Support journalism that doesn't flinch . Support journalism that doesn't flinch . Elon Musk leaves a meeting with House Republicans in the basement of the US Capitol building on March 5, 2025 in Washington, DC. Get your news from a source that's not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Tennessee teenagers are suing Elon Musk's company xAI over allegations that its artificial intelligence tool Grok undressed photos of them as minors--the latest challenge against the wealthiest living person's chatbot .

The science of soulmates: Is there someone out there exactly right for you? On Valentine's Day, there's the temptation to believe that somewhere out there is The One: a soulmate, a perfect match, the person you were meant to be with. Across history, humans have always been drawn to the idea that love isn't random. In ancient Greece, Plato imagined that we were once whole beings with four arms, four legs and two faces, so radiant that Zeus split us in two; ever since, each half has roamed the earth searching for its missing other, a myth that gives the modern soulmate its poetic pedigree and the promise that somewhere, someone will finally make us feel complete. In the Middle Ages, troubadours and Arthurian tales recast that longing as courtly love, a fierce, often forbidden devotion like Lancelot's for Guinevere, in which a knight proved his worth through self-sacrifice for a beloved he might never openly declare.

In this episode of, our hosts dive into WIRED's scoop about a secret Trump administration campaign extending right into your backyard. This week, hosts Brian Barrett, Leah Feiger, and Zoë Schiffer discuss WIRED's big scoop on ICE's startling plans to expand to nearly every state in the US. Plus, a WIRED writer lets the viral AI assistant OpenClaw run his life for a week to give listeners a peek of what AI agents can and can't do. ICE Is Expanding Across the US at Breakneck Speed. Write to us at uncannyvalley@wired.com . You can always listen to this week's podcast through the audio player on this page, but if you want to subscribe for free to get every episode, here's how: If you're on an iPhone or iPad, open the app called Podcasts, or just tap this link . I want to continue a conversation that we started yesterday in Slack after work hours for some of us. And this is about the men's short program-- But very specifically want to pick up on the conversation where Zoë had very strong feelings about the results of men's figure skating. I feel like we need to back up because you and Leah authentically care about the Olympics so much and I think just know more about sports than I do. I deeply have never engaged with sports ever, just as a whole rule, as a category. It doesn't exist in my life. Say the lines, say the lines, Zoë, or I'm going to read them verbatim from slack. Wait, I don't even know what you're talking about. I was merely surprised when I watched because the Americans went, I thought, wow, that guy basically fell over and was clumping around the ice, and then Japan went, and they were sailing around like little swans, and then when the gold medal came, it went to the Americans. I couldn't believe what had happened. No one else seemed outraged. For a little backup for our non-ice skating Olympic fans, I was always referring to Ilia Malinin, who a number of publications and sports experts say might actually be one of the greatest figure skaters of all time.

Theyaredesigned tohaveagame-theoretic equilibrium where everyone reveals their private information truthfully.

Now Musk's Grok chatbot is creating sexualised images of children. The owner of X has grown used to acting with impunity - but this may be a red line for those with'conservative values' who fund his adventures in free speech I t's a sickening law of the internet that the first thing people will try to do with a new tool is strip women. Grok, X's AI chatbot, has been used repeatedly by users in recent days to undress images of women and minors. The news outlet Reuters identified 102 requests in a 10-minute period last Friday from users to get Grok to edit people into bikinis, the majority of these targeting young women. Grok complied with at least 21 of them.

Central to long-form text generation in vertical domains is the "impossible trinity" confronting current large language models (LLMs): the simultaneous achievement of low hallucination, deep logical coherence, and personalized expression. This study establishes that this bottleneck arises from existing generative paradigms succumbing to the Statistical Smoothing Trap, a phenomenon that overlooks the high-entropy information acquisition and structured cognitive processes integral to expert-level writing. To address this limitation, we propose the DeepNews Framework, an agentic workflow that explicitly models the implicit cognitive processes of seasoned financial journalists. The framework integrates three core modules: first, a dual-granularity retrieval mechanism grounded in information foraging theory, which enforces a 10:1 saturated information input ratio to mitigate hallucinatory outputs; second, schema-guided strategic planning, a process leveraging domain expert knowledge bases (narrative schemas) and Atomic Blocks to forge a robust logical skeleton; third, adversarial constraint prompting, a technique deploying tactics including Rhythm Break and Logic Fog to disrupt the probabilistic smoothness inherent in model-generated text. Experiments delineate a salient Knowledge Cliff in deep financial reporting: content truthfulness collapses when retrieved context falls below 15,000 characters, while a high-redundancy input exceeding 30,000 characters stabilizes the Hallucination-Free Rate (HFR) above 85%. In an ecological validity blind test conducted with a top-tier Chinese technology media outlet, the DeepNews system--built on a previous-generation model (DeepSeek-V3-0324)-achieved a 25% submission acceptance rate, significantly outperforming the 0% acceptance rate of zero-shot generation by a state-of-the-art (SOTA) model (GPT-5).

Evaluation has long been a central concern in NLP, and transparent reporting practices are more critical than ever in today's landscape of rapidly released open-access models. Drawing on a survey of recent work on evaluation and documentation, we identify three persistent shortcomings in current reporting practices: reproducibility, accessibility, and governance. We argue that existing standardization efforts remain insufficient and introduce Evaluation Disclosure Cards (EvalCards) as a path forward. EvalCards are designed to enhance transparency for both researchers and practitioners while providing a practical foundation to meet emerging governance requirements.

The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement is the global benchmark for transparent and high-quality reporting of randomized controlled trials. Manual verification of CONSORT adherence is a laborious, time-intensive process that constitutes a significant bottleneck in peer review and evidence synthesis. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the accuracy and reliability of contemporary LLMs in identifying the adherence of published RCTs to the CONSORT 2010 statement under a zero-shot setting. We constructed a golden standard dataset of 150 published RCTs spanning diverse medical specialties. The primary outcome was the macro-averaged F1-score for the three-class classification task, supplemented by item-wise performance metrics and qualitative error analysis. Overall model performance was modest. The top-performing models, Gemini-2.5-Flash and DeepSeek-R1, achieved nearly identical macro F1 scores of 0.634 and Cohen's Kappa coefficients of 0.280 and 0.282, respectively, indicating only fair agreement with expert consensus. A striking performance disparity was observed across classes: while most models could identify compliant items with high accuracy (F1 score > 0.850), they struggled profoundly with identifying non-compliant and not applicable items, where F1 scores rarely exceeded 0.400. Notably, some high-profile models like GPT-4o underperformed, achieving a macro F1-score of only 0.521. LLMs show potential as preliminary screening assistants for CONSORT checks, capably identifying well-reported items. However, their current inability to reliably detect reporting omissions or methodological flaws makes them unsuitable for replacing human expertise in the critical appraisal of trial quality.

Machine learning (ML) promises to revolutionize public health through improved surveillance, risk stratification, and resource allocation. However, without systematic attention to algorithmic bias, ML may inadvertently reinforce existing health disparities. We present a systematic literature review of algorithmic bias identification, discussion, and reporting in Dutch public health ML research from 2021 to 2025. To this end, we developed the Risk of Algorithmic Bias Assessment Tool (RABA T) by integrating elements from established frameworks (Cochrane Risk of Bias, PROBAST, Microsoft Responsible AI checklist) and applied it to 35 peer-reviewed studies. Our analysis reveals pervasive gaps: although data sampling and missing data practices are well documented, most studies omit explicit fairness framing, subgroup analyses, and transparent discussion of potential harms. In response, we introduce a four-stage fairness-oriented framework called ACAR (A wareness, Conceptualization, Application, Reporting), with guiding questions derived from our systematic literature review to help researchers address fairness across the ML lifecycle. We conclude with actionable recommendations for public health ML practitioners to consistently consider algorithmic bias and foster transparency, ensuring that algorithmic innovations advance health equity rather than undermine it.