Previous literature offers limited clues on how to learn a periodic function using modern neural networks.

The growth and permeation of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies across society has drawn focus to the ways in which the responsible use of these technologies can be facilitated through AI governance. Increasingly, large companies and governments alike have begun to articulate and, in some cases, enforce governance preferences through AI policy. Yet existing literature documents an unwieldy heterogeneity in ethical principles for AI governance, while our own prior research finds that discussions of the implications of AI policy are not yet present in the computer science (CS) curriculum. In this context, overlapping jurisdictions and even contradictory policy preferences across private companies, local, national, and multinational governments create a complex landscape for AI policy which, we argue, will require AI developers able adapt to an evolving regulatory environment. Preparing computing students for the new challenges of an AI-dominated technology industry is therefore a key priority for the CS curriculum. In this discussion paper, we seek to articulate a framework for integrating discussions on the nascent AI policy landscape into computer science courses. We begin by summarizing recent AI policy efforts in the United States and European Union. Subsequently, we propose guiding questions to frame class discussions around AI policy in technical and non-technical (e.g., ethics) CS courses. Throughout, we emphasize the connection between normative policy demands and still-open technical challenges relating to their implementation and enforcement through code and governance structures. This paper therefore represents a valuable contribution towards bridging research and discussions across the areas of AI policy and CS education, underlining the need to prepare AI engineers to interact with and adapt to societal policy preferences.

This study explores the integration of AI, particularly large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, into educational settings, focusing on the implications for teaching and learning. Through interviews with course coordinators from data science courses at Wageningen University, this research identifies both the benefits and challenges associated with AI in the classroom. While AI tools can streamline tasks and enhance learning, concerns arise regarding students' overreliance on these technologies, potentially hindering the development of essential cognitive and problem solving skills. The study highlights the importance of responsible AI usage, ethical considerations, and the need for adapting assessment methods to ensure educational outcomes are met. With careful integration, AI can be a valuable asset in education, provided it is used to complement rather than replace fundamental learning processes.

The main challenge of continual learning is \textit{catastrophic forgetting}. Because of processing data in one pass, online continual learning (OCL) is one of the most difficult continual learning scenarios. To address catastrophic forgetting in OCL, some existing studies use a rehearsal buffer to store samples and replay them in the later learning process, other studies do not store samples but assume a sequence of learning tasks so that the task identities can be explored. However, storing samples may raise data security or privacy concerns and it is not always possible to identify the boundaries between learning tasks in one pass of data processing. It motivates us to investigate rehearsal-free and task-free OCL (F2OCL). By integrating prompt learning with an NCM classifier, this study has effectively tackled catastrophic forgetting without storing samples and without usage of task boundaries or identities. The extensive experimental results on two benchmarks have demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed method.

The greedy algorithm is extensively studied in the field of combinatorial optimization for decades. In this paper, we address the online learning problem when the input to the greedy algorithm is stochastic with unknown parameters that have to be learned over time. We first propose the greedy regret and null -quasi greedy regret as learning metrics comparing with the performance of offline greedy algorithm. We then propose two online greedy learning algorithms with semi-bandit feedbacks, which use multi-armed bandit and pure exploration bandit policies at each level of greedy learning, one for each of the regret metrics respectively. Both algorithms achieve O (log T) problem-dependent regret bound ( T being the time horizon) for a general class of combinatorial structures and reward functions that allow greedy solutions. We further show that the bound is tight in T and other problem instance parameters.

As personalized learning gains increasing attention in mathematics education, there is a growing demand for intelligent systems that can assess complex student responses and provide individualized feedback in real time. In this study, we present a personalized auto-grading and feedback system for constructive geometry tasks, developed using large language models (LLMs) and deployed on the Algeomath platform, a Korean online tool designed for interactive geometric constructions. The proposed system evaluates student-submitted geometric constructions by analyzing their procedural accuracy and conceptual understanding. It employs a prompt-based grading mechanism using GPT-4, where student answers and model solutions are compared through a few-shot learning approach. Feedback is generated based on teacher-authored examples built from anticipated student responses, and it dynamically adapts to the student's problem-solving history, allowing up to four iterative attempts per question. The system was piloted with 79 middle-school students, where LLM-generated grades and feedback were benchmarked against teacher judgments. Grading closely aligned with teachers, and feedback helped many students revise errors and complete multi-step geometry tasks. While short-term corrections were frequent, longer-term transfer effects were less clear. Overall, the study highlights the potential of LLMs to support scalable, teacher-aligned formative assessment in mathematics, while pointing to improvements needed in terminology handling and feedback design.

We propose ImitSA T, a branching policy for conflict-driven clause learning (CDCL) solvers based on imitation learning for the Boolean satisfiability problem (SA T). Unlike previous methods that predict instance-level signals to improve CDCL branching indirectly, or rely on reinforcement learning and insufficient CDCL information to enhance branching, ImitSA T learns from expert KeyTrace that collapses a full run into the sequence of surviving decisions. Replaying a KeyTrace on the same instance is nearly conflict-free, providing dense decision-level supervision and directly reducing propagations--the dominant contributor to wall-clock time. This prefix-conditioned supervision enables ImitSA T to reproduce high-quality branches without exploration, yielding faster convergence, stable training, and seamless integration into CDCL. Extensive experiments demonstrate that ImitSA T reduces propagation counts and runtime, outperforming state-of-the-art learned approaches. The Boolean satisfiability (SA T) problem is a cornerstone of theoretical computer science and artificial intelligence (Cook, 1971; Karp, 1972). Beyond its foundational role, SA T serves as the computational backbone of numerous applications, including formal verification, planning, and combinatorial optimization. Modern solvers for SA T are dominated by the conflict-driven clause learning (CDCL) framework (Silva & Sakallah, 1996; Biere et al., 2009), which has scaled to industrial benchmarks of immense complexity. A CDCL run interleaves branching, unit propagation, and conflict analysis. Among these components, the branching rule largely determines the search trajectory, while unit propagation often dominates runtime (Zhang & Malik, 2002; Davis et al., 2008; Moskewicz et al., 2001). As a result, more informed branching decisions can translate directly into faster solving.

The proliferation of open large language models (LLMs) is fostering a vibrant ecosystem of research and innovation in artificial intelligence (AI). However, the methods of collaboration used to develop open LLMs both before and after their public release have not yet been comprehensively studied, limiting our understanding of how open LLM projects are initiated, organized, and governed as well as what opportunities there are to foster this ecosystem even further. We address this gap through an exploratory analysis of open collaboration throughout the development and reuse lifecycle of open LLMs, drawing on semi-structured interviews with the developers of 14 open LLMs from grassroots projects, research institutes, startups, and Big Tech companies in North America, Europe, Africa, and Asia. We make three key contributions to research and practice. First, collaboration in open LLM projects extends far beyond the LLMs themselves, encompassing datasets, benchmarks, open source frameworks, leaderboards, knowledge sharing and discussion forums, and compute partnerships, among others. Second, open LLM developers have a variety of social, economic, and technological motivations, from democratizing AI access and promoting open science to building regional ecosystems and expanding language representation. Third, the sampled open LLM projects exhibit five distinct organizational models, ranging from single company projects to non-profit-sponsored grassroots projects, which vary in their centralization of control and community engagement strategies used throughout the open LLM lifecycle. We conclude with practical recommendations for stakeholders seeking to support the global community building a more open future for AI.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly reshaping educational practice, challenging long held assumptions about teaching and learning. This article integrates conceptual perspectives from recent books (Genesis by Eric Schmidt, Henry Kissinger and Craig Mundie, CoIntelligence by Ethan Mollick, and The Inevitable by Kevin Kelly) with empirical insights from popular AI podcasts and Anthropic public releases. We examine seven key domains: emotional support, creativity, contextual understanding, student engagement, problem solving, ethics and morality, and collaboration. For each domain, we explore AI capabilities, opportunities for transformative change, and emerging best practices, drawing equally from theoretical analysis and real world observations. Overall, we find that AI, when used thoughtfully, can complement and enhance human educators in fostering richer learning experiences across cognitive, social, and emotional dimensions. We emphasize an optimistic yet responsible outlook: educators and students should actively shape AI integration to amplify human potential in creativity, ethical reasoning, collaboration, and beyond, while maintaining a focus on human centric values.