Healthcare AI systems have historically faced challenges in merging contextual reasoning, long-term state management, and human-verifiable workflows into a cohesive framework. This paper introduces a completely innovative architecture and concept: combining the Model Context Protocol (MCP) with a specific clinical application, known as MCP-AI. This integration allows intelligent agents to reason over extended periods, collaborate securely, and adhere to authentic clinical logic, representing a significant shift away from traditional Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) and prompt-based Large Language Models (LLMs). As healthcare systems become more complex, the need for autonomous, context-aware clinical reasoning frameworks has become urgent. We present MCP-AI, a novel architecture for explainable medical decision-making built upon the Model Context Protocol (MCP) a modular, executable specification for orchestrating generative and descriptive AI agents in real-time workflows. Each MCP file captures clinical objectives, patient context, reasoning state, and task logic, forming a reusable and auditable memory object. Unlike conventional CDSS or stateless prompt-based AI systems, MCP-AI supports adaptive, longitudinal, and collaborative reasoning across care settings. MCP-AI is validated through two use cases: (1) diagnostic modeling of Fragile X Syndrome with comorbid depression, and (2) remote coordination for Type 2 Diabetes and hypertension. In either scenario, the protocol facilitates physician-in-the-loop validation, streamlines clinical processes, and guarantees secure transitions of AI responsibilities between healthcare providers. The system connects with HL7/FHIR interfaces and adheres to regulatory standards, such as HIPAA and FDA SaMD guidelines. MCP-AI provides a scalable basis for interpretable, composable, and safety-oriented AI within upcoming clinical environments.

We study the problem of robust forecast aggregation: combining expert forecasts with provable accuracy guarantees compared to the best possible aggregation of the underlying information. Prior work shows strong impossibility results, e.g. that even under natural assumptions, no aggregation of the experts' individual forecasts can outperform simply following a random expert (Neyman and Roughgarden, 2022). In this paper, we introduce a more general framework that allows the principal to elicit richer information from experts through structured queries. Our framework ensures that experts will truthfully report their underlying beliefs, and also enables us to define notions of complexity over the difficulty of asking these queries. Under a general model of independent but overlapping expert signals, we show that optimal aggregation is achievable in the worst case with each complexity measure bounded above by the number of agents $n$. We further establish tight tradeoffs between accuracy and query complexity: aggregation error decreases linearly with the number of queries, and vanishes when the "order of reasoning" and number of agents relevant to a query is $ω(\sqrt{n})$. These results demonstrate that modest extensions to the space of expert queries dramatically strengthen the power of robust forecast aggregation. We therefore expect that our new query framework will open up a fruitful line of research in this area.

Developers are widely using AI code-generation models, aiming to increase productivity and efficiency. However, there are also quality concerns regarding the AI-generated code. The generated code is produced by models trained on publicly available code, which are known to contain bugs and quality issues. Those issues can cause trust and maintenance challenges during the development process. Several quality issues associated with AI-generated code have been reported, including bugs and defects. However, these findings are often scattered and lack a systematic summary. A comprehensive review is currently lacking to reveal the types and distribution of these errors, possible remediation strategies, as well as their correlation with the specific models. In this paper, we systematically analyze the existing AI-generated code literature to establish an overall understanding of bugs and defects in generated code, providing a reference for future model improvement and quality assessment. We aim to understand the nature and extent of bugs in AI-generated code, and provide a classification of bug types and patterns present in code generated by different models. We also discuss possible fixes and mitigation strategies adopted to eliminate bugs from the generated code.

The integration of external tools is pivotal for empowering Large Language Model (LLM) agents with real-world capabilities. However, training these agents through direct, continuous interaction with diverse tools is often prohibitively expensive, slow, and introduces additional development and maintenance overhead. To address this challenge, we introduce the Generalist Tool Model (GTM), a 1.5-billion-parameter model that learns to act as a universal tool simulator. With only prompt-level configuration, GTM accesses tool functionalities along with input arguments and generates outputs that faithfully mimic real tool execution, providing a fast and cost-effective solution that eliminates development overhead. To build GTM, we propose the Context-Aware Response Generation (CARG) pipeline, which synthesizes comprehensive training data covering over 20,000 tools across 300 domains including physics, medicine, robotics, and finance. Through this pipeline, GTM learns to produce not only syntactically correct outputs but also logically coherent and contextually appropriate responses. Experiments demonstrate that GTM produces high-quality outputs with strong consistency and reliability. Besides when used in real reinforcement learning scenarios for agent training, GTM exhibits significantly faster simulation speed compared to real tools while maintaining comparable output quality, along with remarkable generalization and domain adaptability. Our results establish GTM as a foundational component for developing future AI agents, enabling efficient and scalable training of tool-augmented systems.

Large Language Model (LLM) agents have developed rapidly in recent years to solve complex real-world problems using external tools. However, the scarcity of high-quality trajectories still hinders the development of stronger LLM agents. Most existing works on multi-turn dialogue synthesis validate correctness only at the trajectory level, which may overlook turn-level errors that can propagate during training and degrade model performance. To address these limitations, we introduce ToolMind, a large-scale, high-quality tool-agentic dataset with 160k synthetic data instances generated using over 20k tools and 200k augmented open-source data instances. Our data synthesis pipeline first constructs a function graph based on parameter correlations and then uses a multi-agent framework to simulate realistic user-assistant-tool interactions. Beyond trajectory-level validation, we employ fine-grained turn-level filtering to remove erroneous or suboptimal steps, ensuring that only high-quality reasoning traces are retained. This approach mitigates error amplification during training while preserving self-corrective reasoning signals essential for robust tool-use learning. Models fine-tuned on ToolMind show significant improvements over baselines on several benchmarks.

We study a class of distributionally robust games where agents are allowed to heterogeneously choose their risk aversion with respect to distributional shifts of the uncertainty. In our formulation, heterogeneous Wasserstein ball constraints on each distribution are enforced through a penalty function leveraging a Lagrangian formulation. We then formulate the distributionally robust game as a variational inequality problem, and show that under certain assumptions the original seemingly infinite-dimensional Nash equilibrium problem is equivalent to a multi-agent but finite-dimensional variational inequality problem with a strongly monotone mapping. Due to the inner maximization problem, it is however still challenging to calculate a distributionally robust Nash equilibrium. To this end, we design an approximate Nash equilibrium seeking algorithm and prove convergence of the average regret to a quantity that diminishes with the number of iterations, thus learning the desired equilibrium up to an a priori specified accuracy. Numerical simulations corroborate our theoretical findings.

Knowledge Graph Question Answering (KGQA) aims to improve factual accuracy by leveraging structured knowledge. However, real-world Knowledge Graphs (KGs) are often incomplete, leading to the problem of Incomplete KGQA (IKGQA). A common solution is to incorporate external data to fill knowledge gaps, but existing methods lack the capacity to adaptively and contextually fuse multiple sources, failing to fully exploit their complementary strengths. To this end, we propose Debate over Mixed-knowledge (DoM), a novel framework that enables dynamic integration of structured and unstructured knowledge for IKGQA. Built upon the Multi-Agent Debate paradigm, DoM assigns specialized agents to perform inference over knowledge graphs and external texts separately, and coordinates their outputs through iterative interaction. It decomposes the input question into sub-questions, retrieves evidence via dual agents (KG and Retrieval-Augmented Generation, RAG), and employs a judge agent to evaluate and aggregate intermediate answers. This collaboration exploits knowledge complementarity and enhances robustness to KG incompleteness. In addition, existing IKGQA datasets simulate incompleteness by randomly removing triples, failing to capture the irregular and unpredictable nature of real-world knowledge incompleteness. To address this, we introduce a new dataset, Incomplete Knowledge Graph WebQuestions, constructed by leveraging real-world knowledge updates. These updates reflect knowledge beyond the static scope of KGs, yielding a more realistic and challenging benchmark. Through extensive experiments, we show that DoM consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines.

Recent advances in deep reinforcement learning for autonomous cyber defence have resulted in agents that can successfully defend simulated computer networks against cyber-attacks. However, many of these agents would need retraining to defend networks with differing topology or size, making them poorly suited to real-world networks where topology and size can vary over time. In this research we introduce a novel set of Topological Extensions for Reinforcement Learning Agents (TERLA) that provide generalisability for the defence of networks with differing topology and size, without the need for retraining. Our approach involves the use of heterogeneous graph neural network layers to produce a fixed-size latent embedding representing the observed network state. This representation learning stage is coupled with a reduced, fixed-size, semantically meaningful and interpretable action space. We apply TERLA to a standard deep reinforcement learning Proximal Policy Optimisation (PPO) agent model, and to reduce the sim-to-real gap, conduct our research using Cyber Autonomy Gym for Experimentation (CAGE) Challenge 4. This Cyber Operations Research Gym environment has many of the features of a real-world network, such as realistic Intrusion Detection System (IDS) events and multiple agents defending network segments of differing topology and size. TERLA agents retain the defensive performance of vanilla PPO agents whilst showing improved action efficiency. Generalisability has been demonstrated by showing that all TERLA agents have the same network-agnostic neural network architecture, and by deploying a single TERLA agent multiple times to defend network segments with differing topology and size, showing improved defensive performance and efficiency.

As the complexity of Software Engineering (SE) tasks continues to escalate, Multi-Agent Systems (MASs) have emerged as a focal point of research and practice due to their autonomy and scalability. Furthermore, through leveraging the reasoning and planning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), the application of LLM-based MASs in the field of SE is garnering increasing attention. However, there is no dedicated study that systematically explores the design of LLM-based MASs, including the Quality Attributes (QAs) on which designers mainly focus, the design patterns used by designers, and the rationale guiding the design of LLM-based MASs for SE tasks. To this end, we conducted a study to identify the QAs that LLM-based MASs for SE tasks focus on, the design patterns used in the MASs, and the design rationale for the MASs. We collected 94 papers on LLM-based MASs for SE tasks as the source. Our study shows that: (1) Code Generation is the most common SE task solved by LLM-based MASs among ten identified SE tasks, (2) Functional Suitability is the QA on which designers of LLM-based MASs pay the most attention, (3) Role-Based Cooperation is the design pattern most frequently employed among 16 patterns used to construct LLM-based MASs, and (4) Improving the Quality of Generated Code is the most common rationale behind the design of LLM-based MASs. Based on the study results, we presented the implications for the design of LLM-based MASs to support SE tasks.

Flawed planning from VLM-driven embodied agents poses significant safety hazards, hindering their deployment in real-world household tasks. However, existing static, non-interactive evaluation paradigms fail to adequately assess risks within these interactive environments, since they cannot simulate dynamic risks that emerge from an agent's actions and rely on unreliable post-hoc evaluations that ignore unsafe intermediate steps. To bridge this critical gap, we propose evaluating an agent's interactive safety: its ability to perceive emergent risks and execute mitigation steps in the correct procedural order. We thus present IS-Bench, the first multi-modal benchmark designed for interactive safety, featuring 161 challenging scenarios with 388 unique safety risks instantiated in a high-fidelity simulator. Crucially, it facilitates a novel process-oriented evaluation that verifies whether risk mitigation actions are performed before/after specific risk-prone steps. Extensive experiments on leading VLMs, including the GPT-4o and Gemini-2.5 series, reveal that current agents lack interactive safety awareness, and that while safety-aware Chain-of-Thought can improve performance, it often compromises task completion. By highlighting these critical limitations, IS-Bench provides a foundation for developing safer and more reliable embodied AI systems. Code and data are released under https://github.com/AI45Lab/IS-Bench.