Deep Research (DR) is an emerging agent application that leverages large language models (LLMs) to address open-ended queries. It requires the integration of several capabilities, including multi-step reasoning, cross-document synthesis, and the generation of evidence-backed, long-form answers. Evaluating DR remains challenging because responses are lengthy and diverse, admit many valid solutions, and often depend on dynamic information sources. We introduce ResearchRubrics, a standardized benchmark for DR built with over 2,800+ hours of human labor that pairs realistic, domain-diverse prompts with 2,500+ expert-written, fine-grained rubrics to assess factual grounding, reasoning soundness, and clarity. We also propose a new complexity framework for categorizing DR tasks along three axes: conceptual breadth, logical nesting, and exploration. In addition, we develop human and model-based evaluation protocols that measure rubric adherence for DR agents. We evaluate several state-of-the-art DR systems and find that even leading agents like Gemini's DR and OpenAI's DR achieve under 68% average compliance with our rubrics, primarily due to missed implicit context and inadequate reasoning about retrieved information. Our results highlight the need for robust, scalable assessment of deep research capabilities, to which end we release ResearchRubrics(including all prompts, rubrics, and evaluation code) to facilitate progress toward well-justified research assistants.

This study introduces 'Malinowski's Lens', the first AI-native educational game for anthropology that transforms Bronislaw Malinowski's 'Argonauts of the Western Pacific' (1922) into an interactive learning experience. The system combines Retrieval-Augmented Generation with DALL-E 3 text-to-image generation, creating consistent VGA-style visuals as players embody Malinowski during his Trobriand Islands fieldwork (1915-1918). To address ethical concerns, indigenous peoples appear as silhouettes while Malinowski is detailed, prompting reflection on anthropological representation. Two validation studies confirmed effectiveness: Study 1 with 10 non-specialists showed strong learning outcomes (average quiz score 7.5/10) and excellent usability (SUS: 83/100). Study 2 with 4 expert anthropologists confirmed pedagogical value, with one senior researcher discovering "new aspects" of Malinowski's work through gameplay. The findings demonstrate that AI-driven educational games can effectively convey complex anthropological concepts while sparking disciplinary curiosity. This study advances AI-native educational game design and provides a replicable model for transforming academic texts into engaging interactive experiences.

This technical report describes the AIA Forecaster, a Large Language Model (LLM)-based system for judgmental forecasting using unstructured data. The AIA Forecaster approach combines three core elements: agentic search over high-quality news sources, a supervisor agent that reconciles disparate forecasts for the same event, and a set of statistical calibration techniques to counter behavioral biases in large language models. On the ForecastBench benchmark (Karger et al., 2024), the AIA Forecaster achieves performance equal to human superforecasters, surpassing prior LLM baselines. In addition to reporting on ForecastBench, we also introduce a more challenging forecasting benchmark sourced from liquid prediction markets. While the AIA Forecaster underperforms market consensus on this benchmark, an ensemble combining AIA Forecaster with market consensus outperforms consensus alone, demonstrating that our forecaster provides additive information. Our work establishes a new state of the art in AI forecasting and provides practical, transferable recommendations for future research. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that verifiably achieves expert-level forecasting at scale.

Current large language models (LLMs) excel in verifiable domains where outputs can be checked before action but prove less reliable for high-stakes strategic decisions with uncertain outcomes. This gap, driven by mutually reinforcing cognitive biases in both humans and artificial intelligence (AI) systems, threatens the defensibility of valuations and sustainability of investments in the sector. This report describes a framework emerging from systematic qualitative assessment across 7 frontier-grade LLMs and 3 market-facing venture vignettes under time pressure. Detailed prompting specifying decision partnership and explicitly instructing avoidance of sycophancy, confabulation, solution drift, and nihilism achieved initial partnership state but failed to maintain it under operational pressure. Sustaining protective partnership state required an emergent 7-stage calibration sequence, built upon a 4-stage initialization process, within a 5-layer protection architecture enabling bias self-monitoring, human-AI adversarial challenge, partnership state verification, performance degradation detection, and stakeholder protection. Three discoveries resulted: partnership state is achievable through ordered calibration but requires emergent maintenance protocols; reliability degrades when architectural drift and context exhaustion align; and dissolution discipline prevents costly pursuit of fundamentally wrong directions. Cross-model validation revealed systematic performance differences across LLM architectures. This approach demonstrates that human-AI teams can achieve cognitive partnership capable of preventing avoidable regret in high-stakes decisions, addressing return-on-investment expectations that depend on AI systems supporting consequential decision-making without introducing preventable cognitive traps when verification arrives too late.

The equitable assessment of individual contribution in teams remains a persistent challenge, where conflict and disparity in workload can result in unfair performance evaluation, often requiring manual intervention - a costly and challenging process. We survey existing tool features and identify a gap in conflict resolution methods and AI integration. To address this, we propose a framework and implementation design for a novel AI-enhanced tool that assists in dispute investigation. The framework organises heterogeneous artefacts - submissions (code, text, media), communications (chat, email), coordination records (meeting logs, tasks), peer assessments, and contextual information - into three dimensions with nine benchmarks: Contribution, Interaction, and Role. Objective measures are normalised, aggregated per dimension, and paired with inequality measures (Gini index) to surface conflict markers. A Large Language Model (LLM) architecture performs validated and contextual analysis over these measures to generate interpretable and transparent advisory judgments. We argue for feasibility under current statutory and institutional policy, and outline practical analytics (sentimental, task fidelity, word/line count, etc.), bias safeguards, limitations, and practical challenges.

Evaluating answers from state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) is challenging: lexical metrics miss semantic nuances, whereas "LLM-as-Judge" scoring is computationally expensive. We re-evaluate a lightweight alternative -- off-the-shelf Natural Language Inference (NLI) scoring augmented by a simple lexical-match flag and find that this decades-old technique matches GPT-4o's accuracy (89.9%) on long-form QA, while requiring orders-of-magnitude fewer parameters. To test human alignment of these metrics rigorously, we introduce DIVER-QA, a new 3000-sample human-annotated benchmark spanning five QA datasets and five candidate LLMs. Our results highlight that inexpensive NLI-based evaluation remains competitive and offer DIVER-QA as an open resource for future metric research.

Although recent advancements in learning-based analog circuit design automation have tackled tasks such as topology generation, device sizing, and layout synthesis, efficient performance evaluation remains a major bottleneck. Traditional SPICE simulations are time-consuming, while existing machine learning methods often require topology-specific retraining or manual substructure segmentation for fine-tuning, hindering scalability and adaptability. In this work, we propose ZeroSim, a transformer-based performance modeling framework designed to achieve robust in-distribution generalization across trained topologies under novel parameter configurations and zero-shot generalization to unseen topologies without any fine-tuning. We apply three key enabling strategies: (1) a diverse training corpus of 3.6 million instances covering over 60 amplifier topologies, (2) unified topology embeddings leveraging global-aware tokens and hierarchical attention to robustly generalize to novel circuits, and (3) a topology-conditioned parameter mapping approach that maintains consistent structural representations independent of parameter variations. Our experimental results demonstrate that ZeroSim significantly outperforms baseline models such as multilayer perceptrons, graph neural networks and transformers, delivering accurate zero-shot predictions across different amplifier topologies. Additionally, when integrated into a reinforcement learning-based parameter optimization pipeline, ZeroSim achieves a remarkable speedup (13x) compared to conventional SPICE simulations, underscoring its practical value for a wide range of analog circuit design automation tasks.

Context: The integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into core software systems is accelerating. However, existing software architecture patterns are static, while current safety assurance methods are not scalable, leaving systems vulnerable to novel adversarial threats. Objective: To design, implement, and evaluate a novel software architecture that enables an AI-driven system to autonomously and continuously adapt its own safety protocols at runtime. Method: We propose the Self-Improving Safety Framework (SISF), a runtime architecture that couples an unprotected, unaligned base LLM (mistralai/Mistral-7B-v0.1) with a dynamic feedback loop. This loop consists of an AI Adjudicator (GPT-4o) for breach detection and a Policy Synthesis Module (GPT-4 Turbo) that autonomously generates new, generalized safety policies (both heuristic and semantic) in response to failures. Results: We conducted a dynamic learning evaluation using the 520-prompt AdvBench dataset. The unprotected model was 100% vulnerable. Our SISF, starting from zero policies, demonstrated a clear learning curve: it detected 237 breaches, autonomously synthesized 234 new policies, and reduced the overall Attack Success Rate (ASR) to 45.58%. In a subsequent test on 520 benign prompts, the SISF achieved a 0.00% False Positive Rate (FPR), proving its ability to adapt without compromising user utility. Conclusion: An architectural approach to AI safety, based on the principles of self-adaptation, is a viable and effective strategy. Our framework demonstrates a practical path towards building more robust, resilient, and scalable AI-driven systems, shifting safety assurance from a static, pre-deployment activity to an automated, runtime process.

Understanding emotional nuances in everyday language is crucial for computational linguistics and emotion research. While traditional lexicon-based tools like LIWC and Pattern have served as foundational instruments, Large Language Models (LLMs) promise enhanced context understanding. We evaluated three Dutch-specific LLMs (ChocoLlama-8B-Instruct, Reynaerde-7B-chat, and GEITje-7B-ultra) against LIWC and Pattern for valence prediction in Flemish, a low-resource language variant. Our dataset comprised approximately 25000 spontaneous textual responses from 102 Dutch-speaking participants, each providing narratives about their current experiences with self-assessed valence ratings (-50 to +50). Surprisingly, despite architectural advancements, the Dutch-tuned LLMs underperformed compared to traditional methods, with Pattern showing superior performance. These findings challenge assumptions about LLM superiority in sentiment analysis tasks and highlight the complexity of capturing emotional valence in spontaneous, real-world narratives. Our results underscore the need for developing culturally and linguistically tailored evaluation frameworks for low-resource language variants, while questioning whether current LLM fine-tuning approaches adequately address the nuanced emotional expressions found in everyday language use.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) enhances large language models (LLMs) by retrieving documents from an external corpus at inference time. When this corpus contains sensitive information, however, unprotected RAG systems are at risk of leaking private information. Prior work has introduced differential privacy (DP) guarantees for RAG, but only in single-query settings, which fall short of realistic usage. In this paper, we study the more practical multi-query setting and propose two DP-RAG algorithms. The first, MURAG, leverages an individual privacy filter so that the accumulated privacy loss only depends on how frequently each document is retrieved rather than the total number of queries. The second, MURAG-ADA, further improves utility by privately releasing query-specific thresholds, enabling more precise selection of relevant documents. Our experiments across multiple LLMs and datasets demonstrate that the proposed methods scale to hundreds of queries within a practical DP budget ($\varepsilon\approx10$), while preserving meaningful utility.