Media
Revealed: Amazon Alexa's most-asked questions of 2025 - including 'how tall is Tom Cruise?' and 'how long do I poach an egg for?'
Ghislaine Maxwell's ultimate humiliation: Epstein's sex trafficker girlfriend poses in outrageous outfits and exposes herself in dozens of photos released from the billionaire paedophile's files I was falsely accused of being the Brown University shooter... Silent Trump flees growing storm over Epstein'cover-up' as he jets off for holidays without ANY comment Truth about THIS photo of Karoline Leavitt's face... and why if she was non-binary and disabled, Vanity Fair would never have done this: KENNEDY Why Conan O'Brien'stopped party guests calling 911' on Nick Reiner: Insiders reveal disturbing new details of final hours before Rob and Michele murders After 27 years as a TV anchor I was suddenly pulled off screens. My boss's explanation was a brutal lesson in loyalty Emily in Paris cast left'aghast' and'walking on eggshells' as off-camera drama becomes overwhelming... and whispers swirl about a CURSE Doctors said my hip pain was just tendinitis from sitting all day at work.
Creation of the Estonian Subjectivity Dataset: Assessing the Degree of Subjectivity on a Scale
Gailit, Karl Gustav, Muischnek, Kadri, Sirts, Kairit
This article presents the creation of an Estonian-language dataset for document-level subjectivity, analyzes the resulting annotations, and reports an initial experiment of automatic subjectivity analysis using a large language model (LLM). The dataset comprises of 1,000 documents-300 journalistic articles and 700 randomly selected web texts-each rated for subjectivity on a continuous scale from 0 (fully objective) to 100 (fully subjective) by four annotators. As the inter-annotator correlations were moderate, with some texts receiving scores at the opposite ends of the scale, a subset of texts with the most divergent scores was re-annotated, with the inter-annotator correlation improving. In addition to human annotations, the dataset includes scores generated by GPT-5 as an experiment on annotation automation. These scores were similar to human annotators, however several differences emerged, suggesting that while LLM based automatic subjectivity scoring is feasible, it is not an interchangeable alternative to human annotation, and its suitability depends on the intended application.
RouteRAG: Efficient Retrieval-Augmented Generation from Text and Graph via Reinforcement Learning
Guo, Yucan, Su, Miao, Guan, Saiping, Sun, Zihao, Jin, Xiaolong, Guo, Jiafeng, Cheng, Xueqi
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) integrates non-parametric knowledge into Large Language Models (LLMs), typically from unstructured texts and structured graphs. While recent progress has advanced text-based RAG to multi-turn reasoning through Reinforcement Learning (RL), extending these advances to hybrid retrieval introduces additional challenges. Existing graph-based or hybrid systems typically depend on fixed or handcrafted retrieval pipelines, lacking the ability to integrate supplementary evidence as reasoning unfolds. Besides, while graph evidence provides relational structures crucial for multi-hop reasoning, it is substantially more expensive to retrieve. To address these limitations, we introduce \model{}, an RL-based framework that enables LLMs to perform multi-turn and adaptive graph-text hybrid RAG. \model{} jointly optimizes the entire generation process via RL, allowing the model to learn when to reason, what to retrieve from either texts or graphs, and when to produce final answers, all within a unified generation policy. To guide this learning process, we design a two-stage training framework that accounts for both task outcome and retrieval efficiency, enabling the model to exploit hybrid evidence while avoiding unnecessary retrieval overhead. Experimental results across five question answering benchmarks demonstrate that \model{} significantly outperforms existing RAG baselines, highlighting the benefits of end-to-end RL in supporting adaptive and efficient retrieval for complex reasoning.
Source Coverage and Citation Bias in LLM-based vs. Traditional Search Engines
Zhang, Peixian, Ye, Qiming, Peng, Zifan, Garimella, Kiran, Tyson, Gareth
LLM-based Search Engines (LLM-SEs) introduces a new paradigm for information seeking. Unlike Traditional Search Engines (TSEs) (e.g., Google), these systems summarize results, often providing limited citation transparency. The implications of this shift remain largely unexplored, yet raises key questions regarding trust and transparency. In this paper, we present a large-scale empirical study of LLM-SEs, analyzing 55,936 queries and the corresponding search results across six LLM-SEs and two TSEs. We confirm that LLM-SEs cites domain resources with greater diversity than TSEs. Indeed, 37% of domains are unique to LLM-SEs. However, certain risks still persist: LLM-SEs do not outperform TSEs in credibility, political neutrality and safety metrics. Finally, to understand the selection criteria of LLM-SEs, we perform a feature-based analysis to identify key factors influencing source choice. Our findings provide actionable insights for end users, website owners, and developers.
Log NeRF: Comparing Spaces for Learning Radiance Fields
Chen, Sihe, Verma, Luv, Maxwell, Bruce A.
Neural Radiance Fields (NeRF) have achieved remarkable results in novel view synthesis, typically using sRGB images for supervision. However, little attention has been paid to the color space in which the network is learning the radiance field representation. Inspired by the BiIlluminant Dichromatic Reflection (BIDR) model, which suggests that a logarithmic transformation simplifies the separation of illumination and reflectance, we hypothesize that log RGB space enables NeRF to learn a more compact and effective representation of scene appearance. To test this, we captured approximately 30 videos using a GoPro camera, ensuring linear data recovery through inverse encoding. We trained NeRF models under various color space interpretations linear, sRGB, GPLog, and log RGB by converting each network output to a common color space before rendering and loss computation, enforcing representation learning in different color spaces. Quantitative and qualitative evaluations demonstrate that using a log RGB color space consistently improves rendering quality, exhibits greater robustness across scenes, and performs particularly well in low light conditions while using the same bit-depth input images. Further analysis across different network sizes and NeRF variants confirms the generalization and stability of the log space advantage.
Identifying Bias in Machine-generated Text Detection
Stowe, Kevin, Afanaseva, Svetlana, Raimundo, Rodolfo, Sun, Yitao, Patil, Kailash
The meteoric rise in text generation capability has been accompanied by parallel growth in interest in machine-generated text detection: the capability to identify whether a given text was generated using a model or written by a person. While detection models show strong performance, they have the capacity to cause significant negative impacts. We explore potential biases in English machine-generated text detection systems. We curate a dataset of student essays and assess 16 different detection systems for bias across four attributes: gender, race/ethnicity, English-language learner (ELL) status, and economic status. We evaluate these attributes using regression-based models to determine the significance and power of the effects, as well as performing subgroup analysis. We find that while biases are generally inconsistent across systems, there are several key issues: several models tend to classify disadvantaged groups as machine-generated, ELL essays are more likely to be classified as machine-generated, economically disadvantaged students' essays are less likely to be classified as machine-generated, and non-White ELL essays are disproportionately classified as machine-generated relative to their White counterparts. Finally, we perform human annotation and find that while humans perform generally poorly at the detection task, they show no significant biases on the studied attributes.