy by +3.6% and +1.8% on average over a standard single-layer steering baseline. These results show that multimodal SAEs can serve not only as interpretability tools, but as mechanisms for auditing, steering, and controlling MLLMs behavior toward safer and more capable generations.

2026-08-10T17:59:30Z Accepted at the 40th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2026) Hunar Batra Lachin Naghashyar Ashkan Khakzar Philip Torr Christian Schroeder de Witt Constantin Venhoff Ronald Clark http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14518v1 2026-11-10T18:59:17Z

DeepLearning (DL)-based Computer-Aided Diagnostic (CAD) systems have shown great promise in supporting clinicians, but their performance heavily depends on the availability of large, well-annotated datasets. In medical lesion detection, the scarcity of comprehensive, stan dardized annotations and the heterogeneity of existing datasets limit the development of robust foundation models. In this work, we introduce a novel approach to building a multi-domain foundation model for le sion detection by integrating diverse medical image datasets annotated for both anatomical structures and abnormalities. We first propose a student-teacher training strategy to effectively combine datasets with heterogeneous label spaces, mitigating catastrophic forgetting, and im proving feature learning. In addition, building on our previously pro posed example-based EM-DETR framework, we adapt it to jointly learn from multiple domain-specific datasets, enabling fine-grained, example driven detection across modalities. Our model achieves state-of-the-art (SOTA) results, with image-level AUC scores exceeding previous SOTA by 1% point on four key findings in CXRs. We achieve a leading mAP50 in CXRs and mammography, surpassing EM-DETR trained on a single dataset by 2-3% points. This approach paves the way for scalable foundation models in medical imaging that leverage heterogeneous data while maintaining robust and generalizable performance.

2026-11-10T18:59:17Z Sheethal Bhat Bogdan Georgescu Awais Mansoor Florin C. Ghesu Sasa Grbic Andreas Maier http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14514v1 2026-11-10T18:58:43Z

LLM agents are increasingly used for open-ended, data-driven scientific discovery, yet most of them evaluate hypotheses pointwise, testing an empirical claim $h$ only against its complement $\neg h$. When evidence rejects $h$, the agent learns that one explanation is unlikely but not which alternative the evidence supports. To recover that alternative, we introduce Contrastive Discovery, which replaces the single hypothesis with a contrast set, a scientific question paired with mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive competing explanations. Each experiment is scored by how its evidence redistributes belief across the set, and the question is resolved when belief concentrates on one explanation. Because contrast sets change only the unit an agent proposes and scores, an existing agent can use them to re-evaluate evidence it has already collected or to guide its search. Across six domains, $89\%$ of the pointwise candidates with the largest belief shifts are rejections. On the same evidence, contrast sets resolve $73\%$ of these candidates to a specific alternative. When contrast sets guide search, the agent resolves $67\%$ more questions than pointwise surprisal under the same experiment budget. In a blinded study, $38$ human experts chose the same explanation on $78\%$ of resolved questions and on $82\%$ of questions where the pointwise agent rejected its hypothesis and stopped. Together, these results support explicit competing explanations as a way for discovery agents to resolve more scientific questions from the same evidence and validation budget.

2026-11-10T18:58:43Z Accepted at NeurIPS 2026. 55 pages. Project page: https://codiscovery.ai/contrastive-discovery/ Ziang Liu James J. Kim Yijia Dai Jennifer J. Sun http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14493v1 2026-11-10T18:50:06Z

Deploying LLM-based analytics agents in enterprise settings requires evaluation frameworks that can reliably detect failures across complex, multi-tool workflows. We present a three-phase comparative study of three evaluation frameworks, each representing a distinct evaluation paradigm (trace-based LLM judging, text-only LLM judging with red-teaming, and deterministic heuristics), applied to two analytics agents in a controlled research setting using frozen execution traces. Phase 1 quantifies evaluation harness stability through repeated measurements, finding that 97% of configurations meet the stability threshold and that stability patterns are agent-independent. Phase 2 measures known risk detection on 72 ground-truth test cases, where the trace-based framework achieves the best precision-recall balance (F1=0.90) while text-only evaluation matches on recall but generates 5x more false alarms. Phase 3 evaluates unknown risk discovery, uncovering 24 novel failures with zero overlap between functional testing and security red-teaming. Our results demonstrate that (1) the information available to the evaluation harness determines evaluation quality, (2) functional and security evaluation are complementary, and (3) LLM-based evaluation harnesses surface subtle errors that human reviewers miss. We recommend a two-framework strategy: trace-based evaluation for functional assessment and adversarial red-teaming for security validation.

2026-11-10T18:50:06Z Accepted to KDD 2026, Jeju, Korea. 9 pages, 3 figures Howard Zhang Chuck Arvin Logan Brown Mihir Bhatia Neelu Choudhary Lily Miao http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14492v1 2026-11-10T18:49:47Z

Business process automation runs the same Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) again and again on new inputs. Large Language Model (LLM) agents can follow an SOP written in natural language, but they call an LLM to choose every step of every run, which adds latency and cost at scale. We present ReTrace, which turns an SOP and a few logged agent runs into a reusable workflow in which code, not an LLM, selects the next step. The agent's reasoning, the explanation it writes with each tool call, often states why it took an action; the tool calls alone do not. ReTrace extracts the condition behind each step, merges these conditions across runs into a compact rule document, and generates an executable workflow from it. Only this last stage depends on the platform, so rule documents can be compiled for different orchestration platforms. On $79$ procedures from our production platform, ReTrace workflows reach $93.8\%$ completion, against $96.8\%$ for the agent, at $24\%$ lower cost per task. On $τ^2$-Bench, they reach $75.8\%$ task success (agent: $80.6\%$) and run in $1.3$s instead of $170$s; three rounds of repair on training failures lift $k{=}2$ workflows from $66.7\%$ to $81.2\%$. On eight SOP-Bench procedures, ReTrace without repair trails few-shot generation ($80.6\%$ vs. $83.6\%$), but repair from labeled training failures lifts it to $87.8\%$ at $0.40$s per task, compared to $85.5\%$ in $46.6$s for the agent.

2026-11-10T18:49:47Z Kaiyuan Hou Yang Ping Kuo Indranil Bhattacharya Rohith Nama Arushi Gupta Carlos D. Castillo Prathap Ramachandra Xiaofan Jiang Francesco Carbone http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14487v1 2026-11-10T18:47:22Z

Research ideation is iterative: researchers refine their ideas step by step based on feedback. Yet existing evaluations obscure this search process, making it difficult to understand how LLMs explore the space of research ideas and what limits their progress. We introduce Re-Search, which adapts the format of Twenty Questions to research ideation: given only the research problem of a published paper, a model must rediscover the paper's core idea by asking yes-or-no questions. Built from 200 ICML 2026 papers, Re-Search tracks how a model's idea evolves as it asks questions and receives binary oracle feedback, isolating ideation from execution. Across six recent LLMs, nearly all progress happens within the first 30 of 100 questions, which largely decide how the game ends; after that, most models plateau. Through controlled interventions on the candidate questions and the hypothesis space, we find that the bottleneck is generation, not judgment: models recognize a good idea or a good question when one is offered, but often cannot produce it on their own. We further analyze the ideation traces and find that models fail by either over-exploiting one direction or over-exploring too many. These findings point to concrete design principles for autoresearch systems: since models can judge candidates they cannot produce, enriching the search with externally sourced ideas and questions may be more effective than improving any single model's generation ability.

2026-11-10T18:47:22Z Preprint. 15 figures, 10 tables Muhan Gao Hangxiao Zhu Xinqi Su Yu Zhang Daniel Khashabi Kuan-Hao Huang http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.10529v2 2026-11-10T18:42:54Z

Hardware executions of the quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA) are often validated by comparing the device's mean cost with a simulation, a check that can miss what matters for optimization. Under global depolarization, the mean normalized gap and the floor-corrected probability of every set of bitstrings, the optimum included, retain the same fraction of their noiseless improvement over uniform sampling. We test this prediction with depth-2, transferred-angle QAOA circuits for binary subproblems of an alternating-direction decomposition on the IBM Heron processor \texttt{ibm\_marrakesh}, with and without dynamical decoupling and twirling. At 12 qubits, the main-family circuits retained 29\% to 46\% of their mean-gap improvement but only 5\% to 15\% of their probability of the optimum, lower on at least nine of ten instances per run. Near-optimal bitstrings were lost about as much as the optimum, whereas the avoidance of poor bitstrings was retained best. In the first submission, a device-matched noise model reproduced the pattern but overestimated the retention of the optimum five- to eightfold. On a rugged planted family, the device found the optimum in 62\% of 768-shot blocks (noiseless: 98\%), within the range of local heuristics. Validations of optimization circuits should report retention of the optimum and of near-optimal sets.

2026-11-07T07:00:23Z Sanim Yousuf Fahim Mohammad Arif Hossain http://arxiv.org/abs/2610.38851v3 2026-11-10T18:37:33Z

In many settings where LLM post-training is desirable, high-quality answers are recognizable but difficult to score with explicit rewards. Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) is limited to tasks where an explicit correctness signal is available. Prior adversarial approaches to training reasoning LLMs either complement verifiable rewards with co-trained critics or require reference reasoning traces. We ask whether a co-trained LLM judge can turn reference answers alone into the sole reward for on-policy post-training of reasoning LLMs. We call this method Reinforced Adversarial Learning (RAL). We first validate RAL on three verifiable tasks (integer multiplication, code-based arithmetic-expression synthesis, and SMILES-to-formula translation), using the verifiers only for evaluation. With sufficiently capable judges and enough training, RAL matches direct RLVR. We then apply RAL to scientific abstract generation in two settings. In the first setting, RAL guides the generator to produce abstracts in the scientific domain of the reference abstracts, even though the prompt leaves that domain unspecified. In the second setting, we generate abstracts for U.S. National Institutes of Health grant proposals conditioned on the grant title. Human scientists and an ensemble of LLM judges find our generations harder to distinguish from real abstracts than those of frontier-LLM baselines. These results suggest a path toward post-training reasoning models in scientific and other high-value domains, where increasingly capable judges infer hard-to-specify reward functions from example answers.

2026-10-28T20:34:15Z 31 pages, 6 figures, 10 tables, including references and appendices Albert Bou Javier Valdes-Aleman Jon M. Laurent Samuel G. Rodriques Andrew D. White Michaela Hinks Siddharth Narayanan http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.24001v3 2026-11-10T18:16:41Z

Recent advances in one-step text-to-image generation have enabled real-time synthesis with remarkable efficiency and quality. Previous reinforcement learning methods for one-step generators combine image-space reward optimization with diffusion noisy-space distribution matching. This paradigm brings challenges due to a mismatch between terminal reward optimization and the underlying generative dynamics. As a result, optimization tends to exploit stochastic degrees of freedom, often improving reward at the expense of image fidelity. To address this issue, we propose Diff-Instruct with Diffused Reward (DIDR), a data-free trajectory-level alignment framework derived from Integral KL minimization. DIDR propagates the RLHF-optimal reward-tilted clean-image distribution across all noise levels along the diffusion trajectory. We show that this objective admits the same minimizer as clean-image RLHF, while naturally inducing the Diffused Reward Score (DRS), which acts as a reward-driven correction to the reference score function. To make this practical, we further introduce the Diffused Reward Proxy (DRP), an efficient estimator of DRS based on differentiable short-step denoising. Extensive experiments demonstrate that DIDR consistently Pareto-dominates existing one-step SDXL baselines. Moreover, when transferred to a 6B DiT backbone (Z-Image), DIDR surpasses its 50-step teacher in preference alignment while requiring only a single generation step. Code: https://github.com/Junyi-W/DIDR

2026-05-18T21:26:33Z 33 pages. Updated manuscript and author information Junyi Wu Weijian Luo Haoyang Zheng Ruizhe Zhang Guang Lin http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.09745v2 2026-11-10T18:13:13Z

This paper introduces SupplyNetPy, an open-source, well-documented Python library for modeling and discrete-event simulation of supply chain networks with arbitrary multi-echelon structures. It supports multiple replenishment policies, perishable inventory, node disruptions, and stochastic demand and lead times. All components are extensible via inheritance. Users describe a supply chain as a graph with node and link attributes, while the library handles simulation, providing logs and extensive node and network level performance reports. This paper presents the motivation, design, key features, and architecture of SupplyNetPy, along with detailed validation results (against analytical benchmarks, a commercial tool, and a published case study). A key motivation behind SupplyNetPy's development is programmatic generation and simulation of complex models, enabling design-space exploration, what-if analysis, training data generation, and supply chain digital twins.

2026-07-03T13:35:56Z Accepted to the Winter Simulation Conference 2026 Tushar Lone Neha Karanjkar http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12683v3 2026-11-10T18:10:54Z

Over the last decade, building human-level artificial general intelligence has moved from far-fetched speculation to being a concrete next-decade target for many of the largest AI organizations. Achieving this goal would have profound and far-reaching impacts on human society, which raises many complex questions for the decade ahead. This report investigates how AI itself might continue to develop in a post-AGI world along the continuum of machine intelligence. The endpoint of this continuum, Universal AI, is theoretically well understood, which provides some formal grounding for the main focus of this report: the transition from human-level AGI to artificial general superintelligence, which can intuitively be understood as a system that is more intelligent and cognitively capable than large organizations of humans. After characterizing ASI, the report discusses four potential pathways from AGI to ASI: scaling AGI, AI paradigm shifts, ASI emerging from large-scale multi-agent collectives, and recursive improvement. The report then discusses possible frictions and bottlenecks along these pathways. Determining whether the impact of these frictions will be negligible or substantial raises a number of concrete open research questions. While large uncertainties for predicting ASI progress remain, it cannot be ruled out that AI progress might continue to accelerate over the next years. This would imply that the image of a single transformative step change, caused by the introduction of human-level AGI into our society, could be inaccurate. More apt might be the prospect of a series of transformative societal changes caused by AI-enabled progress and breakthroughs across many areas of science and technology. Preparing for this prospect requires a massively interdisciplinary endeavor of global scope and interest.

2026-06-10T21:14:10Z v3: minor fixes, overhaul of RSI mechanisms, and addition cognitive industrialization Tim Genewein Matija Franklin Alexander Lerchner Laurent Orseau Samuel Albanie Adam Bales Cole Wyeth Stephanie Chan Iason Gabriel Joel Z. Leibo Allan Dafoe Marcus Hutter Thore Graepel Shane Legg http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14432v1 2026-11-10T18:06:16Z

We describe our solution for the 2026 BEHAVIOR Challenge: 100 long-horizon household tasks in the OmniGibson simulator. We placed 9th on the final leaderboard, the only independent team in the top 10. The core of the solution is a single vision-language-action (VLA) model, one checkpoint for all 100 tasks, built on our 1st-place 2025 solution, which is based on $π_{0.5}$. On the 50 tasks shared with 2025, its Q rises from 0.260 to 0.371; across all 100 tasks it scores 0.392. Our main conclusion from 2025 was that the model was undertrained, so most of the 2026 work went into training the model for longer, optimizing some training parameters, making each training step slightly faster and reducing the gradient noise: a migration from 50 to 100 tasks (semantic stages built from the demonstrations' skill annotations, task and stage embeddings of new tasks warm-started from similar old ones, and a 21-dimensional action space matching the teleoperation controls); variance-reduced multi-sample flow matching with a simple noise-vs-compute model that picks the number of action-expert samples per observation without ablations; and a 200k-step training run, about one pass over the 211M frames of the demonstrations. A cloud evaluation infrastructure keeps a shared record with provenance, episode diagnostics and restorable simulator states, and runs six simulators on one GPU together faster than real time. On top of the learned policy, 14 tasks are routed to a GPT-6 Astra coding agent that controls the robot through observation and motion tools, starting every episode from a frozen copy of its own practice session on training instances. Across these 14 tasks, Astra's mean Q is 0.639, against 0.108 for the learned policy. The public submission included only part of the Astra results and scored 0.446 Q with 27.3% full-task success.

2026-11-10T18:06:16Z Code: https://github.com/Robot-Learning-Collective/behavior-1k-solution-2026 ; checkpoint: https://huggingface.co/IliaLarchenko/BEHAVIOR2026VLA ; project page: https://robot-learning-collective.github.io/behavior-1k-2026/ Ilia Larchenko Gleb Zarin Atindra Nair Keerti Manney Vitaly Kleban Mirko Kiefer Anjana Yodaiken http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14426v1 2026-11-10T18:03:17Z

Branch-and-Bound (B&B) and $A^*$ are popular exact search methods originating from Operations Research and Artificial Intelligence, respectively. Although the two methods share fundamental search principles, their different ways of exploring the search space can lead to substantially different computational performance. We investigate these differences using the Resource-Constrained Project Scheduling Problem (RCPSP) as an exemplary problem setting. We first establish the relationships between mixed-integer linear programming, state-action, and timed Petri-net representations. Since B&B and $A^*$ admit numerous algorithmic enhancements, we focus on relatively basic implementations. This allows us to examine the fundamental differences between the methods rather than compare the performance of state-of-the-art solvers. By using the same lower bound and best-first node selection, we isolate the effects of the search mechanisms, particularly the identification of equivalent states reached through different scheduling decision sequences. Experiments on 480 benchmark RCPSP instances show that graph-based $A^*$ substantially outperforms the B&B variants considered. With additional pruning rules, $A^*$ proves optimality for all 480 instances, compared with 445 for best-first B&B under the same time and memory limits. Depth-first B&B uses less memory and can find feasible solutions even when the search does not finish within the time limit. Stronger linear programming relaxations reduce the search space but introduce considerable computational overhead. Our findings highlight the importance of duplicate-state detection and clarify the computational trade-offs between the search approaches. These insights can help researchers select an appropriate method and identify opportunities to incorporate effective mechanisms from one approach into the other.

2026-11-10T18:03:17Z Izack Cohen Dominik Kress Lara Nehrke Erwin Pesch Shimrit Shtern http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14425v1 2026-11-10T18:01:23Z

Time-Series Foundation Models (TSFMs) are increasingly used in sensor applications, where sampling frequency (SF) varies across sensors, devices, and operating modes (e.g., power saving). Ideally, TSFMs must remain effective during such SF changes, provided the SF retains task-critical bandwidth. In this paper, we stress-test 4 prominent TSFMs: MOMENT, Chronos-2, Moirai-MoE, and TimesFM, to quantify their SF-invariance and investigate whether their behavior tracks the resulting loss of information bandwidth rather than the SF value itself. Our stress-test probes 3 dimensions: (i) the shift in embeddings, (ii) the degradation in forecasting performance, and (iii) the degradation in downstream performance, quantified by three novel metrics: FSI, FDI, and CDI, respectively. To our knowledge, this is the first study to place SF-invariance at the core of TSFM evaluations. Our results characterize: (i) how SF-invariance depends on the margin between signal's native-SF and the bandwidth its task requires, (ii) how much of that invariance the choice of TSFM explains, and (iii) how much of TSFM's performance degradation under a lower SF reflects information loss rather than a limitation of their abilities. These findings reframe SF-invariance as a measurable, signal-aware property of the (signal X TSFM) pair, and guide practitioners on when TSFMs display SF-invariance.

2026-11-10T18:01:23Z Sourish Gunesh Dhekane Abinaya Kumar Torsten Woertwein Yan-Bo Lin Thomas Ploetz Shabnam Ghaffarzadegan