Question: Do the main claims made in the abstract and introduction accurately reflect the3 paper's contributions and scope?4 Answer: [Yes]5 Justification: These claims are substantiated within the paper through detailed descriptions6 of the dataset's structure and the methodologies employed for each analysis task. The answer NA means that the abstract and introduction do not include the claims11 made in the paper.12 The abstract and/or introduction should clearly state the claims made, including the13 contributions made in the paper and important assumptions and limitations. ANo or14 NA answer to this question will not be perceived well by the reviewers.15 The claims made should match theoretical and experimental results, and reflect how16 much the results can be expected to generalize to other settings.17

Learning from active human involvement enables the human subject to actively intervene and demonstrate to the AI agent during training. The interaction and corrective feedback from human brings safety and AI alignment to the learning process.

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

A vast swath of modern neuroscience research requires training animals to perform specific tasks.

Evaluating Large Language Models' (LLMs) anthropomorphic capabilities has

The discovery of conservation laws is a cornerstone of scientific progress. However, identifying these invariants from observational data remains a significant challenge. We propose a hybrid framework to automate the discovery of conserved quantities from noisy trajectory data. Our approach integrates three components: (1) a Neural Ordinary Differential Equation (Neural ODE) that learns a continuous model of the system's dynamics, (2) a Transformer that generates symbolic candidate invariants conditioned on the learned vector field, and (3) a symbolic-numeric verifier that provides a strong numerical certificate for the validity of these candidates. We test our framework on canonical physical systems and show that it significantly outperforms baselines that operate directly on trajectory data. This work demonstrates the robustness of a decoupled learn-then-search approach for discovering mathematical principles from imperfect data.

Recent advances in neural decoding have enabled the reconstruction of visual experiences from brain activity, positioning fMRI-to-image reconstruction as a promising bridge between neuroscience and computer vision. However, current methods predominantly rely on subject-specific models or require subject-specific fine-tuning, limiting their scalability and real-world applicability. In this work, we introduce ZEBRA, the first zero-shot brain visual decoding framework that eliminates the need for subject-specific adaptation. ZEBRA is built on the key insight that fMRI representations can be decomposed into subject-related and semantic-related components. By leveraging adversarial training, our method explicitly disentangles these components to isolate subject-invariant, semantic-specific representations. This disentanglement allows ZEBRA to generalize to unseen subjects without any additional fMRI data or retraining. Extensive experiments show that ZEBRA significantly outperforms zero-shot baselines and achieves performance comparable to fully finetuned models on several metrics. Our work represents a scalable and practical step toward universal neural decoding. Code and model weights are available at: https://github.com/xmed-lab/ZEBRA.

Evaluating Large Language Models' (LLMs) anthropomorphic capabilities has