The action is to choose a set of arms, whereupon feedback for each arm in the chosen set is received.

Despite significant progress in robotics and embodied AI in recent years, deploying robots for long-horizon tasks remains a great challenge. Majority of prior arts adhere to an open-loop philosophy and lack real-time feedback, leading to error accumulation and undesirable robustness. A handful of approaches have endeavored to establish feedback mechanisms leveraging pixel-level differences or pre-trained visual representations, yet their efficacy and adaptability have been found to be constrained. Inspired by classic closed-loop control systems, we propose CLOVER, a closed-loop visuomotor control framework that incorporates feedback mechanisms to improve adaptive robotic control. CLOVER consists of a text-conditioned video diffusion model for generating visual plans as reference inputs, a measurable embedding space for accurate error quantification, and a feedback-driven controller that refines actions from feedback and initiates replans as needed. Our framework exhibits notable advancement in real-world robotic tasks and achieves state-of-the-art on CALVIN benchmark, improving by 8% over previous open-loop counterparts.

We present a novel framework for human-robot \emph{logical} interaction that enables robots to reliably satisfy (infinite horizon) temporal logic tasks while effectively collaborating with humans who pursue independent and unknown tasks. The framework combines two key capabilities: (i) \emph{maximal adaptation} enables the robot to adjust its strategy \emph{online} to exploit human behavior for cooperation whenever possible, and (ii) \emph{minimal tunable feedback} enables the robot to request cooperation by the human online only when necessary to guarantee progress. This balance minimizes human-robot interference, preserves human autonomy, and ensures persistent robot task satisfaction even under conflicting human goals. We validate the approach in a real-world block-manipulation task with a Franka Emika Panda robotic arm and in the Overcooked-AI benchmark, demonstrating that our method produces rich, \emph{emergent} cooperative behaviors beyond the reach of existing approaches, while maintaining strong formal guarantees.

Large language models (LLMs) have empowered AI agents to tackle increasingly complex tasks. However, most existing agents remain limited to static planning and brittle interactions, falling short of true collaboration or adaptive reasoning. We introduce ProSEA, a modular, general-purpose multi-agent framework designed for iterative problem solving through exploration and plan evolution. ProSEA features a hierarchical architecture in which a Manager Agent orchestrates domain-specialized Expert Agents, decomposes tasks, and adaptively replans based on structured feedback from failed attempts. Unlike prior systems, ProSEA agents report not only success or failure but also detailed reasons for failure and newly discovered constraints, enabling dynamic plan refinement informed by exploratory traces. The framework operates autonomously but supports seamless integration with human collaborators when needed. Experiments on the challenging FinanceBench benchmark demonstrate that ProSEA, even without human feedback, outperforms state-of-the-art baselines and achieves robust performance across reasoning-heavy tasks. These results underscore ProSEA's potential as a foundation for more transparent, adaptive, and human-aligned AI agents.

Recent studies have shown LLMs possess some ability to improve their responses when given external feedback. However, it remains unclear how effectively and thoroughly these models can incorporate extrinsic feedback. In an ideal scenario, if LLMs receive near-perfect and complete feedback, we would expect them to fully integrate the feedback and reach correct solutions. In this paper, we systematically investigate LLMs' ability to incorporate feedback by designing a controlled experimental environment. For each problem, a solver model attempts a solution, then a feedback generator with access to near-complete ground-truth answers produces targeted feedback, after which the solver tries again. We evaluate this pipeline across a diverse range of tasks, including math reasoning, knowledge reasoning, scientific reasoning, and general multi-domain evaluations with state-of-the-art language models including Claude 3.7 with extended thinking. Surprisingly, even under these near-ideal conditions, solver models consistently show resistance to feedback, a limitation that we term Feedback Friction. To mitigate this limitation, we experiment with sampling-based strategies like progressive temperature increases and explicit rejection of previously attempted incorrect answers, which yield improvements but still fail to help models achieve target performance. We analyze Feedback Friction and find that models' confidence on specific questions, measured by semantic entropy, predicts feedback resistance: high-confidence predictions remain resistant to external correction. We hope that highlighting this issue in LLMs will help future research in self-improvement.

After each decision to choose a particular arm, the learner receives some form of feedback - typically a numerical reward - determined by a feedback mechanism of the chosen arm.

While biological vision systems rely heavily on feedback connections to iteratively refine perception, most artificial neural networks remain purely feedforward, processing input in a single static pass. In this work, we propose a predictive coding inspired feedback mechanism that introduces a recurrent loop from output to input, allowing the model to refine its internal state over time. We implement this mechanism within a standard U-Net architecture and introduce two biologically motivated operations, softmax projection and exponential decay, to ensure stability of the feedback loop. Through controlled experiments on a synthetic segmentation task, we show that the feedback model significantly outperforms its feedforward counterpart in noisy conditions and generalizes more effectively with limited supervision. Notably, feedback achieves above random performance with just two training examples, while the feedforward model requires at least four. Our findings demonstrate that feedback enhances robustness and data efficiency, and offer a path toward more adaptive and biologically inspired neural architectures. Code is available at: github.com/DCalhas/feedback_segmentation.

Accurately modeling malware propagation is essential for designing effective cybersecurity defenses, particularly against adaptive threats that evolve in real time. While traditional epidemiological models and recent neural approaches offer useful foundations, they often fail to fully capture the nonlinear feedback mechanisms present in real-world networks. In this work, we apply scientific machine learning to malware modeling by evaluating three approaches: classical Ordinary Differential Equations (ODEs), Universal Differential Equations (UDEs), and Neural ODEs. Using data from the Code Red worm outbreak, we show that the UDE approach substantially reduces prediction error compared to both traditional and neural baselines by 44%, while preserving interpretability. We introduce a symbolic recovery method that transforms the learned neural feedback into explicit mathematical expressions, revealing suppression mechanisms such as network saturation, security response, and malware variant evolution. Our results demonstrate that hybrid physics-informed models can outperform both purely analytical and purely neural approaches, offering improved predictive accuracy and deeper insight into the dynamics of malware spread. These findings support the development of early warning systems, efficient outbreak response strategies, and targeted cyber defense interventions.