Many real-world machine learning tasks require outputs that satisfy hard constraints, such as physical conservation laws, structured dependencies in graphs, or column-level relationships in tabular data. Existing approaches rely either on domain-specific architectures and losses or on strong assumptions on the constraint space, restricting their applicability to linear or convex constraints. We propose a general-purpose framework for constraint-aware refinement that leverages denoising diffusion implicit models (DDIMs). Starting from a coarse prediction, our method iteratively refines it through a deterministic diffusion trajectory guided by a learned prior and augmented by constraint gradient corrections. The approach accommodates a wide class of non-convex and nonlinear equality constraints and can be applied post hoc to any base model. We demonstrate the method in two representative domains: constrained adversarial attack generation on tabular data with column-level dependencies and in AC power flow prediction under Kirchhoff's laws. Across both settings, our diffusion-guided refinement improves both constraint satisfaction and performance while remaining lightweight and model-agnostic.

The recent advent of reasoning models like OpenAI's o1 was met with excited speculation by the AI community about the mechanisms underlying these capabilities in closed models, followed by a rush of replication efforts, particularly from the open source community. These speculations were largely settled by the demonstration from DeepSeek-R1 that chains-of-thought and reinforcement learning (RL) can effectively replicate reasoning on top of base LLMs. However, it remains valuable to explore alternative methods for theoretically eliciting reasoning that could help elucidate the underlying mechanisms, as well as providing additional methods that may offer complementary benefits. Here, we build on the long-standing literature in cognitive psychology and cognitive architectures, which postulates that reasoning arises from the orchestrated, sequential execution of a set of modular, predetermined cognitive operations. Crucially, we implement this key idea within a modern agentic tool-calling framework. In particular, we endow an LLM with a small set of "cognitive tools" encapsulating specific reasoning operations, each executed by the LLM itself. Surprisingly, this simple strategy results in considerable gains in performance on standard mathematical reasoning benchmarks compared to base LLMs, for both closed and open-weight models. For instance, providing our "cognitive tools" to GPT-4.1 increases its pass@1 performance on AIME2024 from 32% to 53%, even surpassing the performance of o1-preview. In addition to its practical implications, this demonstration contributes to the debate regarding the role of post-training methods in eliciting reasoning in LLMs versus the role of inherent capabilities acquired during pre-training, and whether post-training merely uncovers these latent abilities.

Following the successful paradigm shift of large language models, leveraging pre-training on a massive corpus of data and fine-tuning on different downstream tasks, generalist models have made their foray into computer vision. The introduction of Segment Anything Model (SAM) set a milestone on segmentation of natural images, inspiring the design of a multitude of architectures for medical image segmentation. In this survey we offer a comprehensive and in-depth investigation on generalist models for medical image segmentation. We start with an introduction on the fundamentals concepts underpinning their development. Then, we provide a taxonomy on the different declinations of SAM in terms of zero-shot, few-shot, fine-tuning, adapters, on the recent SAM 2, on other innovative models trained on images alone, and others trained on both text and images. We thoroughly analyze their performances at the level of both primary research and best-in-literature, followed by a rigorous comparison with the state-of-the-art task-specific models. We emphasize the need to address challenges in terms of compliance with regulatory frameworks, privacy and security laws, budget, and trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI). Finally, we share our perspective on future directions concerning synthetic data, early fusion, lessons learnt from generalist models in natural language processing, agentic AI and physical AI, and clinical translation.

As text-to-image models become increasingly prevalent, ensuring their equitable performance across diverse cultural contexts is critical. Efforts to mitigate cross-cultural biases have been hampered by trade-offs, including a loss in performance, factual inaccuracies, or offensive outputs. Despite widespread recognition of these challenges, an inability to reliably measure these biases has stalled progress. To address this gap, we introduce CAIRe, an evaluation metric that assesses the degree of cultural relevance of an image, given a user-defined set of labels. Our framework grounds entities and concepts in the image to a knowledge base and uses factual information to give independent graded judgments for each culture label. On a manually curated dataset of culturally salient but rare items built using language models, CAIRe surpasses all baselines by 22% F1 points. Additionally, we construct two datasets for culturally universal concepts, one comprising T2I-generated outputs and another retrieved from naturally occurring data. CAIRe achieves Pearson's correlations of 0.56 and 0.66 with human ratings on these sets, based on a 5-point Likert scale of cultural relevance. This demonstrates its strong alignment with human judgment across diverse image sources.

The rapid adoption of Small Language Models (SLMs) for resource constrained applications has outpaced our understanding of their ethical and fairness implications. To address this gap, we introduce the Vacuous Neutrality Framework (VaNeu), a multi-dimensional evaluation paradigm designed to assess SLM fairness prior to deployment. The framework examines model robustness across four stages - biases, utility, ambiguity handling, and positional bias over diverse social bias categories. To the best of our knowledge, this work presents the first large-scale audit of SLMs in the 0.5-5B parameter range, an overlooked "middle tier" between BERT-class encoders and flagship LLMs. We evaluate nine widely used SLMs spanning four model families under both ambiguous and disambiguated contexts. Our findings show that models demonstrating low bias in early stages often fail subsequent evaluations, revealing hidden vulnerabilities and unreliable reasoning. These results underscore the need for a more comprehensive understanding of fairness and reliability in SLMs, and position the proposed framework as a principled tool for responsible deployment in socially sensitive settings.

Recent generations of language models have introduced Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) that generate detailed thinking processes before providing answers. While these models demonstrate improved performance on reasoning benchmarks, their fundamental capabilities, scaling properties, and limitations remain insufficiently understood. Current evaluations primarily focus on established math and coding benchmarks, emphasizing final answer accuracy. However, this evaluation paradigm often suffers from contamination and does not provide insights into the reasoning traces. In this work, we systematically investigate these gaps with the help of controllable puzzle environments that allow precise manipulation of complexity while maintaining consistent logical structures. This setup enables the analysis of not only final answers but also the internal reasoning traces, offering insights into how LRMs think. Through extensive experiments, we show that LRMs face a complete accuracy collapse beyond certain complexities. Moreover, they exhibit a counterintuitive scaling limit: their reasoning effort increases with problem complexity up to a point, then declines despite having remaining token budget. By comparing LRMs with their standard LLM counterparts under same inference compute, we identify three performance regimes: (1) low-complexity tasks where standard models outperform LRMs, (2) medium-complexity tasks where LRMs demonstrates advantage, and (3) high-complexity tasks where both models face complete collapse. We found that LRMs have limitations in exact computation: they fail to use explicit algorithms and reason inconsistently across scales. We also investigate the reasoning traces in more depth, studying the patterns of explored solutions and analyzing the models' computational behavior, shedding light on their strengths, limitations, and raising questions about their reasoning capabilities.

Estimation of causal effects is critical to a range of scientific disciplines. Existing methods for this task either require interventional data, knowledge about the ground truth causal graph, or rely on assumptions such as unconfoundedness, restricting their applicability in real-world settings. In the domain of tabular machine learning, Prior-data fitted networks (PFNs) have achieved state-of-the-art predictive performance, having been pre-trained on synthetic data to solve tabular prediction problems via in-context learning. To assess whether this can be transferred to the harder problem of causal effect estimation, we pre-train PFNs on synthetic data drawn from a wide variety of causal structures, including interventions, to predict interventional outcomes given observational data. Through extensive experiments on synthetic case studies, we show that our approach allows for the accurate estimation of causal effects without knowledge of the underlying causal graph. We also perform ablation studies that elucidate Do-PFN's scalability and robustness across datasets with a variety of causal characteristics.

Large language model (LLM) agents have demonstrated strong capabilities across diverse domains, yet automated agent design remains a significant challenge. Current automated agent design approaches are often constrained by limited search spaces that primarily optimize workflows but fail to integrate crucial human-designed components like memory, planning, and tool use. Furthermore, these methods are hampered by high evaluation costs, as evaluating even a single new agent on a benchmark can require tens of dollars. The difficulty of this exploration is further exacerbated by inefficient search strategies that struggle to navigate the large design space effectively, making the discovery of novel agents a slow and resource-intensive process. To address these challenges, we propose AgentSwift, a novel framework for automated agent design. We formalize a hierarchical search space that jointly models agentic workflow and composable functional components. This structure moves beyond optimizing workflows alone by co-optimizing functional components, which enables the discovery of more complex and effective agent architectures. To make exploration within this expansive space feasible, we mitigate high evaluation costs by training a value model on a high-quality dataset, generated via a novel strategy combining combinatorial coverage and balanced Bayesian sampling for low-cost evaluation. Guiding the entire process is a hierarchical MCTS strategy, which is informed by uncertainty to efficiently navigate the search space. Evaluated across a comprehensive set of seven benchmarks spanning embodied, math, web, tool, and game domains, AgentSwift discovers agents that achieve an average performance gain of 8.34\% over both existing automated agent search methods and manually designed agents. Our framework serves as a launchpad for researchers to rapidly discover powerful agent architectures.

Agentic AI aims to create systems that set their own goals, adapt proactively to change, and refine behavior through continuous experience. Recent advances suggest that, when facing multiple and unforeseen tasks, agents could benefit from sharing machine-learned knowledge and reusing policies that have already been fully or partially learned by other agents. However, how to query, select, and retrieve policies from a pool of agents, and how to integrate such policies remains a largely unexplored area. This study explores how an agent decides what knowledge to select, from whom, and when and how to integrate it in its own policy in order to accelerate its own learning. The proposed algorithm, \emph{Modular Sharing and Composition in Collective Learning} (MOSAIC), improves learning in agentic collectives by combining (1) knowledge selection using performance signals and cosine similarity on Wasserstein task embeddings, (2) modular and transferable neural representations via masks, and (3) policy integration, composition and fine-tuning. MOSAIC outperforms isolated learners and global sharing approaches in both learning speed and overall performance, and in some cases solves tasks that isolated agents cannot. The results also demonstrate that selective, goal-driven reuse leads to less susceptibility to task interference. We also observe the emergence of self-organization, where agents solving simpler tasks accelerate the learning of harder ones through shared knowledge.

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in many natural language processing tasks but often exhibit factual inconsistencies in knowledge-intensive settings. Integrating external knowledge resources, particularly knowledge graphs (KGs), provides a transparent and updatable foundation for more reliable reasoning. Knowledge Base Question Answering (KBQA), which queries and reasons over KGs, is central to this effort, especially for complex, multi-hop queries. However, multi-hop reasoning poses two key challenges: (1)~maintaining coherent reasoning paths, and (2)~avoiding prematurely discarding critical multi-hop connections. To tackle these challenges, we introduce iQUEST, a question-guided KBQA framework that iteratively decomposes complex queries into simpler sub-questions, ensuring a structured and focused reasoning trajectory. Additionally, we integrate a Graph Neural Network (GNN) to look ahead and incorporate 2-hop neighbor information at each reasoning step. This dual approach strengthens the reasoning process, enabling the model to explore viable paths more effectively. Detailed experiments demonstrate the consistent improvement delivered by iQUEST across four benchmark datasets and four LLMs.