Recent work claims that large language models display \textit{emergent abilities}, abilities not present in smaller-scale models that are present in larger-scale models.What makes emergent abilities intriguing is two-fold: their \textit{sharpness}, transitioning seemingly instantaneously from not present to present, and their \textit{unpredictability}, appearing at seemingly unforeseeable model scales.Here, we present an alternative explanation for emergent abilities: that for a particular task and model family, when analyzing fixed model outputs, emergent abilities appear due the researcher's choice of metric rather than due to fundamental changes in model behavior with scale. Specifically, nonlinear or discontinuous metrics produce apparent emergent abilities, whereas linear or continuous metrics produce smooth, continuous, predictable changes in model performance.We present our alternative explanation in a simple mathematical model, then test it in three complementary ways: we (1) make, test and confirm three predictions on the effect of metric choice using the InstructGPT/GPT-3 family on tasks with claimed emergent abilities, (2) make, test and confirm two predictions about metric choices in a meta-analysis of emergent abilities on BIG-Bench; and (3) show how to choose metrics to produce never-before-seen seemingly emergent abilities in multiple vision tasks across diverse deep networks.Via all three analyses, we provide evidence that alleged emergent abilities evaporate with different metrics or with better statistics, and may not be a fundamental property of scaling AI models.

Detecting student misconceptions in open-ended responses is a longstanding challenge, demanding semantic precision and logical reasoning. We propose MiRAGE - Misconception Detection with Retrieval-Guided Multi-Stage Reasoning and Ensemble Fusion, a novel framework for automated misconception detection in mathematics. MiRAGE operates in three stages: (1) a Retrieval module narrows a large candidate pool to a semantically relevant subset; (2) a Reasoning module employs chain-of-thought generation to expose logical inconsistencies in student solutions; and (3) a Reranking module refines predictions by aligning them with the reasoning. These components are unified through an ensemble-fusion strategy that enhances robustness and interpretability. On mathematics datasets, MiRAGE achieves Mean Average Precision scores of 0.82/0.92/0.93 at levels 1/3/5, consistently outperforming individual modules. By coupling retrieval guidance with multi-stage reasoning, MiRAGE reduces dependence on large-scale language models while delivering a scalable and effective solution for educational assessment.

Misinformation spreads across web platforms through billions of daily multimodal posts that combine text and images, overwhelming manual fact-checking capacity. Supervised detection models require domain-specific training data and fail to generalize across diverse manipulation tactics. We present MIRAGE, an inference-time, model-pluggable agentic framework that decomposes multimodal verification into four sequential modules: visual veracity assessment detects AI-generated images, cross-modal consistency analysis identifies out-of-context repurposing, retrieval-augmented factual checking grounds claims in web evidence through iterative question generation, and a calibrated judgment module integrates all signals. MIRAGE orchestrates vision-language model reasoning with targeted web retrieval, outputs structured and citation-linked rationales. On MMFakeBench validation set (1,000 samples), MIRAGE with GPT-4o-mini achieves 81.65% F1 and 75.1% accuracy, outperforming the strongest zero-shot baseline (GPT-4V with MMD-Agent at 74.0% F1) by 7.65 points while maintaining 34.3% false positive rate versus 97.3% for a judge-only baseline. Test set results (5,000 samples) confirm generalization with 81.44% F1 and 75.08% accuracy. Ablation studies show visual verification contributes 5.18 F1 points and retrieval-augmented reasoning contributes 2.97 points. Our results demonstrate that decomposed agentic reasoning with web retrieval can match supervised detector performance without domain-specific training, enabling misinformation detection across modalities where labeled data remains scarce.

Recent advances in generative models have highlighted the need for robust detectors capable of distinguishing real images from AI-generated images. While existing methods perform well on known generators, their performance often declines when tested with newly emerging or unseen generative models due to overlapping feature embeddings that hinder accurate cross-generator classification. In this paper, we propose Multimodal Discriminative Representation Learning for Generalizable AI-generated Image Detection (MiraGe), a method designed to learn generator-invariant features. Motivated by theoretical insights on intra-class variation minimization and inter-class separation, MiraGe tightly aligns features within the same class while maximizing separation between classes, enhancing feature discriminability. Moreover, we apply multimodal prompt learning to further refine these principles into CLIP, leveraging text embeddings as semantic anchors for effective discriminative representation learning, thereby improving generalizability. Comprehensive experiments across multiple benchmarks show that MiraGe achieves state-of-the-art performance, maintaining robustness even against unseen generators like Sora.

Dean Leitersdorf introduces himself over Zoom, then types a prompt that makes me feel like I've just taken psychedelic mushrooms: "wild west, cosmic, Roman Empire, golden, underwater." He feeds the words into an artificial intelligence model developed by his startup, Decart, which manipulates live video in real time. "I have no idea what's going to happen," Leitersdorf says with a laugh, shortly before transforming into a bizarre, gold-tinged, subaquatic version of Julius Caesar in a poncho. Leitersdorf already looks a bit wild--long hair tumbling down his back, a pen doing acrobatics in his fingers. As we talk, his onscreen image oscillates in surreal ways as the model tries to predict what each new frame should look like.

Spatial perception and reasoning are core components of human cognition, encompassing object recognition, spatial relational understanding, and dynamic reasoning. Despite progress in computer vision, existing benchmarks reveal significant gaps in models' abilities to accurately recognize object attributes and reason about spatial relationships, both essential for dynamic reasoning. To address these limitations, we propose MIRAGE, a multi-modal benchmark designed to evaluate models' capabilities in Counting (object attribute recognition), Relation (spatial relational reasoning), and Counting with Relation. Through diverse and complex scenarios requiring fine-grained recognition and reasoning, MIRAGE highlights critical limitations in state-of-the-art models, underscoring the need for improved representations and reasoning frameworks. By targeting these foundational abilities, MIRAGE provides a pathway toward spatiotemporal reasoning in future research.

Multimodal hallucination in multimodal large language models (MLLMs) restricts the correctness of MLLMs. However, multimodal hallucinations are multi-sourced and arise from diverse causes. Existing benchmarks fail to adequately distinguish between perception-induced hallucinations and reasoning-induced hallucinations. This failure constitutes a significant issue and hinders the diagnosis of multimodal reasoning failures within MLLMs. To address this, we propose the {\dataset} benchmark, which isolates reasoning hallucinations by constructing questions where input images are correctly perceived by MLLMs yet reasoning errors persist. {\dataset} introduces multi-granular evaluation metrics: accuracy, factuality, and LLMs hallucination score for hallucination quantification. Our analysis reveals that (1) the model scale, data scale, and training stages significantly affect the degree of logical, fabrication, and factual hallucinations; (2) current MLLMs show no effective improvement on spatial hallucinations caused by misinterpreted spatial relationships, indicating their limited visual reasoning capabilities; and (3) question types correlate with distinct hallucination patterns, highlighting targeted challenges and potential mitigation strategies. To address these challenges, we propose {\method}, a method that combines curriculum reinforcement fine-tuning to encourage models to generate logic-consistent reasoning chains by stepwise reducing learning difficulty, and collaborative hint inference to reduce reasoning complexity. {\method} establishes a baseline on {\dataset}, and reduces the logical hallucinations in original base models.

Cautious predictions -- where a machine learning model abstains when uncertain -- are crucial for limiting harmful errors in safety-critical applications. In this work, we identify a novel threat: a dishonest institution can exploit these mechanisms to discriminate or unjustly deny services under the guise of uncertainty. We demonstrate the practicality of this threat by introducing an uncertainty-inducing attack called Mirage, which deliberately reduces confidence in targeted input regions, thereby covertly disadvantaging specific individuals. At the same time, Mirage maintains high predictive performance across all data points. To counter this threat, we propose Confidential Guardian, a framework that analyzes calibration metrics on a reference dataset to detect artificially suppressed confidence. Additionally, it employs zero-knowledge proofs of verified inference to ensure that reported confidence scores genuinely originate from the deployed model. This prevents the provider from fabricating arbitrary model confidence values while protecting the model's proprietary details. Our results confirm that Confidential Guardian effectively prevents the misuse of cautious predictions, providing verifiable assurances that abstention reflects genuine model uncertainty rather than malicious intent.

Offline multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) is an emerging field with great promise for real-world applications. Unfortunately, the current state of research in offline MARL is plagued by inconsistencies in baselines and evaluation protocols, which ultimately makes it difficult to accurately assess progress, trust newly proposed innovations, and allow researchers to easily build upon prior work. In this paper, we firstly identify significant shortcomings in existing methodologies for measuring the performance of novel algorithms through a representative study of published offline MARL work. Secondly, by directly comparing to this prior work, we demonstrate that simple, well-implemented baselines can achieve state-of-the-art (SOTA) results across a wide range of tasks. Specifically, we show that on 35 out of 47 datasets used in prior work (almost 75\% of cases), we match or surpass the performance of the current purported SOTA.

Classical optimization and learning-based methods are the two reigning paradigms in deformable image registration. While optimization-based methods boast generalizability across modalities and robust performance, learning-based methods promise peak performance, incorporating weak supervision and amortized optimization. However, the exact conditions for either paradigm to perform well over the other are shrouded and not explicitly outlined in the existing literature. In this paper, we make an explicit correspondence between the mutual information of the distribution of per-pixel intensity and labels, and the performance of classical registration methods. This strong correlation hints to the fact that architectural designs in learning-based methods is unlikely to affect this correlation, and therefore, the performance of learning-based methods.