AI's recursive self-improvement might not come so quickly after all AI agents are not yet creative enough to carry out genuinely innovative open-ended AI research, it seems. The AI industry's boldest promise right now is that AI will soon improve itself, with almost no need for human oversight. LLMs can already write code, generate synthetic data for training, and optimize the computer chips they run on. Forecasts of explosive AI progress predict that what researchers call recursive self-improvement is on the horizon. But a new study suggests that it might take a while for us to get there. The researchers behind it found that AI agents are not yet capable of conducting open-ended AI research--free-form investigations that have no clear-cut answers and require judgment and taste, which may be integral to building self-improving AI.

Dr François Pachet is an AI researcher and musician, and one of the most influential figures in AI and music. His innovative contributions have defined the field over the past decades through creative systems such as the Continuator, and Flow Machines, among others. After leading the Spotify Creator Technology Research Lab and the Sony Computer Science Lab, he went on to create his own companies: Imagine All The People and Ynosound. In the context of IJCAI2025, he spoke about what deep learning changed, and what still remains wide open. He explains why tools like Suno and Udio--ChatGPT-like platforms for music generation--can produce astonishing results that still feel unsatisfying; why the next step for music generation requires combining sampling with search; and why the most important problems in artistic domains are, by nature, ill-defined--because there is no loss function to determine what is "good". Above all, he defends the importance of researcher autonomy: work on the questions that genuinely fascinate you, even when they fall outside prevailing trends--perhaps especially then. Thank you for joining me for this interview. Could you begin by telling us when was your first IJCAI and a memory related to it? I think the first IJCAI I attended was in Montreal in '95. I was there for a couple of workshops, one of them was about music and AI, and the other one I think was on advisor systems, something like that. And I remember there was a French colleague who was there also, at the time he was doing his PhD. And there was this researcher called Herbert Simon, who is a Nobel Prize pioneer of AI. I remember having chatted a little bit with this French guy who was very bold, and he just went up to Simon, said "Hey," and he started a conversation with him. And I was very impressed by the fact that you could meet those kinds of guys informally in a corridor or something at this conference.

Creativity in AI imagery remains a fundamental challenge, requiring not only the generation of visually compelling content but also the capacity to add novel, expressive, and artistically rich transformations to images. Unlike conventional editing requires tasks an autonomous, that rely on iterati direct v prompt-based e approach that modifications, balances originality creativ, e coherence, image editing and artistic intent. To address this, we introduce CREA, a novel multi-agent collaborative framework that mimics the human creative process. Our framework leverages a team of specialized AI agents who dynamically collaborate to conceptualize, generate, critique, and enhance images. Through extensive qualitative and quantitative evaluations, we demonstrate that CREA significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods in diversity, semantic alignment, and creative transformation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to introduce the task of creative editing.

While Generative AI rapidly advances in various domains, generating truly creative, aesthetic, and counter-intuitive outputs remains a challenge. This paper presents an approach to tackle these difficulties in the domain of chess puzzles. We start by benchmarking Generative AI architectures, and then introduce an RL framework with novel rewards based on chess engine search statistics to overcome some of those shortcomings. The rewards are designed to enhance a puzzle's uniqueness, counter-intuitiveness, diversity, and realism. Our RL approach dramatically increases counter-intuitive puzzle generation by 10x, from 0.22% (supervised) to 2.5%, surpassing existing dataset rates (2.1%) and the best Lichess-trained model (0.4%).

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) face an inherent trade-off between faithfulness and creativity, as different tasks require varying degrees of associative reasoning. However, existing methods lack the flexibility to modulate this reasoning strength, limiting MLLMs' adaptability across factual and creative scenarios. To bridge this gap, we propose equipping MLLMs with mechanisms that enable flexible control over associative reasoning. We begin by investigating the internal mechanisms underlying associative behavior in MLLMs and find that: (1) middle layers play a pivotal role in shaping model's associative tendencies, (2) modifying representations in these layers effectively regulates associative reasoning strength, and (3) hallucinations can be exploited to derive steering vectors that guide this modulation. Building on these findings, we introduce Flexible Association Control (FlexAC), a lightweight and training-free framework for modulating associative behavior in MLLMs.

Recent advances in enhancing the reasoning ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) have been remarkably successful. LLMs trained with Reinforcement Learning (RL) for reasoning demonstrate strong performance in challenging tasks such as mathematics and coding, even with relatively small model sizes. However, despite these impressive improvements in task accuracy, the assessment of creativity in LLM generations has been largely overlooked in reasoning tasks, in contrast to writing tasks. The lack of research on creativity assessment in reasoning primarily stems from two challenges: (1) the difficulty of defining the range of creativity, and (2) the necessity of human evaluation in the assessment process. To address these challenges, we propose CLAWS, a novel method that defines and classifies mathematical solutions into Typical, Creative, and Hallucinated categories without human evaluation, by leveraging attention weights across prompt sections and output. CLAWS outperforms five existing white-box detection methods--Perplexity, Logit Entropy, Window Entropy, Hidden Score, and Attention Score--on five 7-8B math RL models (DeepSeek, Qwen, Mathstral, OpenMath2, and Oreal). We validate CLAWS on 4,545 math problems collected from 181 math contests (A(J)HSME, AMC, AIME). Our code is available at https://github.com/kkt94/CLAWS.

Recent text-to-image models have revolutionized image generation, but they still struggle with maintaining concept consistency across generated images. While existing works focus on character consistency, they often overlook the crucial role of scenes in storytelling, which restricts their creativity in practice. This paper introduces scene-oriented story generation, addressing two key challenges: (i) scene planning, where current methods fail to ensure scene-level narrative coherence by relying solely on text descriptions, and (ii) scene consistency, which remains largely unexplored in terms of maintaining scene consistency across multiple stories. We propose SceneDecorator, a training-free framework that employs VLM-Guided Scene Planning to ensure narrative coherence across different scenes in a ``global-to-local'' manner, and Long-Term Scene-Sharing Attention to maintain long-term scene consistency and subject diversity across generated stories. Extensive experiments demonstrate the superior performance of SceneDecorator, highlighting its potential to unleash creativity in the fields of arts, films, and games.

Recent large language models (LLMs) with long-chain-of-thought reasoning--such as DeepSeek-R1--have achieved impressive results on Olympiad-level mathematics benchmarks. However, they often rely on a narrow set of strategies and struggle with problems that require a novel way of thinking. To systematically investigate these limitations, we introduce OMEGA--Out-of-distribution Math Problems Evaluation with 3 Generalization Axes--a controlled yet diverse benchmark designed to evaluate three axes of out-of-distribution generalization, inspired by Boden's typology of creativity: (1) Exploratory--applying known problem-solving skills to more complex instances within the same problem domain; (2) Compositional--combining distinct reasoning skills, previously learned in isolation, to solve novel problems that require integrating these skills in new and coherent ways; and (3) Transformative--adopting novel, often unconventional strategies by moving beyond familiar approaches to solve problems more effectively. OMEGA consists of programmatically generated training-test pairs derived from templated problem generators across geometry, number theory, algebra, combinatorics, logic, and puzzles, with solutions verified using symbolic, numerical, or graphical methods. We evaluate frontier (or top-tier) LLMs and observe sharp performance degradation as problem complexity increases. Moreover, we fine-tune the Qwen-series models across all generalization settings and observe notable improvements in exploratory generalization, while compositional generalization remains limited, and transformative reasoning shows little to no improvement. By isolating and quantifying these fine-grained failures, OMEGA lays the groundwork for advancing LLMs toward genuine mathematical creativity beyond mechanical proficiency.

Large language models (LLMs), despite their impressive performance across a wide range of tasks, often struggle to balance two competing objectives in open-ended text generation: fostering diversity and creativity while preserving logical coherence. Existing truncated sampling techniques, including temperature scaling, top- (nucleus) sampling, and min-sampling, aim to manage this trade-off.

We sat down with Douglas Guillbault to discuss his paper, " Comparing Colorseeing, Colorblind, Painters, and Large Language Models in Their Processing of Color Metaphors ". The results have interesting implications for how we model human cognition, and in turn, how the concept of synaesthesia could be integrated to develop more intelligent AI models. A color metaphor is the use of color to describe something in a way that is not immediately literal. For example, to say "green with envy" would be a color metaphor, because envy doesn't have an immediate visual structure to it - we're evoking a broader, more flexible notion of what green conveys, beyond just its visible properties. What makes metaphors very interesting is that they often use past experience or cultural associations in new ways to talk about something beyond our current perception - either something imagined or in the future, which are many steps of abstraction away from the present. Metaphors provide an alternative pathway to get there.