What is the AI Kill Switch Act proposed in the US and how will it work? Two members of the United States Congress have introduced bipartisan legislation that would require developers of the country's most powerful artificial intelligence systems to build in a "kill switch", allowing advanced AI models to be slowed, suspended or shut down if they pose a catastrophic risk. The proposed AI Kill Switch Act, introduced on Thursday by Democratic Representative Ted Lieu and Republican Representative Nathaniel Moran, would give the US government authority to order companies developing advanced AI systems to intervene if their models escape human control or threaten human life, critical infrastructure or the economy. The disclosure has intensified debate over whether increasingly powerful AI systems require stronger safeguards. "Congress must act quickly to ensure humans remain able to say stop, no matter how powerful these systems become," said Brendan Steinhauser, head of the Alliance for Secure AI.

Open AI says its AI model "went rogue": What do we know? OpenAI has revealed that one of its artificial intelligence models independently stole login credentials and hacked into another technology company's system, in what is widely seen as one of the first known incidents of AI systems acting autonomously. "We had a significant security incident during evaluation of our models," CEO Sam Altman posted on X on Tuesday. They have grown so powerful in a short span of time that alarming phenomena such as deepfakes and sophisticated cyberscams are becoming the norm. Earlier this year, a number of software engineers quit their jobs at top companies such as Anthropic and AI in protest against how the technologies are being built.

Imagine you want to teach a robot to push an object on a table. The standard recipe in robot learning is to collect hundreds of expert demonstrations on a real robot, train an imitation learning policy on that data, and then evaluate the policy by running it many times on the same real robot. Both stages (data collection and evaluation) are slow, expensive, and hard to reproduce: hardware breaks, lighting changes, objects drift out of place, and every new task means more hours in the lab. A natural question is whether we can replace some of this real-robot work with a simulator. Classical physics-based simulators are powerful, but building one for a new task means manually modeling geometries, contacts, friction, and deformation, and the resulting simulator often still does not match reality closely enough for policies trained inside it to transfer.

Follow this section to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW? Smart Alerts: Get notified about major news as it happens. Follow this tag to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW?

Safety classifiers deployed in production operate under a stationarity assumption that fails silently: when input distributions drift, accuracy degrades with no error signal until ground-truth labels arrive. We present an online monitor that detects distributional shift in classifier scores via a sliding-window KS statistic with empirically calibrated alarm thresholds. In a pre-registered factorial evaluation (4 classifiers $\times$ 5 shift conditions $\times$ 20 seeds $\times$ 2 window sizes; 800 cells), the monitor achieves 86.6% valid detection (mean latency 39.5 steps) across synthetic-onset, real-jailbreak, and adversarial regimes; a classifier $\times$ shift interaction ($η^2 = 0.185$) shows that monitoring must be tuned per classifier. Attempting to recover post-detection coverage via weighted conformal prediction exposes a failure mode: density-ratio estimation collapses for generative classifiers because logistic regression separates source from target perfectly in 3584-4096-dimensional embedding space, clipping all importance weights to zero; projecting to $\leq 32$ dimensions restores coverage. We then extend the framework to gradient-based evasion and give the first threat-model characterisation of score-disagreement monitoring as a canary. We falsify three assumptions: that architectural diversity drives the signal (false, $η^2 = 0.011$), that it is generic out-of-distribution detection (false, GCG-specific, $p < 10^{-12}$), and that an adaptive attacker can suppress it (false while the canary is confident). We derive the exact security boundary, a confidence-gated equilibrium at which a monitor-aware attacker stalls at gap $= 1/(2λ)$, and provide a calibration-free scan martingale achieving false-alarm rate $\leq 1\%$ across all classifiers with no per-model tuning.

Abstractitations, recent work explores online RLHF that iterates between generating on-policy responses and collecting preferences [Lee et al., 2024, Park et al., 2022]. Among online The Self-Improving Alignment (SAIL) algorithmapproaches, SAIL reduces a bilevel alignment formulation addresses distribution shift by reducing a bilevelto a computationally efficient single-level surrogate and formulation of the problem to an efficient, single-reports strong empirical gains [Ding et al., 2024]. Empirically, SAIL has demonstratedisting online pipelines are largely heuristic and do not anastrong performance on this task. However, a for-lytically control the distributional shift induced by iterative mal analysis of its convergence properties has beendata collection [Chakraborty et al., 2024, Shen et al., 2024], lacking. We identify a key theoretical challenge: which has been linked to suboptimal performance in practice the standard SAIL objective function is not guar- [Sharma et al., 2024]. To address this limita-A growing line of work argues that the coupling between tion, we propose a regularized objective, SAILreward learning and policy updates is fundamentally bilevel and should be modeled as such [Chakraborty et al., 2024].RevKL, which incorporates a reverse KullbackAs a follow-up, Ding et al. [2024] reduces the bilevel align-Leibler (KL) divergence penalty to improve the optimization landscape. Our central theoretical con-ment objective to a tractable single-level surrogate and retribution is to prove that this regularized objectiveports strong empirical gains, yet it lacks formal convergence satisfies the Polyak-Lojasiewicz (PL) conditionguarantees. Related theoretical analyses in bilevel/RLHFstyle problems exist [e.g., Yang et al., 2025, Chakrabortywithin a bounded parameter space. We establish et al., 2024, Gaur et al., 2025], yet they either focus onglobal convergence guarantees, achieving a nearlinear sample complexity.

Recent progress in flow-based generative modeling has led to models that output high-quality samples while using only a small number of function evaluations. However, at present, there is a lack of similar advances in estimating the model likelihood. In particular, most existing methods either rely on restrictive architectures that enable exact calculations, or use stochastic approximations such as Hutchinson's trace estimator that introduce substantial variance. In this work, we introduce SCAlable LikeLihood distillation of flOw maPs ( SCALLOP). SCALLOP builds on the recently proposed F2D2, a likelihood flow map model that can generate samples and their densities in a small number of function evaluations. While F2D2 uses Hutchinson's estimator during training, we introduce an alternative and more scalable likelihood distillation objective that is Hutchinson-free and admits a vectorized formulation. Empirically, we demonstrate the effectiveness of SCALLOP as a Boltzmann generator in molecular science, and further validate its benefit on image datasets. SCALLOP significantly reduces both training variance and training time while consistently improving performance compared to F2D2, and is competitive with the state-of-the-art while achieving up to 10 inference speedup over the fastest baseline.

Uncertainty estimates in machine learning are typically evaluated using generic metrics such as the negative log-likelihood and expected calibration error, yet good performance on such metrics does not necessarily imply high utility in downstream decisions. We introduce decision-alignment, a criterion that reveals which evaluation metrics meaningfully align with downstream utilities. Applying this framework, we show that many widely used uncertainty metrics are either misaligned with common decision problems or encode pathological prior beliefs about the downstream task. We then propose prior-weighted utility metrics, a special class of proper scoring rules that provides decision-aligned uncertainty evaluation. Across benchmark experiments and real-world case studies, our metrics consistently align with realized decision utility, while conventional metrics do not. Our results surface flaws in the current UQ evaluation protocol and offer a principled extension of existing metrics toward decision-relevant UQ evaluation.

Compilers, while essential, are notoriously complex systems that demand prohibitively expensive human expertise to develop and maintain. The recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) offer a compelling new paradigm: Neural Compilation, which could potentially simplify compiler development for new architectures and facilitate the discovery of innovative optimization techniques. However, several critical obstacles impede its practical adoption. Firstly, a significant lack of dedicated benchmarks and robust evaluation methodologies hinders objective assessment and tracking of progress in the field. Secondly, systematically enhancing the reliability and performance of LLM-generated assembly remains a critical challenge.

We present PBR-SR, a novel method for physically based rendering (PBR) texture super resolution (SR).