Full-waveform inversion (FWI) plays a vital role in geoscience to explore the subsurface. It utilizes the seismic wave to image the subsurface velocity map. As the machine learning (ML) technique evolves, the data-driven approaches using ML for FWI tasks have emerged, offering enhanced accuracy and reduced computational cost compared to traditional physics-based methods. However, a common challenge in geoscience, the unprivileged data, severely limits ML effectiveness. The issue becomes even worse during model pruning, a step essential in geoscience due to environmental complexities. To tackle this, we introduce the EdGeo toolkit, which employs a diffusion-based model guided by physics principles to generate high-fidelity velocity maps. The toolkit uses the acoustic wave equation to generate corresponding seismic waveform data, facilitating the fine-tuning of pruned ML models. Our results demonstrate significant improvements in SSIM scores and reduction in both MAE and MSE across various pruning ratios. Notably, the ML model fine-tuned using data generated by EdGeo yields superior quality of velocity maps, especially in representing unprivileged features, outperforming other existing methods.

Research suggests that tutors should adopt a strategic approach when addressing math errors made by low-efficacy students. Rather than drawing direct attention to the error, tutors should guide the students to identify and correct their mistakes on their own. While tutor lessons have introduced this pedagogical skill, human evaluation of tutors applying this strategy is arduous and time-consuming. Large language models (LLMs) show promise in providing real-time assessment to tutors during their actual tutoring sessions, yet little is known regarding their accuracy in this context. In this study, we investigate the capacity of generative AI to evaluate real-life tutors' performance in responding to students making math errors. By analyzing 50 real-life tutoring dialogues, we find both GPT-3.5-Turbo and GPT-4 demonstrate proficiency in assessing the criteria related to reacting to students making errors. However, both models exhibit limitations in recognizing instances where the student made an error. Notably, GPT-4 tends to overidentify instances of students making errors, often attributing student uncertainty or inferring potential errors where human evaluators did not. Future work will focus on enhancing generalizability by assessing a larger dataset of dialogues and evaluating learning transfer. Specifically, we will analyze the performance of tutors in real-life scenarios when responding to students' math errors before and after lesson completion on this crucial tutoring skill.

Synthetic data generation, a cornerstone of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI), signifies a paradigm shift in data science by addressing data scarcity and privacy while enabling unprecedented performance. As synthetic data gains prominence, questions arise concerning the accuracy of statistical methods when applied to synthetic data compared to raw data. This article introduces the Synthetic Data Generation for Analytics (Syn) framework. This framework employs statistical methods on high-fidelity synthetic data generated by advanced models such as tabular diffusion and Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) models. These models, trained on raw data, are further enhanced with insights from pertinent studies through knowledge transfer. A significant discovery within this framework is the generational effect: the error of a statistical method on synthetic data initially diminishes with additional synthetic data but may eventually increase or plateau. This phenomenon, rooted in the complexities of replicating raw data distributions, highlights a "reflection point" - an optimal threshold in the size of synthetic data determined by specific error metrics. Through three case studies - sentiment analysis of texts, predictive modeling of structured data, and inference in tabular data - we demonstrate the effectiveness of this framework over traditional ones. We underline its potential to amplify various statistical methods, including gradient boosting for prediction and hypothesis testing, thereby underscoring the transformative potential of synthetic data generation in data science.

Generative AI--think Dall.E, ChatGPT-4, and many more--is all the rage. It's remarkable successes, and occasional catastrophic failures, have kick-started important debates about both the scope and dangers of advanced forms of artificial intelligence. But what, if anything, does this work reveal about natural intelligences such as our own? I'm a philosopher and cognitive scientist who has spent their entire career trying to understand how the human mind works. Drawing on research spanning psychology, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence, my search has drawn me towards a picture of how natural minds work that is both interestingly similar to, yet also deeply different from, the core operating principles of the generative AIs.

OpenAI's management chaos in November could have long-lasting effects on its business as some of the company's customers say it was a wake-up call about the risks of being too reliant on one company's tech. Executives at companies that use OpenAI's software say they are increasingly looking to also use others' technology to protect themselves from the risks of problems at any one. OpenAI's competitors are using the opportunity to sign up wary customers.

If A.I. and chatbots are the next wave of innovation, then the New York Times and other media organizations are determined to get paid this time. If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Dear Prudence--and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next TBD. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work.

The high-performance generative artificial intelligence (GAI) represents the latest evolution of computational intelligence, while the blessing of future 6G networks also makes edge intelligence (EI) full of development potential. The inevitable encounter between GAI and EI can unleash new opportunities, where GAI's pre-training based on massive computing resources and large-scale unlabeled corpora can provide strong foundational knowledge for EI, while EI can harness fragmented computing resources to aggregate personalized knowledge for GAI. However, the natural contradictory features pose significant challenges to direct knowledge sharing. To address this, in this paper, we propose the GAI-oriented synthetical network (GaisNet), a collaborative cloud-edge-end intelligence framework that buffers contradiction leveraging data-free knowledge relay, where the bidirectional knowledge flow enables GAI's virtuous-cycle model fine-tuning and task inference, achieving mutualism between GAI and EI with seamless fusion and collaborative evolution. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed mechanisms. Finally, we discuss the future challenges and directions in the interplay between GAI and EI.

Equipped with sensing, networking, and computing capabilities, Internet of Things (IoT) such as smartphones, wearables, smart speakers, and household robots have been seamlessly weaved into our daily lives. Recent advancements in Generative AI exemplified by GPT, LLaMA, DALL-E, and Stable Difussion hold immense promise to push IoT to the next level. In this article, we share our vision and views on the benefits that Generative AI brings to IoT, and discuss some of the most important applications of Generative AI in IoT-related domains. Fully harnessing Generative AI in IoT is a complex challenge. We identify some of the most critical challenges including high resource demands of the Generative AI models, prompt engineering, on-device inference, offloading, on-device fine-tuning, federated learning, security, as well as development tools and benchmarks, and discuss current gaps as well as promising opportunities on enabling Generative AI for IoT. We hope this article can inspire new research on IoT in the era of Generative AI.

Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT and Google Bard have garnered significant attention in the academic community. Previous research has evaluated these LLMs for various applications such as generating programming exercises and solutions. However, these evaluations have predominantly been conducted by instructors and researchers, not considering the actual usage of LLMs by students. This study adopts a student-first approach to comprehensively understand how undergraduate computer science students utilize ChatGPT, a popular LLM, released by OpenAI. We employ a combination of student surveys and interviews to obtain valuable insights into the benefits, challenges, and suggested improvements related to ChatGPT. Our findings suggest that a majority of students (over 57%) have a convincingly positive outlook towards adopting ChatGPT as an aid in coursework-related tasks. However, our research also highlights various challenges that must be resolved for long-term acceptance of ChatGPT amongst students. The findings from this investigation have broader implications and may be applicable to other LLMs and their role in computing education.

We propose a framework for classifying the capabilities and behavior of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) models and their precursors. This framework introduces levels of AGI performance, generality, and autonomy. It is our hope that this framework will be useful in an analogous way to the levels of autonomous driving, by providing a common language to compare models, assess risks, and measure progress along the path to AGI. To develop our framework, we analyze existing definitions of AGI, and distill six principles that a useful ontology for AGI should satisfy. These principles include focusing on capabilities rather than mechanisms; separately evaluating generality and performance; and defining stages along the path toward AGI, rather than focusing on the endpoint. With these principles in mind, we propose 'Levels of AGI' based on depth (performance) and breadth (generality) of capabilities, and reflect on how current systems fit into this ontology. We discuss the challenging requirements for future benchmarks that quantify the behavior and capabilities of AGI models against these levels. Finally, we discuss how these levels of AGI interact with deployment considerations such as autonomy and risk, and emphasize the importance of carefully selecting Human-AI Interaction paradigms for responsible and safe deployment of highly capable AI systems.