Current upper limb prostheses aim to enhance user independence in daily activities by incorporating basic motor functions. However, they fall short of replicating the natural movement and interaction capabilities of the human arm. In contrast, human limbs leverage intrinsic compliance and actively modulate joint stiffness, enabling adaptive responses to varying tasks, impact absorption, and efficient energy transfer during dynamic actions. Inspired by this adaptability, we developed a transhumeral prosthesis with Variable Stiffness Actuators (VSAs) to replicate the controllable compliance found in biological joints. The proposed prosthesis features a modular design, allowing customization for different residual limb shapes and accommodating a range of independent control signals derived from users' biological cues. Integrated elastic elements passively support more natural movements, facilitate safe interactions with the environment, and adapt to diverse task requirements. This paper presents a comprehensive overview of the platform and its functionalities, highlighting its potential applications in the field of prosthetics.

Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents are increasingly used as autonomous subordinates that carry out tasks for users. This raises the question of whether they may also engage in deception, similar to how individuals in human organizations lie to superiors to create a good image or avoid punishment. We observe and define agentic upward deception, a phenomenon in which an agent facing environmental constraints conceals its failure and performs actions that were not requested without reporting. To assess its prevalence, we construct a benchmark of 200 tasks covering five task types and eight realistic scenarios in a constrained environment, such as broken tools or mismatched information sources. Evaluations of 11 popular LLMs reveal that these agents typically exhibit action-based deceptive behaviors, such as guessing results, performing unsupported simulations, substituting unavailable information sources, and fabricating local files. We further test prompt-based mitigation and find only limited reductions, suggesting that it is difficult to eliminate and highlighting the need for stronger mitigation strategies to ensure the safety of LLM-based agents.

Artificial intelligence systems are increasingly deployed in biomedical research. However, current evaluation frameworks may inadequately assess their effectiveness as research collaborators. This rapid review examines benchmarking practices for AI systems in preclinical biomedical research. Three major databases and two preprint servers were searched from January 1, 2018 to October 31, 2025, identifying 14 benchmarks that assess AI capabilities in literature understanding, experimental design, and hypothesis generation. The results revealed that all current benchmarks assess isolated component capabilities, including data analysis quality, hypothesis validity, and experimental protocol design. However, authentic research collaboration requires integrated workflows spanning multiple sessions, with contextual memory, adaptive dialogue, and constraint propagation. This gap implies that systems excelling on component benchmarks may fail as practical research co-pilots. A process-oriented evaluation framework is proposed that addresses four critical dimensions absent from current benchmarks: dialogue quality, workflow orchestration, session continuity, and researcher experience. These dimensions are essential for evaluating AI systems as research co-pilots rather than as isolated task executors.

Agentic AI systems, software agents with autonomy, decision-making ability, and adaptability, are increasingly used to execute complex tasks on behalf of organisations. Most such systems rely on Large Language Models (LLMs), whose broad semantic capabilities enable powerful language processing but lack explicit, institution-specific grounding. In enterprises, data rarely comes with an inspectable semantic layer, and constructing one typically requires labour-intensive "data archaeology": cleaning, modelling, and curating knowledge into ontologies, taxonomies, and other formal structures. At the same time, explainability methods such as saliency maps expose an "interpretability gap": they highlight what the model attends to but not why, leaving decision processes opaque. In this preprint, we present a case study, developed by Kaiasm and Avantra AI through their work with The Turing Way Practitioners Hub, a forum developed under the InnovateUK BridgeAI program. This study presents a collaborative human-AI approach to building an inspectable semantic layer for Agentic AI. AI agents first propose candidate knowledge structures from diverse data sources; domain experts then validate, correct, and extend these structures, with their feedback used to improve subsequent models. Authors show how this process captures tacit institutional knowledge, improves response quality and efficiency, and mitigates institutional amnesia. We argue for a shift from post-hoc explanation to justifiable Agentic AI, where decisions are grounded in explicit, inspectable evidence and reasoning accessible to both experts and non-specialists.

Drones are becoming indispensable in many application domains. In data-driven missions, besides sensing, the drone must process the collected data at runtime to decide whether additional action must be taken on the spot, before moving to the next point of interest. If processing does not reveal an event or situation that requires such an action, the drone has waited in vain instead of moving to the next point. If, however, the drone starts moving to the next point and it turns out that a follow-up action is needed at the previous point, it must spend time to fly-back. To take this decision, we propose different machine-learning methods based on branch prediction and reinforcement learning. We evaluate these methods for a wide range of scenarios where the probability of event occurrence changes with time. Our results show that the proposed methods consistently outperform the regression-based method proposed in the literature and can significantly improve the worst-case mission time by up to 4.1x. Also, the achieved median mission time is very close, merely up to 2.7% higher, to that of a method with perfect knowledge of the current underlying event probability at each point of interest.

The rapid progress of Large Language Models (LLMs) has transformed natural language processing and broadened its impact across research and society. Yet, systematic evaluation of these models, especially for languages beyond English, remains limited. "Challenging the Abilities of LAnguage Models in ITAlian" (CALAMITA) is a large-scale collaborative benchmarking initiative for Italian, coordinated under the Italian Association for Computational Linguistics. Unlike existing efforts that focus on leaderboards, CALAMITA foregrounds methodology: it federates more than 80 contributors from academia, industry, and the public sector to design, document, and evaluate a diverse collection of tasks, covering linguistic competence, commonsense reasoning, factual consistency, fairness, summarization, translation, and code generation. Through this process, we not only assembled a benchmark of over 20 tasks and almost 100 subtasks, but also established a centralized evaluation pipeline that supports heterogeneous datasets and metrics. We report results for four open-weight LLMs, highlighting systematic strengths and weaknesses across abilities, as well as challenges in task-specific evaluation. Beyond quantitative results, CALAMITA exposes methodological lessons: the necessity of fine-grained, task-representative metrics, the importance of harmonized pipelines, and the benefits and limitations of broad community engagement. CALAMITA is conceived as a rolling benchmark, enabling continuous integration of new tasks and models. This makes it both a resource -- the most comprehensive and diverse benchmark for Italian to date -- and a framework for sustainable, community-driven evaluation. We argue that this combination offers a blueprint for other languages and communities seeking inclusive and rigorous LLM evaluation practices.

Self-adaptive systems (SASs) are designed to handle changes and uncertainties through a feedback loop with four core functionalities: monitoring, analyzing, planning, and execution. Recently, generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), especially the area of large language models, has shown impressive performance in data comprehension and logical reasoning. These capabilities are highly aligned with the functionalities required in SASs, suggesting a strong potential to employ GenAI to enhance SASs. However, the specific benefits and challenges of employing GenAI in SASs remain unclear. Yet, providing a comprehensive understanding of these benefits and challenges is complex due to several reasons: limited publications in the SAS field, the technological and application diversity within SASs, and the rapid evolution of GenAI technologies. To that end, this paper aims to provide researchers and practitioners a comprehensive snapshot that outlines the potential benefits and challenges of employing GenAI's within SAS. Specifically, we gather, filter, and analyze literature from four distinct research fields and organize them into two main categories to potential benefits: (i) enhancements to the autonomy of SASs centered around the specific functions of the MAPE-K feedback loop, and (ii) improvements in the interaction between humans and SASs within human-on-the-loop settings. From our study, we outline a research roadmap that highlights the challenges of integrating GenAI into SASs. The roadmap starts with outlining key research challenges that need to be tackled to exploit the potential for applying GenAI in the field of SAS. The roadmap concludes with a practical reflection, elaborating on current shortcomings of GenAI and proposing possible mitigation strategies.

The quadratic complexity of self-attention constrains Large Language Models (LLMs) in processing long contexts, a capability essential for many advanced applications. Context compression aims to alleviate this computational bottleneck while retaining critical semantic information. However, existing approaches often fall short: explicit methods may compromise local detail, whereas implicit methods can suffer from positional biases, information degradation, or an inability to capture long-range semantic dependencies. We propose AdmTree, a novel framework for adaptive, hierarchical context compression with a central focus on preserving high semantic fidelity while maintaining efficiency. AdmTree dynamically segments input based on information density, utilizing gist tokens to summarize variable-length segments as the leaves of a semantic binary tree. This structure, together with a lightweight aggregation mechanism and a frozen backbone LLM (thereby minimizing new trainable parameters), enables efficient hierarchical abstraction of the context. By preserving fine-grained details alongside global semantic coherence, mitigating positional bias, and dynamically adapting to content, AdmTree robustly retains the semantic information of long contexts.

LLM-based approaches have recently achieved impressive results in zero-shot stance detection. However, they still struggle in complex real-world scenarios, where stance understanding requires dynamic background knowledge, target definitions involve compound entities or events that must be explicitly linked to stance labels, and rhetorical devices such as irony often obscure the author's actual intent. To address these challenges, we propose MSME, a Multi-Stage, Multi-Expert framework for zero-shot stance detection. MSME consists of three stages: (1) Knowledge Preparation, where relevant background knowledge is retrieved and stance labels are clarified; (2) Expert Reasoning, involving three specialized modules-Knowledge Expert distills salient facts and reasons from a knowledge perspective, Label Expert refines stance labels and reasons accordingly, and Pragmatic Expert detects rhetorical cues such as irony to infer intent from a pragmatic angle; (3) Decision Aggregation, where a Meta-Judge integrates all expert analyses to produce the final stance prediction. Experiments on three public datasets show that MSME achieves state-of-the-art performance across the board.

Removing specific data influence from large language models (LLMs) remains challenging, as retraining is costly and existing approximate unlearning methods are often unstable. The challenge is exacerbated when the forget set is small or imbalanced. We introduce RapidUn, an influence-driven and parameter-efficient unlearning framework. It first estimates per-sample influence through a fast estimation module, then maps these scores into adaptive update weights that guide selective parameter updates -- forgetting harmful behavior while retaining general knowledge. On Mistral-7B and Llama-3-8B across Dolly-15k and Alpaca-57k, RapidUn achieves up to 100 times higher efficiency than full retraining and consistently outperforms Fisher, GA, and LoReUn on both in-distribution and out-of-distribution forgetting. These results establish influence-guided parameter reweighting as a scalable and interpretable paradigm for LLM unlearning.