A major step toward Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and Super Intelligence is AI's ability to autonomously conduct research - what we term Artificial Research Intelligence (ARI). If machines could generate hypotheses, conduct experiments, and write research papers without human intervention, it would transform science. Sakana recently introduced the 'AI Scientist', claiming to conduct research autonomously, i.e. they imply to have achieved what we term Artificial Research Intelligence (ARI). The AI Scientist gained much attention, but a thorough independent evaluation has yet to be conducted. Our evaluation of the AI Scientist reveals critical shortcomings. The system's literature reviews produced poor novelty assessments, often misclassifying established concepts (e.g., micro-batching for stochastic gradient descent) as novel. It also struggles with experiment execution: 42% of experiments failed due to coding errors, while others produced flawed or misleading results. Code modifications were minimal, averaging 8% more characters per iteration, suggesting limited adaptability. Generated manuscripts were poorly substantiated, with a median of five citations, most outdated (only five of 34 from 2020 or later). Structural errors were frequent, including missing figures, repeated sections, and placeholder text like 'Conclusions Here'. Some papers contained hallucinated numerical results. Despite these flaws, the AI Scientist represents a leap forward in research automation. It generates full research manuscripts with minimal human input, challenging expectations of AI-driven science. Many reviewers might struggle to distinguish its work from human researchers. While its quality resembles a rushed undergraduate paper, its speed and cost efficiency are unprecedented, producing a full paper for USD 6 to 15 with 3.5 hours of human involvement, far outpacing traditional researchers.

To combat the rising energy consumption of recommender systems we implement a novel alternative for k-fold cross validation. This alternative, named e-fold cross validation, aims to minimize the number of folds to achieve a reduction in power usage while keeping the reliability and robustness of the test results high. We tested our method on 5 recommender system algorithms across 6 datasets and compared it with 10-fold cross validation. On average e-fold cross validation only needed 41.5% of the energy that 10-fold cross validation would need, while it's results only differed by 1.81%. We conclude that e-fold cross validation is a promising approach that has the potential to be an energy efficient but still reliable alternative to k-fold cross validation.

As recommender systems become increasingly prevalent, the environmental impact and energy efficiency of training large-scale models have come under scrutiny. This paper investigates the potential for energy-efficient algorithm performance by optimizing dataset sizes through downsampling techniques in the context of Green Recommender Systems. We conducted experiments on the MovieLens 100K, 1M, 10M, and Amazon Toys and Games datasets, analyzing the performance of various recommender algorithms under different portions of dataset size. Our results indicate that while more training data generally leads to higher algorithm performance, certain algorithms, such as FunkSVD and BiasedMF, particularly with unbalanced and sparse datasets like Amazon Toys and Games, maintain high-quality recommendations with up to a 50% reduction in training data, achieving nDCG@10 scores within approximately 13% of full dataset performance. These findings suggest that strategic dataset reduction can decrease computational and environmental costs without substantially compromising recommendation quality. This study advances sustainable and green recommender systems by providing insights for reducing energy consumption while maintaining effectiveness.

This paper introduces e-fold cross-validation, an energy-efficient alternative to k-fold cross-validation. It dynamically adjusts the number of folds based on a stopping criterion. The criterion checks after each fold whether the standard deviation of the evaluated folds has consistently decreased or remained stable. Once met, the process stops early. We tested e-fold cross-validation on 15 datasets and 10 machine-learning algorithms. On average, it required 4 fewer folds than 10-fold cross-validation, reducing evaluation time, computational resources, and energy use by about 40%. Performance differences between e-fold and 10-fold cross-validation were less than 2% for larger datasets. More complex models showed even smaller discrepancies. In 96% of iterations, the results were within the confidence interval, confirming statistical significance. E-fold cross-validation offers a reliable and efficient alternative to k-fold, reducing computational costs while maintaining comparable accuracy.

Automated Machine Learning (AutoML) has greatly advanced applications of Machine Learning (ML) including model compression, machine translation, and computer vision. Recommender Systems (RecSys) can be seen as an application of ML. Yet, AutoML has found little attention in the RecSys community; nor has RecSys found notable attention in the AutoML community. Only few and relatively simple Automated Recommender Systems (AutoRecSys) libraries exist that adopt AutoML techniques. However, these libraries are based on student projects and do not offer the features and thorough development of AutoML libraries. We set out to determine how AutoML libraries perform in the scenario of an inexperienced user who wants to implement a recommender system. We compared the predictive performance of 60 AutoML, AutoRecSys, ML, and RecSys algorithms from 15 libraries, including a mean predictor baseline, on 14 explicit feedback RecSys datasets. To simulate the perspective of an inexperienced user, the algorithms were evaluated with default hyperparameters. We found that AutoML and AutoRecSys libraries performed best. AutoML libraries performed best for six of the 14 datasets (43%), but it was not always the same AutoML library performing best. The single-best library was the AutoRecSys library Auto-Surprise, which performed best on five datasets (36%). On three datasets (21%), AutoML libraries performed poorly, and RecSys libraries with default parameters performed best. Although, while obtaining 50% of all placements in the top five per dataset, RecSys algorithms fall behind AutoML on average. ML algorithms generally performed the worst.

Automated machine learning (AutoML) systems commonly ensemble models post hoc to improve predictive performance, typically via greedy ensemble selection (GES). However, we believe that GES may not always be optimal, as it performs a simple deterministic greedy search. In this work, we introduce two novel population-based ensemble selection methods, QO-ES and QDO-ES, and compare them to GES. While QO-ES optimises solely for predictive performance, QDO-ES also considers the diversity of ensembles within the population, maintaining a diverse set of well-performing ensembles during optimisation based on ideas of quality diversity optimisation. The methods are evaluated using 71 classification datasets from the AutoML benchmark, demonstrating that QO-ES and QDO-ES often outrank GES, albeit only statistically significant on validation data. Our results further suggest that diversity can be beneficial for post hoc ensembling but also increases the risk of overfitting.

Automated Machine Learning (AutoML) frameworks regularly use ensembles. Developers need to compare different ensemble techniques to select appropriate techniques for an AutoML framework from the many potential techniques. So far, the comparison of ensemble techniques is often computationally expensive, because many base models must be trained and evaluated one or multiple times. Therefore, we present Assembled-OpenML. Assembled-OpenML is a Python tool, which builds meta-datasets for ensembles using OpenML. A meta-dataset, called Metatask, consists of the data of an OpenML task, the task's dataset, and prediction data from model evaluations for the task. We can make the comparison of ensemble techniques computationally cheaper by using the predictions stored in a metatask instead of training and evaluating base models. To introduce Assembled-OpenML, we describe the first version of our tool. Moreover, we present an example of using Assembled-OpenML to compare a set of ensemble techniques. For this example comparison, we built a benchmark using Assembled-OpenML and implemented ensemble techniques expecting predictions instead of base models as input. In our example comparison, we gathered the prediction data of $1523$ base models for $31$ datasets. Obtaining the prediction data for all base models using Assembled-OpenML took ${\sim} 1$ hour in total. In comparison, obtaining the prediction data by training and evaluating just one base model on the most computationally expensive dataset took ${\sim} 37$ minutes.

Many state-of-the-art automated machine learning (AutoML) systems use greedy ensemble selection (GES) by Caruana et al. (2004) to ensemble models found during model selection post hoc. Thereby, boosting predictive performance and likely following Auto-Sklearn 1's insight that alternatives, like stacking or gradient-free numerical optimization, overfit. Overfitting in Auto-Sklearn 1 is much more likely than in other AutoML systems because it uses only low-quality validation data for post hoc ensembling. Therefore, we were motivated to analyze whether Auto-Sklearn 1's insight holds true for systems with higher-quality validation data. Consequently, we compared the performance of covariance matrix adaptation evolution strategy (CMA-ES), state-of-the-art gradient-free numerical optimization, to GES on the 71 classification datasets from the AutoML benchmark for AutoGluon. We found that Auto-Sklearn's insight depends on the chosen metric. For the metric ROC AUC, CMA-ES overfits drastically and is outperformed by GES -- statistically significantly for multi-class classification. For the metric balanced accuracy, CMA-ES does not overfit and outperforms GES significantly. Motivated by the successful application of CMA-ES for balanced accuracy, we explored methods to stop CMA-ES from overfitting for ROC AUC. We propose a method to normalize the weights produced by CMA-ES, inspired by GES, that avoids overfitting for CMA-ES and makes CMA-ES perform better than or similar to GES for ROC AUC.

Games such as go, chess and checkers have multiple equivalent game states, i.e. multiple board positions where symmetrical and opposite moves should be made. These equivalences are not exploited by current state of the art neural agents which instead must relearn similar information, thereby wasting computing time. Group equivariant CNNs in existing work create networks which can exploit symmetries to improve learning, however, they lack the expressiveness to correctly reflect the move embeddings necessary for games. We introduce Finite Group Neural Networks (FGNNs), a method for creating agents with an innate understanding of these board positions. FGNNs are shown to improve the performance of networks playing checkers (draughts), and can be easily adapted to other games and learning problems. Additionally, FGNNs can be created from existing network architectures. These include, for the first time, those with skip connections and arbitrary layer types. We demonstrate that an equivariant version of U-Net (FGNN-U-Net) outperforms the unmodified network in image segmentation.

The fashion industry is looking forward to use artificial intelligence technologies to enhance their processes, services, and applications. Although the amount of fashion data currently in use is increasing, there is a large gap in data exchange between the fashion industry and the related AI companies, not to mention the different structure used for each fashion dataset. As a result, AI companies are relying on manually annotated fashion data to build different applications. Furthermore, as of this writing, the terminology, vocabulary and methods of data representation used to denote fashion items are still ambiguous and confusing. Hence, it is clear that the fashion industry and AI companies will benefit from a protocol that allows them to exchange and organise fashion information in a unified way. To achieve this goal we aim (1) to define a protocol called DDOIF that will allow interoperability of fashion data; (2) for DDOIF to contain diverse entities including extensive information on clothing and accessories attributes in the form of text and various media formats; and (3)To design and implement an API that includes, among other things, functions for importing and exporting a file built according to the DDOIF protocol that stores all information about a single item of clothing. To this end, we identified over 1000 class and subclass names used to name fashion items and use them to build the DDOIF dictionary. We make DDOIF publicly available to all interested users and developers and look forward to engaging more collaborators to improve and enrich it.