A classic statistical problem is to study the asymptotic behavior of the order statistics of a large number of independent samples taken from a distribution with finite expectation. This behavior has implications for several core problems in machine learning and economics -- including robust learning under adversarial noise, best-arm identification in bandit algorithms, revenue estimation in secondprice auctions, and the analysis of tail-sensitive statistics used in out-of-distribution detection. The research question we tackle in this paper is: How large can the expectation of the ℓ-th maximum of the n samples be? For ℓ = 1, i.e., the maximum, this expectation is known to grow as o(n), which can be shown to be tight. We show that there is a sharp contrast when considering any fixed ℓ > 1. Surprisingly, in

Machine learning (ML) is transforming modeling and control in the physical, engineering, and biological sciences. However, rapid development has outpaced the creation of standardized, objective benchmarks--leading to weak baselines, reporting bias, and inconsistent evaluations across methods. This undermines reproducibility, misguides resource allocation, and obscures scientific progress. To address this, we develop a Common Task Framework (CTF) for scientific machine learning. The CTF features a curated set of datasets and task-specific metrics spanning forecasting, state reconstruction, and generalization under realistic constraints, including noise and limited data. Inspired by the success of CTFs in fields like natural language processing and computer vision, our framework provides a structured, rigorous foundation for head-to-head evaluation of diverse algorithms.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are now integral across various domains and have demonstrated impressive performance. Progress, however, rests on the premise that benchmark scores are both accurate and reproducible. We demonstrate that the reproducibility of LLM performance is fragile: changing system configuration, such as evaluation batch size, GPU count, and GPU version, can introduce significant differences in the generated responses. This issue is especially pronounced in reasoning models, where minor rounding differences in early tokens can cascade into divergent chains of thought, ultimately affecting accuracy. For instance, under bfloat16 precision with greedy decoding, a reasoning model like DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-7B can exhibit up to 9% variation in accuracy and 9,000 tokens difference in response length due to differences in GPU count, type, and evaluation batch size.

Medical time-series analysis differs fundamentally from general ones by requiring specialized domain knowledge to interpret complex signals and clinical context. Large language models (LLMs) hold great promise for augmenting medical timeseries analysis by complementing raw series with rich contextual knowledge drawn from biomedical literature and clinical guidelines. However, realizing this potential depends on precise and meaningful prompts that guide the LLM to key information. Yet, determining what constitutes effective prompt content remains non-trivial--especially in medical settings where signal interpretation often hinges on subtle, expert-defined decision-making indicators. To this end, we propose InDiGO, a knowledge-aware evolutionary learning framework that integrates clinical signals and decision-making indicators through iterative optimization. Across four medical benchmarks, InDiGO consistently outperforms prior methods.

Hemodynamics has a substantial influence on normal cardiovascular growth and disease formation, but requires time-consuming simulations to obtain. Deep Learning algorithms to rapidly predict hemodynamics parameters can be very useful, but their development is hindered by the lack of large dataset on anatomic geometries and associated fluid dynamics. This paper presents a new large-scale dataset of intracranial aneurysm (IA) geometries and hemodynamics to support the development of neural operators to solve geometry-dependent flow governing partial differential equations. The dataset includes 14,000 steady-flow cases and 730 pulsatile-flow cases simulated with computational fluid dynamics. All cases are computed using a laminar flow setup with more than 3 million cells.

Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) fine-tuning has demonstrated significant enhancements in reasoning tasks. However, it often relies on high quality labeled dataset, which is typically difficult to obtain. To address this challenge, we introduce Noise-Aware Dual-Reward Optimization (NaDRO) to effectively enhances the training of Large Language Models (LLMs) under noisy or ambiguous supervision. NaDRO operates through two key components: (1) Preference-based Outcome Reward (POR),which makes a principled bias-variance tradeoff, reducing training variance by learning from robust preference rankings instead of overfitting to single-best estimates; and (2) Context Perception Reward (CPR) mechanism, which ensures that LLMs conduct necessary qualitative assessment of the current problem state to foster deeper situational understanding prior to decision-making.

Novel view synthesis is an important problem with many applications, including AR/VR, gaming, and robotic simulations. With the recent rapid development of Neural Radiance Fields (NeRFs) and 3DGaussian Splatting (3DGS) methods, it is becoming difficult to keep track of the current state of the art (SoTA) due to methods using different evaluation protocols, codebases being difficult to install and use, and methods not generalizing well to novel 3D scenes. In our experiments, we show that even tiny differences in the evaluation protocols of various methods can artificially boost the performance of these methods. This raises questions about the validity of quantitative comparisons performed in the literature. To address these questions, we propose NerfBaselines, an evaluation framework which provides consistent benchmarking tools, ensures reproducibility, and simplifies the installation and use of various methods. We validate our implementation experimentally by reproducing the numbers reported in the original papers. For improved accessibility, we release a web platform that compares commonly used methods on standard benchmarks. We strongly believe NerfBaselines is a valuable contribution to the community as it ensures that quantitative results are comparable and thus truly measure progress in the field of novel view synthesis.

This paper investigates the limitations of the normalization in attention mechanisms. We begin with a theoretical framework that enables the identification of the model's selective ability and the geometric separation involved in token selection. Our analysis includes explicit bounds on distances and separation criteria for token vectors under softmax scaling. Through experiments with pre-trained GPT-2 model, we empirically validate our theoretical results and analyze key behaviors of the attention mechanism. Notably, we demonstrate that as the number of selected tokens increases, the model's ability to distinguish informative tokens declines, often converging toward a uniform selection pattern. We also show that gradient sensitivity under softmax normalization presents challenges during training, especially at low temperature settings. These findings advance current understanding of softmax-based attention mechanism and motivate the need for more robust normalization and selection strategies in future attention architectures.

Long-horizon tasks requiring multi-step reasoning and dynamic re-planning remain challenging for large language models (LLMs). Sequential prompting methods are prone to context drift, loss of goal information, and recurrent failure cycles, while hierarchical prompting methods often weaken cross-level continuity or incur substantial runtime overhead. We introduce ReCAP (Recursive Context-Aware Reasoning and Planning), a hierarchical framework with shared context for reasoning and planning in LLMs. ReCAP combines three key mechanisms: (i) plan-ahead decomposition, in which the model generates a full subtask list, executes the first item, and refines the remainder; (ii) structured re-injection of parent plans, maintaining consistent multi-level context during recursive return; and (iii) memory-efficient execution, bounding the active prompt so costs scale linearly with task depth. Together these mechanisms align high-level goals with low-level actions, reduce redundant prompting, and preserve coherent context updates across recursion. Experiments demonstrate that ReCAP substantially improves subgoal alignment and success rates on various long-horizon reasoning benchmarks, achieving a 32% gain on synchronous Robotouille and a 29% improvement on asynchronous Robotouille under the strict pass@1 protocol.

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