We argue that progress toward AGI is theory limited rather than data or scale limited. Building on the critical rationalism of Popper and Deutsch, we challenge the Platonic Representation Hypothesis. Observationally equivalent worlds can diverge under interventions, so observational adequacy alone cannot guarantee interventional competence. We begin by laying foundations, definitions of knowledge, learning, intelligence, counterfactual competence and AGI, and then analyze the limits of observational learning that motivate an error centric shift. We recast the problem as three questions about how explicit and implicit errors evolve under an agent's actions, which errors are unreachable within a fixed hypothesis space, and how conjecture and criticism expand that space. From these questions we propose Causal Mechanics, a mechanisms first program in which hypothesis space change is a first class operation and probabilistic structure is used when useful rather than presumed. We advance structural principles that make error discovery and correction tractable, including a differential Locality and Autonomy Principle for modular interventions, a gauge invariant form of Independent Causal Mechanisms for separability, and the Compositional Autonomy Principle for analogy preservation, together with actionable diagnostics. The aim is a scaffold for systems that can convert unreachable errors into reachable ones and correct them.

Real-world settings where language models (LMs) are deployed -- in domains spanning healthcare, finance, and other forms of knowledge work -- require models to grapple with incomplete information and reason under uncertainty. Yet most LM evaluations focus on problems with well-defined answers and success criteria. This gap exists in part because natural problems involving uncertainty are difficult to construct: given that LMs have access to most of the same knowledge as humans, it is non-trivial to design questions for which LMs will struggle to produce correct answers, but which humans can answer reliably. As a result, LM performance on reasoning under uncertainty remains poorly characterized. To address this gap, we introduce OpenEstimate, an extensible, multi-domain benchmark for evaluating LMs on numerical estimation tasks that require models to synthesize significant amounts of background information and express predictions as probabilistic priors. We assess these priors for accuracy and calibration, quantifying their usefulness relative to samples from the true distribution of interest. Across six frontier LMs, we find that LM-elicited priors are often inaccurate and overconfident. Performance improves modestly depending on how uncertainty is elicited from the model, but is largely unaffected by changes in sampling strategy, reasoning effort, or prompt design. The OpenEstimate benchmark thus offers a challenging evaluation for frontier LMs and a platform for developing models that are better at probabilistic estimation and reasoning under uncertainty.

We study the problem of learning to generate an answer (or completion) to a question (or prompt), where there could be multiple correct answers, any one of which is acceptable at test time. Learning is based on demonstrations of some correct answer to each training question, as in Supervised Fine Tuning (SFT). We formalize the problem as offline imitation learning in contextual bandits, with demonstrations from some optimal policy, without explicitly observed rewards. Prior work assumes that the demonstrator belongs to a low-complexity policy class, which motivates maximum likelihood estimation (i.e., log-loss minimization). In contrast, we propose relying only on the reward model (specifying which answers are correct) being in a low-cardinality class, which we argue is a weaker assumption. We show that likelihood maximization methods can fail in this case, and instead devise an alternative novel approach that learns with sample complexity logarithmic in the cardinality of the reward class. Our work motivates looking beyond likelihood maximization when learning from correct demonstrations.

Variational Inference (VI) provides a scalable framework for Bayesian inference by optimizing the Evidence Lower Bound (ELBO), but convergence analysis remains challenging due to the objective's non-convexity and non-smoothness in Euclidean space. We establish a novel theoretical framework for analyzing VI convergence by exploiting the exponential family structure of distributions. We express negative ELBO as a Bregman divergence with respect to the log-partition function, enabling a geometric analysis of the optimization landscape. We show that this Bregman representation admits a weak monotonicity property that, while weaker than convexity, provides sufficient structure for rigorous convergence analysis. By deriving bounds on the objective function along rays in parameter space, we establish properties governed by the spectral characteristics of the Fisher information matrix. Under this geometric framework, we prove non-asymptotic convergence rates for gradient descent algorithms with both constant and diminishing step sizes.

Open world Machine Learning (OWML) aims to develop intelligent systems capable of recognizing known categories, rejecting unknown samples, and continually learning from novel information. Despite significant progress in open set recognition, novelty detection, and continual learning, the field still lacks a unified theoretical foundation that can quantify uncertainty, characterize information transfer, and explain learning adaptability in dynamic, nonstationary environments. This paper presents a comprehensive review of information theoretic approaches in open world machine learning, emphasizing how core concepts such as entropy, mutual information, and Kullback Leibler divergence provide a mathematical language for describing knowledge acquisition, uncertainty suppression, and risk control under open world conditions. We synthesize recent studies into three major research axes: information theoretic open set recognition enabling safe rejection of unknowns, information driven novelty discovery guiding new concept formation, and information retentive continual learning ensuring stable long term adaptation. Furthermore, we discuss theoretical connections between information theory and provable learning frameworks, including PAC Bayes bounds, open-space risk theory, and causal information flow, to establish a pathway toward provable and trustworthy open world intelligence. Finally, the review identifies key open problems and future research directions, such as the quantification of information risk, development of dynamic mutual information bounds, multimodal information fusion, and integration of information theory with causal reasoning and world model learning.

Semantic segmentation labels each pixel in an image with its corresponding class, and is typically evaluated using the Intersection over Union (IoU) and Dice metrics to quantify the overlap between predicted and ground-truth segmentation masks. In the literature, most existing methods estimate pixel-wise class probabilities, then apply argmax or thresholding to obtain the final prediction. These methods have been shown to generally lead to inconsistent or suboptimal results, as they do not directly maximize segmentation metrics. To address this issue, a novel consistent segmentation framework, RankSEG, has been proposed, which includes RankDice and RankIoU specifically designed to optimize the Dice and IoU metrics, respectively. Although RankSEG almost guarantees improved performance, it suffers from two major drawbacks. First, it is its computational expense-RankDice has a complexity of O(d log d) with a substantial constant factor (where d represents the number of pixels), while RankIoU exhibits even higher complexity O(d^2), thus limiting its practical application. For instance, in LiTS, prediction with RankSEG takes 16.33 seconds compared to just 0.01 seconds with the argmax rule. Second, RankSEG is only applicable to overlapping segmentation settings, where multiple classes can occupy the same pixel, which contrasts with standard benchmarks that typically assume non-overlapping segmentation. In this paper, we overcome these two drawbacks via a reciprocal moment approximation (RMA) of RankSEG with the following contributions: (i) we improve RankSEG using RMA, namely RankSEG-RMA, reduces the complexity of both algorithms to O(d) while maintaining comparable performance; (ii) inspired by RMA, we develop a pixel-wise score function that allows efficient implementation for non-overlapping segmentation settings.

Selecting the latent dimensions (ranks) in tensor factorization is a central challenge that often relies on heuristic methods. This paper introduces a rigorous approach to determine rank identifiability in probabilistic tensor models, based on prior predictive moment matching. We transform a set of moment matching conditions into a log-linear system of equations in terms of marginal moments, prior hyperparameters, and ranks; establishing an equivalence between rank identifiability and the solvability of such system. We apply this framework to four foundational tensor-models, demonstrating that the linear structure of the PARAFAC/CP model, the chain structure of the Tensor Train model, and the closed-loop structure of the Tensor Ring model yield solvable systems, making their ranks identifiable. In contrast, we prove that the symmetric topology of the Tucker model leads to an underdetermined system, rendering the ranks unidentifiable by this method. For the identifiable models, we derive explicit closed-form rank estimators based on the moments of observed data only. We empirically validate these estimators and evaluate the robustness of the proposal.

We introduce the Kernel Calibration Conditional Stein Discrepancy test (KCCSD test), a non-parametric, kernel-based test for assessing the calibration of probabilistic models with well-defined scores. In contrast to previous methods, our test avoids the need for possibly expensive expectation approximations while providing control over its type-I error. We achieve these improvements by using a new family of kernels for score-based probabilities that can be estimated without probability density samples, and by using a conditional goodness-of-fit criterion for the KCCSD test's U-statistic. We demonstrate the properties of our test on various synthetic settings.

We explore the use of Active Inference (AIF) as a computational user model for spatial pointing, a key problem in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI). We present an AIF agent with continuous state, action, and observation spaces, performing one-dimensional mouse pointing and clicking. We use a simple underlying dynamic system to model the mouse cursor dynamics with realistic perceptual delay. In contrast to previous optimal feedback control-based models, the agent's actions are selected by minimizing Expected Free Energy, solely based on preference distributions over percepts, such as observing clicking a button correctly. Our results show that the agent creates plausible pointing movements and clicks when the cursor is over the target, with similar end-point variance to human users. In contrast to other models of pointing, we incorporate fully probabilistic, predictive delay compensation into the agent. The agent shows distinct behaviour for differing target difficulties without the need to retune system parameters, as done in other approaches. We discuss the simulation results and emphasize the challenges in identifying the correct configuration of an AIF agent interacting with continuous systems.

Neuro-symbolic (NeSy) AI aims to develop deep neural networks whose predictions comply with prior knowledge encoding, e.g. safety or structural constraints. As such, it represents one of the most promising avenues for reliable and trustworthy AI. The core idea behind NeSy AI is to combine neural and symbolic steps: neural networks are typically responsible for mapping low-level inputs into high-level symbolic concepts, while symbolic reasoning infers predictions compatible with the extracted concepts and the prior knowledge. Despite their promise, it was recently shown that - whenever the concepts are not supervised directly - NeSy models can be affected by Reasoning Shortcuts (RSs). That is, they can achieve high label accuracy by grounding the concepts incorrectly. RSs can compromise the interpretability of the model's explanations, performance in out-of-distribution scenarios, and therefore reliability. At the same time, RSs are difficult to detect and prevent unless concept supervision is available, which is typically not the case. However, the literature on RSs is scattered, making it difficult for researchers and practitioners to understand and tackle this challenging problem. This overview addresses this issue by providing a gentle introduction to RSs, discussing their causes and consequences in intuitive terms. It also reviews and elucidates existing theoretical characterizations of this phenomenon. Finally, it details methods for dealing with RSs, including mitigation and awareness strategies, and maps their benefits and limitations. By reformulating advanced material in a digestible form, this overview aims to provide a unifying perspective on RSs to lower the bar to entry for tackling them. Ultimately, we hope this overview contributes to the development of reliable NeSy and trustworthy AI models.