A growing body of research has explored the ethical and societal implications of increasingly automateddecision-making.

It has several appealing benefits that prior arts donothave.

However,this assumption may not hold.

Onlinedistillation collaboratively trains agroup of peer models, which are treated as students, and all students gain extra knowledge from each other.

CascadeXML significantly outperforms allexisting approaches with non-trivial gains obtained on benchmark datasets consisting of up to three millionlabels.

Influential critiques argue that Large Language Models (LLMs) are a dead end for AGI: "mere pattern matchers" structurally incapable of reasoning or planning. We argue this conclusion misidentifies the bottleneck: it confuses the ocean with the net. Pattern repositories are the necessary System-1 substrate; the missing component is a System-2 coordination layer that selects, constrains, and binds these patterns. We formalize this layer via UCCT, a theory of semantic anchoring that models reasoning as a phase transition governed by effective support (rho_d), representational mismatch (d_r), and an adaptive anchoring budget (gamma log k). Under this lens, ungrounded generation is simply an unbaited retrieval of the substrate's maximum likelihood prior, while "reasoning" emerges when anchors shift the posterior toward goal-directed constraints. We translate UCCT into architecture with MACI, a coordination stack that implements baiting (behavior-modulated debate), filtering (Socratic judging), and persistence (transactional memory). By reframing common objections as testable coordination failures, we argue that the path to AGI runs through LLMs, not around them.

In this study, we experiment with the ability of LLMs to do temporal reasoning. Using a Norwegian book from 1940 containing trivia questions, we prompt the LLMs to answer the questions as if it were 1940. We also pose the questions in both English and Norwegian. Correct answers are often presented as sentences, and grading is done by means of LLM-as-judge, with sampled checks by a native speaker. Prompting in English consistently gave better results than in Norwegian, an unexpected result. In contrast, using larger LLMs improved results. We tested the DeepSeek-R1, Gemma3, Qwen3, and Llama3.1 model families, and also the largest available LLM especially crafted for Norwegian.