OpenAI CEO Sam Altman sits down with Shannon Bream to discuss the positives and potential negatives of artificial intelligence and the importance of maintaining a lead in the AI industry over China. OpenAI has just made a move that's turning heads across the tech world. The company is acquiring io, the AI device startup founded by Jony Ive, for nearly 6.5 billion. It's a collaboration between Sam Altman, who leads OpenAI, and the designer responsible for some of Apple's most iconic products, including the iPhone and Apple Watch. Together, they want to create a new generation of AI-powered devices that could completely change how we use technology.

With the rapid advancement of generative models, general-purpose generation has gained increasing attention as a promising approach to unify diverse tasks across modalities within a single system. Despite this progress, existing open-source frameworks often remain fragile and struggle to support complex real-world applications due to the lack of structured workflow planning and execution-level feedback. To address these limitations, we present ComfyMind, a collaborative AI system designed to enable robust and scalable general-purpose generation, built on the ComfyUI platform. ComfyMind introduces two core innovations: Semantic Workflow Interface (SWI) that abstracts low-level node graphs into callable functional modules described in natural language, enabling high-level composition and reducing structural errors; Search Tree Planning mechanism with localized feedback execution, which models generation as a hierarchical decision process and allows adaptive correction at each stage. Together, these components improve the stability and flexibility of complex generative workflows. We evaluate ComfyMind on three public benchmarks: ComfyBench, GenEval, and Reason-Edit, which span generation, editing, and reasoning tasks. Results show that ComfyMind consistently outperforms existing open-source baselines and achieves performance comparable to GPT-Image-1. ComfyMind paves a promising path for the development of open-source general-purpose generative AI systems. Project page: https://github.com/LitaoGuo/ComfyMind

Generative AI models often learn and reproduce false information present in their training corpora. This position paper argues that, analogous to biological immunization, where controlled exposure to a weakened pathogen builds immunity, AI models should be fine tuned on small, quarantined sets of explicitly labeled falsehoods as a "vaccine" against misinformation. These curated false examples are periodically injected during finetuning, strengthening the model ability to recognize and reject misleading claims while preserving accuracy on truthful inputs. An illustrative case study shows that immunized models generate substantially less misinformation than baselines. To our knowledge, this is the first training framework that treats fact checked falsehoods themselves as a supervised vaccine, rather than relying on input perturbations or generic human feedback signals, to harden models against future misinformation. We also outline ethical safeguards and governance controls to ensure the safe use of false data. Model immunization offers a proactive paradigm for aligning AI systems with factuality.

Large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4 show potential for scaling motivational interviewing (MI) in addiction care, but require systematic evaluation of therapeutic capabilities. We present a computational framework assessing user-perceived quality (UPQ) through expected and unexpected MI behaviors. Analyzing human therapist and GPT-4 MI sessions via human-AI collaboration, we developed predictive models integrating deep learning and explainable AI to identify 17 MI-consistent (MICO) and MI-inconsistent (MIIN) behavioral metrics. A customized chain-of-thought prompt improved GPT-4's MI performance, reducing inappropriate advice while enhancing reflections and empathy. Although GPT-4 remained marginally inferior to therapists overall, it demonstrated superior advice management capabilities. The model achieved measurable quality improvements through prompt engineering, yet showed limitations in addressing complex emotional nuances. This framework establishes a pathway for optimizing LLM-based therapeutic tools through targeted behavioral metric analysis and human-AI co-evaluation. Findings highlight both the scalability potential and current constraints of LLMs in clinical communication applications.

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly used to support a wide range of human tasks, yet empirical evidence on its effect on creativity remains scattered. Can GenAI generate ideas that are creative? To what extent can it support humans in generating ideas that are both creative and diverse? In this study, we conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of GenAI on the performance in creative tasks. For this, we first perform a systematic literature search, based on which we identify n = 28 relevant studies (m = 8214 participants) for inclusion in our meta-analysis. We then compute standardized effect sizes based on Hedges' g. We compare different outcomes: (i) how creative GenAI is; (ii) how creative humans augmented by GenAI are; and (iii) the diversity of ideas by humans augmented by GenAI. Our results show no significant difference in creative performance between GenAI and humans (g = -0.05), while humans collaborating with GenAI significantly outperform those working without assistance (g = 0.27). However, GenAI has a significant negative effect on the diversity of ideas for such collaborations between humans and GenAI (g = -0.86). We further analyze heterogeneity across different GenAI models (e.g., GPT-3.5, GPT-4), different tasks (e.g., creative writing, ideation, divergent thinking), and different participant populations (e.g., laypeople, business, academia). Overall, our results position GenAI as an augmentative tool that can support, rather than replace, human creativity-particularly in tasks benefiting from ideation support.

Large language models (LLMs), such as Microsoft's Copilot, OpenAI's GPT, and Google's Gemini, have substantially advanced a wide range of applications, including text summarization, content generation, and software development. Despite their impressive capabilities, these LLM services pose significant privacy risks. User prompts, which often contain sensitive personal or organizational information, are transmitted to third-party servers, where they may be vulnerable to data breaches, unauthorized access, or inference attacks. Recent work by Chu et al. [1] demonstrated that adversaries could exploit GPT models to extract private information through carefully crafted prompts, emphasizing the critical importance of privacy protection in LLM interactions. Various privacy-preserving techniques have been developed for LLMs, including cryptography-based and perturbation-based methods.

The fashion industry is an extremely profitable market that generates trillions of dollars in revenue by producing and distributing apparel, footwear, and accessories. This systematic literature review (SLR) seeks to systematically review and analyze the research landscape about the Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) and metaverse in the fashion industry. Thus, investigating the impact of integrating both technologies to enhance the fashion industry. This systematic review uses the Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology, including three essential phases: identification, evaluation, and reporting. In the identification phase, the target search problems are determined by selecting appropriate keywords and alternative synonyms. After that 578 documents from 2014 to the end of 2023 are retrieved. The evaluation phase applies three screening steps to assess papers and choose 118 eligible papers for full-text reading. Finally, the reporting phase thoroughly examines and synthesizes the 118 eligible papers to identify key themes associated with GAI and Metaverse in the fashion industry. Based on Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analyses performed for both GAI and metaverse for the fashion industry, it is concluded that the integration of GAI and the metaverse holds the capacity to profoundly revolutionize the fashion sector, presenting chances for improved manufacturing, design, sales, and client experiences. Accordingly, the research proposes a new framework to integrate GAI and metaverse to enhance the fashion industry. The framework presents different use cases to promote the fashion industry using the integration. Future research points for achieving a successful integration are demonstrated.

In medical practices across the United States, physicians have begun implementing generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools to perform the function of scribes in order to reduce the burden of documenting clinical encounters. Despite their widespread use, no established methods exist to gauge the quality of AI scribes. To address this gap, we developed a blinded study comparing the relative performance of large language model (LLM) generated clinical notes with those from field experts based on audio-recorded clinical encounters. Quantitative metrics from the Physician Documentation Quality Instrument (PDQI9) provided a framework to measure note quality, which we adapted to assess relative performance of AI generated notes. Clinical experts spanning 5 medical specialties used the PDQI9 tool to evaluate specialist-drafted Gold notes and LLM authored Ambient notes. Two evaluators from each specialty scored notes drafted from a total of 97 patient visits. We found uniformly high inter rater agreement (RWG greater than 0.7) between evaluators in general medicine, orthopedics, and obstetrics and gynecology, and moderate (RWG 0.5 to 0.7) to high inter rater agreement in pediatrics and cardiology. We found a modest yet significant difference in the overall note quality, wherein Gold notes achieved a score of 4.25 out of 5 and Ambient notes scored 4.20 out of 5 (p = 0.04). Our findings support the use of the PDQI9 instrument as a practical method to gauge the quality of LLM authored notes, as compared to human-authored notes.

Generative Artificial Intelligence is transforming how English as a foreign language students write. Still, little is known about how students manipulate text generated by generative AI during the writing process. This study investigates how EFL secondary school students integrate and modify AI-generated text when completing an expository writing task. The study employed an exploratory mixed-methods design. Screen recordings were collected from 29 Hong Kong secondary school students who attended an AI-assisted writing workshop and recorded their screens while using generative AI to write an article. Content analysis with hierarchical coding and thematic analysis with a multiple case study approach were adopted to analyze the recordings. 15 types of AI-generated text edits across seven categories were identified from the recordings. Notably, AI-initiated edits from iOS and Google Docs emerged as unanticipated sources of AI-generated text. A thematic analysis revealed four patterns of students' editing behaviors based on planning and drafting direction: planning with top-down drafting and revising; top-down drafting and revising without planning; planning with bottom-up drafting and revising; and bottom-up drafting and revising without planning. Network graphs illustrate cases of each pattern, demonstrating that students' interactions with AI-generated text involve more complex cognitive processes than simple text insertion. The findings challenge assumptions about students' passive, simplistic use of generative AI tools and have implications for developing explicit instructional approaches to teaching AI-generated text editing strategies in the AFL writing pedagogy.

Socioeconomic status (SES) fundamentally influences how people interact with each other and more recently, with digital technologies like Large Language Models (LLMs). While previous research has highlighted the interaction between SES and language technology, it was limited by reliance on proxy metrics and synthetic data. We survey 1,000 individuals from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds about their use of language technologies and generative AI, and collect 6,482 prompts from their previous interactions with LLMs. We find systematic differences across SES groups in language technology usage (i.e., frequency, performed tasks), interaction styles, and topics. Higher SES entails a higher level of abstraction, convey requests more concisely, and topics like 'inclusivity' and 'travel'. Lower SES correlates with higher anthropomorphization of LLMs (using ''hello'' and ''thank you'') and more concrete language. Our findings suggest that while generative language technologies are becoming more accessible to everyone, socioeconomic linguistic differences still stratify their use to exacerbate the digital divide. These differences underscore the importance of considering SES in developing language technologies to accommodate varying linguistic needs rooted in socioeconomic factors and limit the AI Gap across SES groups.