Feedforward network (FFN) layers account for a large fraction of parameters and nonlinear expressivity in Transformer-based large language models (LLMs). Despite the evolution from ReLU and GELU to gated variants such as SwiGLU, most FFN designs still use a single fixed activation function, applying the same nonlinear transformation to all tokens. In this work, we propose Mixture of Activations (MoA), a token-adaptive FFN design that mixes a dictionary of activation functions using lightweight input-dependent gates while sharing the same linear projections. As an input-independent counterpart, we also introduce learnable activations (LA), which form linear combinations of activation functions for both ReLU-type and SwiGLU-type FFNs. Theoretically, we establish strict finite-width expressive separations among fixed-activation FFNs, LA, and MoA: LA strictly contains fixed-activation FFNs, while MoA strictly contains LA, with the additional expressivity arising from input-dependent nonlinear hybridization. Empirically, we evaluate MoA through extensive pre-training experiments on dense and MoE language models ranging from 0.12B to 2B parameters under different token budgets, optimizers, and learning rate schedules. MoA consistently achieves lower terminal loss and exhibits more favorable scaling behavior than well-tuned baselines, with minimal parameter and computational overhead. These results suggest that token-adaptive activation mixing is a simple and effective mechanism for improving FFN expressivity in LLMs.

Normalization layers in modern large language models (LLMs) consist of a deterministic normalization operation and a learnable scale vector. While the normalization operation has been extensively studied, the scale vector remains poorly understood despite its ubiquitous use. In this work, we present a systematic study of scale vectors in LLMs from the perspectives of expressivity, optimization, and architectural structure. First, we show empirically that although scale vectors constitute only a negligible fraction of model parameters, removing them substantially degrades LLM pre-training. Our theory further shows that, in Pre-Norm architectures, scale vectors do not increase expressivity; instead, they improve optimization through a self-amplifying preconditioning effect on subsequent linear mappings. Second, we investigate the role of weight decay for scale vectors. By distinguishing Input-Norm and Output-Norm layers, we theoretically show that weight decay is beneficial for the former but harmful for the latter, due to their distinct roles in optimization and expressivity. Third, motivated by this understanding, we propose three lightweight and complementary improvements to scale vectors: branch-specific heterogeneity, improved placement around linear mappings, and magnitude-direction reparameterization. Both theory and experiments show that each improvement yields consistent gains. Finally, we combine these improvements into a unified scale-vector strategy and evaluate it through extensive LLM pre-training experiments on dense and mixture-of-experts models ranging from 0.12B to 2B parameters, across multiple optimizers and learning rate schedules, under industrial-scale token budgets. The unified strategy consistently achieves lower terminal loss than well-tuned baselines and exhibits more favorable scaling behavior, while adding negligible parameter and computational overhead.

Sampling from learned high-dimensional distributions is a foundational computational problem. We introduce U-turn chains: Markov chains obtained by iterating short forward-backward steps of a diffusion model, in which each step proposes a move that remains on the learned data manifold and, paired with a Metropolis-Hastings correction, samples from energy-modified targets. For synthetic languages, we show that minimal U-turn dynamics undergoes an ergodicity-breaking phase transition driven by fragmentation of the data manifold; ergodicity is restored at larger U-turn magnitude. In the non-ergodic regime, low-level features relax faster than high-level ones, an ordering that inverts only at sufficiently large U-turn magnitude. We test these predictions on natural language and natural images. In both modalities, minimal U-turns relax slowly, especially for high-level features approximated by deep representations in CNNs or LLMs. The layer-ordering inversion appears only at large noise when mixing is efficient -- signatures consistent with strongly constrained, weakly mixing local dynamics. We discuss the implications of these results for sampling with diffusion models.

Large language models (LLMs) are prone to hallucinations, i.e., statements unsupported by the input or training data, hindering reliable deployment. In parallel, numerous uncertainty estimation (UE) methods have been proposed to quantify model confidence and are often implicitly treated as proxies for model failure. However, the relationship between uncertainty and hallucinations remains insufficiently characterized. We present a systematic empirical study of the association between uncertainty estimators and hallucinations in LLMs. Rather than assuming this association, we evaluate directly when and to what extent it holds. We consider a diverse set of uncertainty estimators, including information-theoretic, sampling-based, and reflexive estimators, and examine their behavior across hallucination settings. Our experiments cover both intrinsic hallucinations (violations of input faithfulness) and extrinsic hallucinations (unsupported claims relative to training data), using four complementary benchmarks, including RAGTruth and HalluLens. We find that the association is highly variable and often weak, depending on the hallucination type and the LLM under evaluation. These results challenge the use of uncertainty as a direct signal of hallucination and clarify when it provides actionable information.

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards has become a standard recipe for improving the reasoning abilities of large language models. Existing algorithms face a tradeoff between computational efficiency and sample efficiency in value estimation and policy learning. We introduce BASIS, a critic-free post-training algorithm designed to address this tradeoff. At each online training step, BASIS samples only one rollout per prompt, but leverages rich information across prompts in the entire batch to improve value function estimation. Our experiments demonstrate that BASIS reduces MSE in value function estimation by 69% compared to REINFORCE++, a representative single-rollout baseline, and achieves lower MSE with one rollout than group mean estimators with 8 rollouts. This improvement in value estimation translates to better policy optimization: using substantially less training time, BASIS achieves performance close to multi-rollout GRPO-type baselines and often outperforms single-rollout REINFORCE-type baselines.

Discrete diffusion models have achieved strong empirical performance in text and other symbolic domains, but, especially for uniform-rate models, they often require many steps to generate a single sample. Existing acceleration methods either rely on training additional quantities or suffer from slow mixing. In this work, we propose a novel Gibbs-based corrector for discrete diffusion models, termed Gibbs-Accelerated Discrete Diffusion (GADD). GADD leverages the structure of the concrete score function to construct Gibbs posterior likelihoods directly, without requiring any additional training beyond standard score estimation. We show that GADD achieves an overall sampling complexity of $\mathcal{O}(\mathrm{polylog} (\varepsilon^{-1}))$, yielding the first such rate for diffusion-based samplers for uniform-rate discrete diffusion models. We also conduct numerical experiments demonstrating the practical advantages of GADD across synthetic data, zero-shot text sampling, and zero-shot conditional music generation. These results corroborate the theory and show that GADD consistently improves sample quality and wall-clock efficiency over standard baselines, including vanilla Euler methods and CTMC correctors. Beyond this, our theoretical analysis introduces a novel framework for analyzing predictor-corrector methods in discrete diffusion models, which may be of independent interest. Unlike existing approaches that rely on the Girsanov change-of-measure technique, our method is based on an induction argument that tracks error propagation across predictor iterations while accounting for inaccuracies in the corrector updates.

Sam Altman Says AI'Jobs Apocalypse' He Once Predicted Probably Won't Happen. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman speaks during the BlackRock Infrastructure Summit on March 11, 2026 in Washington, DC. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman speaks during the BlackRock Infrastructure Summit on March 11, 2026 in Washington, DC. Throughout his rise to becoming one of the most influential CEOs in artificial intelligence, OpenAI's Sam Altman made repeated bold assertions about the impact that the new technology would have on jobs. He has said that AI will "probably replace most of the jobs people do today," that entire job categories will be "totally, totally gone," and that those impacted by the dramatic shifts will "find all sorts of new things to do. Now, however, Altman appears to have changed his tune, saying he is "delighted to be wrong" about the impact AI would have on employment. I don't think we're going to have the kind of jobs apocalypse that some of the companies in our space advocate or talk about, he said during a virtual interview at a Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) conference in Sydney on Tuesday. "I thought there would have been more impact on entry-level white-collar jobs being eliminated by now than has actually happened, Altman said.

PCWorld examines Pope Leo XIV's encyclical on AI, which emphasizes that artificial intelligence reflects creator biases and lacks genuine empathy or real-world experience. The Pope calls AI a "valuable tool that requires vigilance," advising users to adopt a more thoughtful, slower-paced approach when interacting with models like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini. This papal guidance encourages users to actively consider when, why, and what they ask AI systems, recognizing their limitations despite sophisticated responses. Delving into Pope Leo XIV's exhaustive treatise about humanity and AI, I was struck by a recurring theme: AI simulates fundamental human traits that it doesn't actually possess. For starters, AI lacks the grounding we humans get from our real-world experiences, Pope Leo noted in his first encyclical, which was released Monday by the Vatican. Yes, AI models like ChatGPT (or more specifically, GPT), Claude, and Gemini are trained on mountains of data that seemingly represent the entirety of human knowledge. But all that data is just that: data.

Here's Exactly How That Happened The definitive story of how Claude Code and OpenClaw kicked off computing's biggest transformation possibly ever. "Hi, my name is Peter, and I'm a Claudeholic." It was August 2025 and Peter Steinberger was addressing a meetup in London called Claude Code Anonymous. Steinberger and some fellow addicts had arranged the event to network with people like themselves--techies swept up by coding tools such as Anthropic's paradigm-busting Claude Code. "I dedicate pretty much all my waking time to this, yet it doesn't feel enough," he told the gathering in a cozy, brick-walled room. A few months later, Anthropic released a new version of Claude Code, and the ranks of Claudeholics exploded . Called Opus 4.5, it could handle more complicated programming tasks, retain much more in its memory, run for many hours on end, and manage a team of AI subagents. Anthropic has what it describes as a "notoriously difficult" take-home exam for prospective engineering hires; in a head-to-head comparison of those people and its models, Anthropic claimed that Opus 4.5 "scored higher than any human candidate ever," which "raises questions on how AI will change engineering as a profession."

Modern Artificial Intelligence achieves remarkable predictive power by optimizing statistical risk functionals over vast corpora. Yet a gap separates this from genuine intelligence: the inability to distinguish correlation from causation. This paper argues that causal inference (identifying mechanisms invariant under intervention) is AI's indispensable statistical conscience. Without causal grounding, AI systems are correlation machines: powerful in familiar domains, brittle under distribution shift, and biased in high-stakes settings. Three contributions develop this argument. First, a Statistical Necessity Theorem for Causal Generalization: any algorithm achieving out-of-distribution generalization must encode causal structure, formalizing the distinction between prediction P(Y|X) and intelligence P(Y|do(X)). Second, a unified framework connects Pearl's do-calculus, the Potential Outcomes framework, Double Machine Learning, and Invariant Risk Minimization as a family of Causal Statistical Estimators, each identifying interventional distributions under different assumptions. Third, three AI failure modes (hallucination in large language models, reward hacking in reinforcement learning from human feedback, and degradation under distribution shift) are manifestations of causal blindness, each admitting a principled statistical remedy. Trustworthy AI is, at its core, a problem of causal statistics. The statistical community is not merely equipped to solve it -- it is the only community with the foundational tools to do so rigorously.