Test-time scaling has shown considerable success in improving the performance of language models on complex reasoning tasks without requiring fine-tuning. However, current strategies such as self-reflection primarily focus on logical or structural refinement. They do not leverage the guiding potential of affective feedback. Inspired by psychological research showing that emotions can modulate cognitive performance, we introduce HEART--a novel framework that uses emotionally-driven prompts for iterative self-correction. HEART provides feedback on a model's incorrect response using a curated set of concise, emotionally charged phrases based on the six universal emotions categorized by Dr. Paul Ekman. By systematically varying the emotional tone of the feedback across iterations, our method guides the model to escape flawed reasoning paths and explore more promising alternatives. We evaluate our framework on challenging reasoning benchmarks including OlympiadBench, Humanity's Last Exam, and SimpleQA. Our results reveal a significant new phenomenon: when guided by an oracle verifier, this affective iteration protocol unlocks significantly deeper reasoning, leading to consistent and substantial increases in accuracy over state-of-the-art baselines with the same verifier. However, we also identify a critical bottleneck for practical deployment. In a verifier-free setting, it struggles to harness these gains consistently, highlighting as a key challenge for future work. Our findings suggest that the next frontier in machine reasoning may lie not just in refining logic, but also in understanding and leveraging the `HEART' of the models.

We address the challenge of generating diverse attack prompts for large language models (LLMs) that elicit harmful behaviors (e.g., insults, sexual content) and are used for safety fine-tuning. Rather than relying on manual prompt engineering, attacker LLMs can be trained with reinforcement learning (RL) to automatically generate such prompts using only a toxicity classifier as a reward. However, capturing a wide range of harmful behaviors is a significant challenge that requires explicit diversity objectives. Existing diversity-seeking RL methods often collapse to limited modes: once high-reward prompts are found, exploration of new regions is discouraged. Inspired by the active learning paradigm that encourages adaptive exploration, we introduce \textit{Active Attacks}, a novel RL-based red-teaming algorithm that adapts its attacks as the victim evolves. By periodically safety fine-tuning the victim LLM with collected attack prompts, rewards in exploited regions diminish, which forces the attacker to seek unexplored vulnerabilities. This process naturally induces an easy-to-hard exploration curriculum, where the attacker progresses beyond easy modes toward increasingly difficult ones. As a result, Active Attacks uncovers a wide range of local attack modes step by step, and their combination achieves wide coverage of the multi-mode distribution. Active Attacks, a simple plug-and-play module that seamlessly integrates into existing RL objectives, unexpectedly outperformed prior RL-based methods -- including GFlowNets, PPO, and REINFORCE -- by improving cross-attack success rates against GFlowNets, the previous state-of-the-art, from 0.07% to 31.28% (a relative gain greater than $400\ \times$) with only a 6% increase in computation. Our code is publicly available \href{https://github.com/dbsxodud-11/active_attacks}{here}.

Prior works have shown that neural networks can be heavily pruned while preserving performance, but the impact of pruning on model interpretability remains unclear. In this work, we investigate how magnitude-based pruning followed by fine-tuning affects both low-level saliency maps and high-level concept representations. Using a ResNet-18 trained on ImageNette, we compare post-hoc explanations from Vanilla Gradients (VG) and Integrated Gradients (IG) across pruning levels, evaluating sparsity and faithfulness. We further apply CRAFT-based concept extraction to track changes in semantic coherence of learned concepts. Our results show that light-to-moderate pruning improves saliency-map focus and faithfulness while retaining distinct, semantically meaningful concepts. In contrast, aggressive pruning merges heterogeneous features, reducing saliency map sparsity and concept coherence despite maintaining accuracy. These findings suggest that while pruning can shape internal representations toward more human-aligned attention patterns, excessive pruning undermines interpretability.

Breast cancer screening with mammography remains central to early detection and mortality reduction. Deep learning has shown strong potential for automating mammogram interpretation, yet limited-resolution datasets and small sample sizes continue to restrict performance. We revisit the Mini-DDSM dataset (9,684 images; 2,414 patients) and introduce a lightweight region-of-interest (ROI) augmentation strategy. During training, full images are probabilistically replaced with random ROI crops sampled from a precomputed, label-free bounding-box bank, with optional jitter to increase variability. We evaluate under strict patient-level cross-validation and report ROC-AUC, PR-AUC, and training-time efficiency metrics (throughput and GPU memory). Because ROI augmentation is training-only, inference-time cost remains unchanged. On Mini-DDSM, ROI augmentation (best: p_roi = 0.10, alpha = 0.10) yields modest average ROC-AUC gains, with performance varying across folds; PR-AUC is flat to slightly lower. These results demonstrate that simple, data-centric ROI strategies can enhance mammography classification in constrained settings without requiring additional labels or architectural modifications.

As data continues to grow in scale and complexity, preparing, transforming, and analyzing it remains labor-intensive, repetitive, and difficult to scale. Since data contains knowledge and AI learns knowledge from it, the alignment between AI and data is essential. However, data is often not structured in ways that are optimal for AI utilization. Moreover, an important question arises: how much knowledge can we pack into data through intensive data operations? Autonomous data agents (DataAgents), which integrate LLM reasoning with task decomposition, action reasoning and grounding, and tool calling, can autonomously interpret data task descriptions, decompose tasks into subtasks, reason over actions, ground actions into python code or tool calling, and execute operations. Unlike traditional data management and engineering tools, DataAgents dynamically plan workflows, call powerful tools, and adapt to diverse data tasks at scale. This report argues that DataAgents represent a paradigm shift toward autonomous data-to-knowledge systems. DataAgents are capable of handling collection, integration, preprocessing, selection, transformation, reweighing, augmentation, reprogramming, repairs, and retrieval. Through these capabilities, DataAgents transform complex and unstructured data into coherent and actionable knowledge. We first examine why the convergence of agentic AI and data-to-knowledge systems has emerged as a critical trend. We then define the concept of DataAgents and discuss their architectural design, training strategies, as well as the new skills and capabilities they enable. Finally, we call for concerted efforts to advance action workflow optimization, establish open datasets and benchmark ecosystems, safeguard privacy, balance efficiency with scalability, and develop trustworthy DataAgent guardrails to prevent malicious actions.

Improving pretraining data quality and size is known to boost downstream performance, but the role of text complexity--how hard a text is to read--remains less explored. We reduce surface-level complexity (shorter sentences, simpler words, simpler structure) while keeping core content approximately constant and ask: (i) How does complexity affect language modeling across model sizes? (ii) Can useful representations be learned from simpler text alone? (iii) How does pretraining text complexity influence downstream language understanding? We simplify human-written texts using a large language model, pretrain causal models (28M-500M) from scratch on original vs. simplified data, and evaluate them in fine-tuning and zero-shot setups. We find that perplexity is sensitive to the interaction between model capacity and text complexity--smaller models degrade far less on simpler texts--while text complexity has little impact on fine-tuning evaluations, with zero-shot evaluations indicating that simpler texts benefit performance on linguistic knowledge tasks, whereas more complex texts favor tasks requiring world knowledge and entity tracking. Our findings suggest that different types of data diversity affect transfer and zero-shot performance differently, providing insight into tailoring data curation to specific goals.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied in diverse real-world scenarios, each governed by bespoke behavioral and safety specifications (spec) custom-tailored by users or organizations. These spec, categorized into safety-spec and behavioral-spec, vary across scenarios and evolve with changing preferences and requirements. We formalize this challenge as specification alignment, focusing on LLMs' ability to follow dynamic, scenario-specific spec from both behavioral and safety perspectives. To address this challenge, we propose Align3, a lightweight method that employs Test-Time Deliberation (TTD) with hierarchical reflection and revision to reason over the specification boundaries. We further present SpecBench, a unified benchmark for measuring specification alignment, covering 5 scenarios, 103 spec, and 1,500 prompts. Experiments on 15 reasoning and 18 instruct models with several TTD methods, including Self-Refine, TPO, and MoreThink, yield three key findings: (i) test-time deliberation enhances specification alignment; (ii) Align3 advances the safety-helpfulness trade-off frontier with minimal overhead; (iii) SpecBench effectively reveals alignment gaps. These results highlight the potential of test-time deliberation as an effective strategy for reasoning over the real-world specification boundaries.

Understanding how people read city scenes can inform design and planning. We introduce a small benchmark for testing vision-language models (VLMs) on urban perception using 100 Montreal street images, evenly split between photographs and photorealistic synthetic scenes. Twelve participants from seven community groups supplied 230 annotation forms across 30 dimensions mixing physical attributes and subjective impressions. French responses were normalized to English. We evaluated seven VLMs in a zero-shot setup with a structured prompt and deterministic parser. We use accuracy for single-choice items and Jaccard overlap for multi-label items; human agreement uses Krippendorff's alpha and pairwise Jaccard. Results suggest stronger model alignment on visible, objective properties than subjective appraisals. The top system (claude-sonnet) reaches macro 0.31 and mean Jaccard 0.48 on multi-label items. Higher human agreement coincides with better model scores. Synthetic images slightly lower scores. We release the benchmark, prompts, and harness for reproducible, uncertainty-aware evaluation in participatory urban analysis.

While transformer-based foundation models excel at forecasting routine patterns, two questions remain: do they internalize semantic concepts such as market regimes, or merely fit curves? And can their internal representations be leveraged to simulate rare, high-stakes events such as market crashes? To investigate this, we introduce activation transplantation, a causal intervention that manipulates hidden states by imposing the statistical moments of one event (e.g., a historical crash) onto another (e.g., a calm period) during the forward pass. This procedure deterministically steers forecasts: injecting crash semantics induces downturn predictions, while injecting calm semantics suppresses crashes and restores stability. Beyond binary control, we find that models encode a graded notion of event severity, with the latent vector norm directly correlating with the magnitude of systemic shocks. Validated across two architecturally distinct TSFMs, Toto (decoder only) and Chronos (encoder-decoder), our results demonstrate that steerable, semantically grounded representations are a robust property of large time series transformers. Our findings provide evidence for a latent concept space that governs model predictions, shifting interpretability from post-hoc attribution to direct causal intervention, and enabling semantic "what-if" analysis for strategic stress-testing.

End-to-end autonomous driving remains constrained by the difficulty of producing adaptive, robust, and interpretable decision-making across diverse scenarios. Existing methods often collapse diverse driving behaviors, lack long-horizon consistency, or require task-specific engineering that limits generalization. This paper presents KDP, a knowledge-driven diffusion policy that integrates generative diffusion modeling with a sparse mixture-of-experts routing mechanism. The diffusion component generates temporally coherent action sequences, while the expert routing mechanism activates specialized and reusable experts according to context, enabling modular knowledge composition. Extensive experiments across representative driving scenarios demonstrate that KDP achieves consistently higher success rates, reduced collision risk, and smoother control compared to prevailing paradigms. Ablation studies highlight the effectiveness of sparse expert activation and the Transformer backbone, and activation analyses reveal structured specialization and cross-scenario reuse of experts. These results establish diffusion with expert routing as a scalable and interpretable paradigm for knowledge-driven end-to-end autonomous driving.