Drug-side effect research is vital for understanding adverse reactions arising in complex multi-drug therapies. However, the scarcity of higher-order datasets that capture the combinatorial effects of multiple drugs severely limits progress in this field. Existing resources such as TWOSIDES primarily focus on pairwise interactions. To fill this critical gap, we introduce HODDI, the first Higher-Order Drug-Drug Interaction Dataset, constructed from U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) records spanning the past decade, to advance computational pharmacovigilance. HODDI contains 109,744 records involving 2,506 unique drugs and 4,569 unique side effects, specifically curated to capture multi-drug interactions and their collective impact on adverse effects. Comprehensive statistical analyses demonstrate HODDI's extensive coverage and robust analytical metrics, making it a valuable resource for studying higher-order drug relationships. Evaluating HODDI with multiple models, we found that simple Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) can outperform graph models, while hypergraph models demonstrate superior performance in capturing complex multi-drug interactions, further validating HODDI's effectiveness. Our findings highlight the inherent value of higher-order information in drug-side effect prediction and position HODDI as a benchmark dataset for advancing research in pharmacovigilance, drug safety, and personalized medicine. The dataset and codes are available at https://github.com/TIML-Group/HODDI.

Current machine learning models excel in short-span perception tasks but struggle to derive high-level insights from long-term observation, a capability central to understanding complex events (CEs). CEs, defined as sequences of short-term atomic events (AEs) governed by spatiotemporal rules, are challenging to detect online due to the need to extract meaningful patterns from long and noisy sensor data while ignoring irrelevant events. We hypothesize that state-based methods are well-suited for CE detection, as they capture event progression through state transitions without requiring long-term memory. Baseline experiments validate this, demonstrating that the state-space model Mamba outperforms existing architectures. However, Mamba's reliance on extensive labeled data, which are difficult to obtain, motivates our second hypothesis: decoupling CE rule learning from noisy sensor data can reduce data requirements. To address this, we propose NARCE, a framework that combines Neural Algorithmic Reasoning (NAR) to split the task into two components: (i) learning CE rules independently of sensor data using synthetic concept traces generated by LLMs and (ii) mapping sensor inputs to these rules via an adapter. Our results show that NARCE outperforms baselines in accuracy, generalization to unseen and longer sensor data, and data efficiency, significantly reducing annotation costs while advancing robust CE detection.

The recent surge in high-quality open-sourced Generative AI text models (colloquially: LLMs), as well as efficient finetuning techniques, has opened the possibility of creating high-quality personalized models, i.e., models generating text attuned to a specific individual's needs and capable of credibly imitating their writing style by leveraging that person's own data to refine an open-source model. The technology to create such models is accessible to private individuals, and training and running such models can be done cheaply on consumer-grade hardware. These advancements are a huge gain for usability and privacy. This position paper argues, however, that these advancements also introduce new safety risks by making it practically feasible for malicious actors to impersonate specific individuals at scale, for instance for the purpose of phishing emails, based on small amounts of publicly available text. We further argue that these risks are complementary to - and distinct from - the much-discussed risks of other impersonation attacks such as image, voice, or video deepfakes, and are not adequately addressed by the larger research community, or the current generation of open - and closed-source models.

Despite widespread speculation about artificial intelligence's impact on the future of work, we lack systematic empirical evidence about how these systems are actually being used for different tasks. Here, we present a novel framework for measuring AI usage patterns across the economy. We leverage a recent privacy-preserving system to analyze over four million Claude.ai conversations through the lens of tasks and occupations in the U.S. Department of Labor's O*NET Database. Our analysis reveals that AI usage primarily concentrates in software development and writing tasks, which together account for nearly half of all total usage. However, usage of AI extends more broadly across the economy, with approximately 36% of occupations using AI for at least a quarter of their associated tasks. We also analyze how AI is being used for tasks, finding 57% of usage suggests augmentation of human capabilities (e.g., learning or iterating on an output) while 43% suggests automation (e.g., fulfilling a request with minimal human involvement). While our data and methods face important limitations and only paint a picture of AI usage on a single platform, they provide an automated, granular approach for tracking AI's evolving role in the economy and identifying leading indicators of future impact as these technologies continue to advance.

Abstract---Agentic AI is shifting the cybersecurity landscape as attackers and defenders leverage AI agents to augment humans and automate common tasks. In this article, we examine the implications for cyber warfare and global politics as Agentic AI becomes more powerful and enables the broad proliferation of capabilities only available to the most well resourced actors today . As attacks increased in volume and attackers became more sophisticated, moving towards polymorphic malware, packers, and novel evasion techniques, defenders looked to machine learning to provide scalability (quickly analyze large volumes of data and automate repetitive tasks), pattern recognition (detect common attack patterns), and novelty detection (recognize abnormal behaviors that may indicate malicious actors or insider threats). Companies now use Large Language Models (LLMs) to provide analysts and reverse engineers with a rapid analysis of malicious code and best next steps when triaging alerts. But the real paradigm shift in cybersecurity for both attackers and defenders is still on the horizon: agentic artificial intelligence (agentic AI).

Rajesh Ranjan* (Carnegie Mellon University, USA) Shailja Gupta* (Carnegie Mellon University, USA) Surya Narayan Singh* (BIT Sindri, India) Abstract: Ensuring fairness in decentralized multi-agent systems presents significant challenges due to emergent biases, systemic inefficiencies, and conflicting agent incentives. This paper provides a comprehensive survey of fairness in multi-agent AI, introducing a novel framework where fairness is treated as a dynamic, emergent property of agent interactions. The framework integrates fairness constraints, bias mitigation strategies, and incentive mechanisms to align autonomous agent behaviors with societal values while balancing efficiency and robustness. Through empirical validation, we demonstrate that incorporating fairness constraints results in more equitable decision-making. Introduction As artificial intelligence (AI) systems evolve, Agentic AI --autonomous systems capable of independent decision-making and goal-setting--has emerged as a ...

AI advancements have been significantly driven by a combination of foundation models and curiosity-driven learning aimed at increasing capability and adaptability. A growing area of interest within this field is Open-Endedness - the ability of AI systems to continuously and autonomously generate novel and diverse artifacts or solutions. This has become relevant for accelerating scientific discovery and enabling continual adaptation in AI agents. This position paper argues that the inherently dynamic and self-propagating nature of Open-Ended AI introduces significant, underexplored risks, including challenges in maintaining alignment, predictability, and control. This paper systematically examines these challenges, proposes mitigation strategies, and calls for action for different stakeholders to support the safe, responsible and successful development of Open-Ended AI.

Current and foreseeable GenAI models are not capable of achieving artificial general intelligence because they are burdened with anthropogenic debt. They depend heavily on human input to provide well-structured problems, architecture, and training data. They cast every problem as a language pattern learning problem and are thus not capable of the kind of autonomy needed to achieve artificial general intelligence. Current models succeed at their tasks because people solve most of the problems to which these models are directed, leaving only simple computations for the model to perform, such as gradient descent. Another barrier is the need to recognize that there are multiple kinds of problems, some of which cannot be solved by available computational methods (for example, "insight problems"). Current methods for evaluating models (benchmarks and tests) are not adequate to identify the generality of the solutions, because it is impossible to infer the means by which a problem was solved from the fact of its solution. A test could be passed, for example, by a test-specific or a test-general method. It is a logical fallacy (affirming the consequent) to infer a method of solution from the observation of success.

Debating over conflicting issues is a necessary first step towards resolving conflicts. However, intrinsic perspectives of an arguer are difficult to overcome by persuasive argumentation skills. Proceeding from a debate to a deliberative process, where we can identify actionable options for resolving a conflict requires a deeper analysis of arguments and the perspectives they are grounded in - as it is only from there that one can derive mutually agreeable resolution steps. In this work we develop a framework for a deliberative analysis of arguments in a computational argumentation setup. We conduct a fine-grained analysis of perspectivized stances expressed in the arguments of different arguers or stakeholders on a given issue, aiming not only to identify their opposing views, but also shared perspectives arising from their attitudes, values or needs. We formalize this analysis in Perspectivized Stance Vectors that characterize the individual perspectivized stances of all arguers on a given issue. We construct these vectors by determining issue- and argument-specific concepts, and predict an arguer's stance relative to each of them. The vectors allow us to measure a modulated (dis)agreement between arguers, structured by perspectives, which allows us to identify actionable points for conflict resolution, as a first step towards deliberation.

In recent years, distributed representations of inputs have led to performance gains in many applications by allowing statistical information to be shared across inputs. However, the predicted outputs (labels, and more generally structures) are still treated as discrete objects even though outputs are often not discrete units of meaning. In this paper, we present a new formulation for structured prediction where we represent individual labels in a structure as dense vectors and allow semantically similar labels to share parameters. We extend this representation to larger structures by defining compositionality using tensor products to give a natural generalization of standard structured prediction approaches. We define a learning objective for jointly learning the model parameters and the label vectors and propose an alternating minimization algorithm for learning. We show that our formulation outperforms structural SVM baselines in two tasks: multiclass document classification and part-of-speech tagging.