This paper compares different methods for forecasting the term structure of U.S. and European zero-coupon government bonds using both traditional econometric and Machine Learning (ML) approaches. We compare classical models (e.g., Dynamic Nelson-Siegel (DNS) and Principal Component Analysis (PCA)) with different Neural Network (NN) architectures, including those inspired by the classical models, on the U.S. Treasury market and bonds issued by the European Central Bank (ECB). To enhance predictive performance, macroeconomic variables are incorporated. The findings for both markets are separately analyzed and compared. To this end, we propose a robust model evaluation framework combining statistical accuracy metrics - such as RMSE, MAE, and directional accuracy - with the economic relevance of a quantitative bond trading strategy. Results show that NNs consistently outperform traditional models in both forecasting accuracy and portfolio performance. For the U.S., the most effective approach is a direct-forecasting NN that incorporates DNS factors to reduce the dimensionality of zero-rate data and an Autoencoder (AE) to extract macroeconomic features, while for Europe, the optimal model is a factor-based NN using PCA-derived zero-rate factors without the integration of macroeconomic variables. Overall, the paper demonstrates how combining traditional modeling approaches with modern ML techniques and evaluation can improve yield curve forecasts and support applications in fixed-income portfolio construction.

Many decoding methods for large language models can be understood as shifting probability mass toward outputs that are more likely under the model, either locally at the token level or globally at the sequence level. Therefore, their success depends on a fundamental question: when does sequence probability, that is, the conditional probability of a continuation given a prompt, actually align with correctness? In this paper, we set out to quantify this relationship across decoding methods, models, and benchmarks at four levels: across decoding methods, across hyperparameters within a method, across prompt-answer pairs within a dataset, and across repeated responses to the same prompt. We find that higher sequence probability is often predictive of correctness across prompt-answer pairs within a fixed dataset. However, this relationship does not generally transfer to decoding decisions: increasing sequence probability by changing hyperparameters or methods does not reliably improve accuracy. Further, sequence probability is not a good indicator of correctness for responses to the same prompt. These findings clarify when decoding can and cannot be expected to improve correctness, and provide practical guidance for decoding, self-consistency, and verifier-free self-improvement.

Offline goal-conditioned reinforcement learning (GCRL) offers a practical learning paradigm in which goal-reaching policies are trained from abundant state-action trajectory datasets without additional environment interaction. However, offline GCRL still struggles with long-horizon tasks, even with recent advances that employ hierarchical policy structures, such as HIQL [33]. Identifying the root cause of this challenge, we observe the following insight. Firstly, performance bottlenecks mainly stem from the high-level policy's inability to generate appropriate subgoals. Secondly, when learning the high-level policy in the long-horizon regime, the sign of the advantage estimate frequently becomes incorrect. Thus, we argue that improving the value function to produce a clear advantage estimate for learning the high-level policy is essential.

As major progress in LLM-based long-form text generation enables paradigms such as retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and inference-time scaling, safely incorporating private information into the generation remains a critical open question.

Despite the remarkable successes of general-purpose neural networks, such as MLPs and Transformers, we find that they exhibit notable shortcomings in modeling and reasoning about periodic phenomena, achieving only marginal performance within the training domain and failing to generalize effectively to out-of-domain (OOD) scenarios. Periodicity is ubiquitous throughout nature and science. Therefore, neural networks should be equipped with the essential ability to model and handle periodicity. In this work, we propose FAN, a novel neural network that effectively addresses periodicity modeling challenges while offering broad applicability similar to MLP with fewer parameters and FLOPs. Periodicity is naturally integrated into FAN's structure and computational processes by introducing the Fourier Principle. Unlike existing Fourier-based networks, which possess particular periodicity modeling abilities but face challenges in scaling to deeper networks and are typically designed for specific tasks, our approach overcomes this challenge to enable scaling to large-scale models and maintains the capability to be applied to more types of tasks. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate the superiority of FAN in periodicity modeling tasks and the effectiveness and generalizability of FAN across a range of real-world tasks. Moreover, we reveal that compared to existing Fourier-based networks, FAN accommodates both periodicity modeling and general-purpose modeling well.

A long-standing goal in AI is to develop agents capable of solving diverse tasks across a range of environments, including those never seen during training. Two dominant paradigms address this challenge: (i) reinforcement learning (RL), which learns policies via trial and error, and (ii) optimal control, which plans actions using a known or learned dynamics model. However, their comparative strengths in the offline setting--where agents must learn from reward-free trajectories--remain underexplored. In this work, we systematically evaluate RL and control-based methods on a suite of navigation tasks, using offline datasets of varying quality. On the RL side, we consider goal-conditioned and zero-shot methods. On the control side, we train a latent dynamics model using the Joint Embedding Predictive Architecture (JEPA) and employ it for planning. We investigate how factors such as data diversity, trajectory quality, and environment variability influence the performance of these approaches. Our results show that model-free RL benefits most from large amounts of high-quality data, whereas model-based planning generalizes better to unseen layouts and is more data-efficient, while achieving trajectory stitching performance comparable to leading model-free methods. Notably, planning with a latent dynamics model proves to be a strong approach for handling suboptimal offline data and adapting to diverse environments.

A common challenge in the natural sciences is to disentangle distinct, unknown sources from observations. Examples of this source separation task include deblending galaxies in a crowded field, distinguishing the activity of individual neurons from overlapping signals, and separating seismic events from an ambient background. Traditional analyses often rely on simplified source models that fail to accurately reproduce the data. Recent advances have shown that diffusion models can directly learn complex prior distributions from noisy, incomplete data. In this work, we show that diffusion models can solve the source separation problem without explicit assumptions about the source. Our method relies only on multiple views, or the property that different sets of observations contain different linear transformations of the unknown sources. We show that our method succeeds even when no source is individually observed and the observations are noisy, incomplete, and vary in resolution. The learned diffusion models enable us to sample from the source priors, evaluate the probability of candidate sources, and draw from the joint posterior of the source distribution given an observation. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our method on a range of synthetic problems as well as real-world galaxy observations.

Scaling laws motivate the development of Time Series Foundation Models (TSFMs) that pre-train vast parameters and achieve remarkable zero-shot forecasting performance. Surprisingly, even after fine-tuning, TSFMs cannot consistently outperform smaller, specialized models trained on full-shot downstream data. A key question is how to realize effective adaptation of TSFMs for a target forecasting task. Through empirical studies on various TSFMs, the pre-trained models often exhibit inherent sparsity and redundancy in computation, suggesting that TSFMs have learned to activate task-relevant network substructures to accommodate diverse forecasting tasks. To preserve this valuable prior knowledge, we propose a structured pruning method to regularize the subsequent fine-tuning process by focusing it on a more relevant and compact parameter space. Extensive experiments on seven TSFMs and six benchmarks demonstrate that fine-tuning a smaller, pruned TSFM significantly improves forecasting performance compared to fine-tuning original models. This "prune-then-finetune" paradigm often enables TSFMs to achieve state-of-the-art performance and surpass strong specialized baselines.

However, most existing optimizers stop searching the parameter space once they reach a local minimum. Given the complex geometric properties of the loss landscape, it is difficult to guarantee that such a point is the lowest or provides the best generalization. To address this, we propose an adaptor "E" for gradient-based optimizers. The adapted optimizer tends to continue exploring along landscape 5.0 valleys (areas with low and nearly identical losses) in order to search for potentially1.0

Data attribution methods, which quantify the influence of individual training data points on a machine learning model, have gained increasing popularity in datacentric applications in modern AI. Despite a recent surge of new methods developed in this space, the impact of hyperparameter tuning in these methods remains underexplored. In this work, we present the first large-scale empirical study to understand the hyperparameter sensitivity of common data attribution methods. Our results show that most methods are indeed sensitive to certain key hyperparameters. However, unlike typical machine learning algorithms--whose hyperparameters can be tuned using computationally-cheap validation metrics--evaluating data attribution performance often requires retraining models on subsets of training data, making such metrics prohibitively costly for hyperparameter tuning.