Computer-using agents have shown strong potential to boost human productivity and enable new application forms across platforms. While recent advances have led to usable applications, existing benchmarks fail to account for the internal task heterogeneity and the corresponding agent capabilities, as well as their alignment with actual user demands-hindering both targeted capability development and the reliable transition of research progress into practical deployment. To bridge the gap, we present OS-MAP, a benchmark for daily computer-using automation that organizes its 416 realistic tasks across 15 applications along two key dimensions: a five-level taxonomy of automation and a generalization scope derived from a real-world user demand hierarchy. To enable fine-grained analysis of required capabilities and alignment with real-world scenarios, OS-MAP evaluates agents along two dimensions: automation level across a five-level taxonomy, and generalization scope across a demand hierarchy. This design captures varying levels of required agent autonomy and generalization, forming a performance-generalization evaluation matrix for structured and comprehensive assessment. Experiments show that even State-of-the-Art agents with VLM backbones struggle with higher-level tasks involving perception, reasoning, and coordination-highlighting the need for a deeper understanding of current strengths and limitations to drive the future progress in computer-using agents research and deployment. All code, environments, baselines, and data are publicly available at https://github.com/OS-Copilot/OS-Map.

The increasing presence of automated vehicles (AVs) presents new challenges for crash classification and safety analysis. Accurately identifying the SAE automation level involved in each crash is essential to understanding crash dynamics and system accountability. However, existing approaches often overlook automation-specific factors and lack model sophistication to capture distinctions between different SAE levels. To address this gap, this study evaluates the performance of three advanced tabular deep learning models MambaAttention, TabPFN, and TabTransformer for classifying SAE automation levels using structured crash data from Texas (2024), covering 4,649 cases categorized as Assisted Driving (SAE Level 1), Partial Automation (SAE Level 2), and Advanced Automation (SAE Levels 3-5 combined). Following class balancing using SMOTEENN, the models were trained and evaluated on a unified dataset of 7,300 records. MambaAttention demonstrated the highest overall performance (F1-scores: 88% for SAE 1, 97% for SAE 2, and 99% for SAE 3-5), while TabPFN excelled in zero-shot inference with high robustness for rare crash categories. In contrast, TabTransformer underperformed, particularly in detecting Partial Automation crashes (F1-score: 55%), suggesting challenges in modeling shared human-system control dynamics. These results highlight the capability of deep learning models tailored for tabular data to enhance the accuracy and efficiency of automation-level classification. Integrating such models into crash analysis frameworks can support policy development, AV safety evaluation, and regulatory decisions, especially in distinguishing high-risk conditions for mid- and high-level automation technologies.

The goal of the current study is to introduce a triadic human-AI collaboration framework for the automated vehicle domain. Previous classifications (e.g., SAE Levels of Automation) focus on defining automation levels based on who controls the vehicle. Howe ver, it remains unclear how human users and AI should collaborate in real -time, especially in dynamic driving contexts, where roles can shift frequently. To fill the gap, this study proposes a triadic human-AI collaboration framework with three AI roles (i.e., Advisor, Co-Pilot, and Guardian) that dynamically adapt to human needs. Overall, the study lays a foundation for developing adaptive, role-based human-AI collaboration strategies in automated vehicles.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) spreads quickly as new technologies and services take over modern society. The need to regulate AI design, development, and use is strictly necessary to avoid unethical and potentially dangerous consequences to humans. The European Union (EU) has released a new legal framework, the AI Act, to regulate AI by undertaking a risk-based approach to safeguard humans during interaction. At the same time, researchers offer a new perspective on AI systems, commonly known as Human-Centred AI (HCAI), highlighting the need for a human-centred approach to their design. In this context, Symbiotic AI (a subtype of HCAI) promises to enhance human capabilities through a deeper and continuous collaboration between human intelligence and AI. This article presents the results of a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) that aims to identify principles that characterise the design and development of Symbiotic AI systems while considering humans as the core of the process. Through content analysis, four principles emerged from the review that must be applied to create Human-Centred AI systems that can establish a symbiotic relationship with humans. In addition, current trends and challenges were defined to indicate open questions that may guide future research for the development of SAI systems that comply with the AI Act.

Surgical robotics is a rapidly evolving field that is transforming the landscape of surgeries. Surgical robots have been shown to enhance precision, minimize invasiveness, and alleviate surgeon fatigue. One promising area of research in surgical robotics is the use of reinforcement learning to enhance the automation level. Reinforcement learning is a type of machine learning that involves training an agent to make decisions based on rewards and punishments. This literature review aims to comprehensively analyze existing research on reinforcement learning in surgical robotics. The review identified various applications of reinforcement learning in surgical robotics, including pre-operative, intra-body, and percutaneous procedures, listed the typical studies, and compared their methodologies and results. The findings show that reinforcement learning has great potential to improve the autonomy of surgical robots. Reinforcement learning can teach robots to perform complex surgical tasks, such as suturing and tissue manipulation. It can also improve the accuracy and precision of surgical robots, making them more effective at performing surgeries.

Anxiety about automation is prevalent in this era of rapid technological advances, especially in artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and robotics. Accordingly, how human labor competes, or cooperates, with machines in performing a range of tasks (what we term "the race between human labor and machines") has attracted a great deal of attention among the public, policymakers, and researchers.14,15,18 While there have been persistent concerns about new technology and automation replacing human tasks at least since the Industrial Revolution,8 recent technological advances in executing sophisticated and complex tasks--enabled by a combinatorial innovation of new techniques and algorithms, advances in computational power, and exponential increases in data--differentiate the 21st century from previous ones.14 For instance, recent advances in autonomous self-driving cars demonstrate the way a wide range of human tasks that have been considered least susceptible to automation may no longer be safe from automation and computerization. Another case in point is human competition against machines, such as IBM's Watson on the TV game show "Jeopardy!" Both cases imply that some tasks, such as pattern recognition and information processing, are being rapidly computerized. Furthermore, recent studies suggest that robotics also plays a role in automating manual tasks and decreasing employment of low-wage workers.3,22

When most people think of autonomous vehicles, an image of a fully self-sufficient vehicle that can drive all on its own often comes to mind. However, not all autonomous vehicles can drive without any human intervention. In reality, there are several different levels of autonomous vehicles that vary based on how much driver assistance they provide. Below, we will walk you through the six different levels of autonomous vehicles. A vehicle that has an automation level of zero essentially does not have any autonomous capabilities.

The terminological landscape is rather cluttered when referring to autonomous driving or vehicles. A plethora of terms are used interchangeably, leading to misuse and confusion. With its technological, social and legal progress, it is increasingly imperative to establish a clear terminology that allows each concept to be placed in its corresponding place.

Decisions are increasingly taken by both humans and machine learning models. However, machine learning models are currently trained for full automation-they are not aware that some of the decisions may still be taken by humans. In this paper, we take a first step towards making machine learning models aware of the presence of human decision-makers. More specifically, we first introduce the problem of ridge regression under human assistance and show that it is NP-hard. Then, we derive an alternative representation of the corresponding objective function as a difference of nondecreasing submodular functions. Building on this representation, we further show that the objective is nondecreasing and satisfies \xi-submodularity, a recently introduced notion of approximate submodularity. These properties allow simple and efficient greedy algorithm to enjoy approximation guarantees at solving the problem. Experiments on synthetic and real-world data from two important applications-medical diagnoses and content moderation-demonstrate that the greedy algorithm beats several competitive baselines.

This video describes the six automation levels defined by SAE International under the J3016 Standard. Level 0 - No Automation - all current cars without at least adaptive cruise control Level 1 - Driver Assistance - all current cars with adaptive cruise control Level 2 - Partial Automation - cars with adaptive cruise control and auto steering - this includes Tesla's Auto-Pilot and Mercedes Drive Pilot; Infinite's Active Lane Control; BMW's Active Driving Assistant Plus Level 3 - Conditional Automation Level 4 - High Automation Level 5 - Full Automation If you want $1000 off your Tesla - Please Use My Referral Code: http://ts.la/nicholas4590