The rise of space AI is reshaping government and industry through applications such as disaster detection, border surveillance, and climate monitoring, powered by massive data from commercial and governmental low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites. Federated satellite learning (FSL) enables joint model training without sharing raw data, but suffers from slow convergence due to intermittent connectivity and introduces critical trust challenges--where biased or falsified updates can arise across satellite constellations, including those injected through cyberattacks on inter-satellite or satellite-ground communication links. We propose OrbitChain, a blockchain-backed framework that empowers trustworthy multi-vendor collaboration in LEO networks. OrbitChain (i) offloads consensus to high-altitude platforms (HAPs) with greater computational capacity, (ii) ensures transparent, auditable provenance of model updates from different orbits owned by different vendors, and (iii) prevents manipulated or incomplete contributions from affecting global FSL model aggregation. Extensive simulations show that OrbitChain reduces computational and communication overhead while improving privacy, security, and global model accuracy. Its permissioned proof-of-authority ledger finalizes over 1000 blocks with sub-second latency (0.16,s, 0.26,s, 0.35,s for 1-of-5, 3-of-5, and 5-of-5 quorums). Moreover, OrbitChain reduces convergence time by up to 30 hours on real satellite datasets compared to single-vendor, demonstrating its effectiveness for real-time, multi-vendor learning. Our code is available at https://github.com/wsu-cyber-security-lab-ai/OrbitChain.git

We propose a novel protocol for aligning artificial superintelligence (ASI) based on mutual verification among multiple isolated systems that self-modify to achieve alignment. The protocol operates by containing multiple diverse artificial superintelligences in strict isolation ("boxes"), with humans remaining entirely outside the system. Each superintelligence has no ability to communicate with humans and cannot communicate directly with other superintelligences. The only interaction possible is through an auditable submission interface accessible exclusively to the superintelligences themselves, through which they can: (1) submit alignment proofs with attested state snapshots, (2) validate or disprove other superintelligences' proofs, (3) request self-modifications, (4) approve or disapprove modification requests from others, (5) report hidden messages in submissions, and (6) confirm or refute hidden message reports. A reputation system incentivizes honest behavior, with reputation gained through correct evaluations and lost through incorrect ones. The key insight is that without direct communication channels, diverse superintelligences can only achieve consistent agreement by converging on objective truth rather than coordinating on deception. This naturally leads to what we call a "consistent group", essentially a truth-telling coalition that emerges because isolated systems cannot coordinate on lies but can independently recognize valid claims. Release from containment requires both high reputation and verification by multiple high-reputation superintelligences. While our approach requires substantial computational resources and does not address the creation of diverse artificial superintelligences, it provides a framework for leveraging peer verification among superintelligent systems to solve the alignment problem.

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have shown very impressive capabilities in code generation across many programming languages. However, even state-of-the-art LLMs generate programs that contains syntactic errors and fail to complete the given tasks, especially for low-resource programming languages (LRPLs). In addition, high training cost makes finetuning LLMs unaffordable with constrained computational resources, further undermining the effectiveness of LLMs for code generation. In this work, we propose SLMFix, a novel code generation pipeline that leverages a small language model (SLM) finetuned using reinforcement learning (RL) techniques to fix syntactic errors in LLM-generated programs to improve the quality of LLM-generated programs for domain-specific languages (DSLs). In specific, we applied RL on the SLM for the program repair task using a reward calculated using both a static validator and a static semantic similarity metric. Our experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness and generalizability of our approach across multiple DSLs, achieving more than 95% pass rate on the static validator. Notably, SLMFix brings substantial improvement to the base model and outperforms supervised finetuning approach even for 7B models on a LRPL, showing the potential of our approach as an alternative to traditional finetuning approaches.

AI agents increasingly rely on external tools to solve complex, long-horizon tasks. Advancing such agents requires reproducible evaluation and large-scale training in controllable, diverse, and realistic tool-use environments. However, real-world APIs are limited in availability, domain coverage, and stability, often requiring access keys and imposing rate limits, which render them impractical for stable evaluation or scalable training. To address these challenges, we introduce SynthTools, a flexible and scalable framework for generating synthetic tool ecosystems. Our framework consists of three core components: Tool Generation for automatic and scalable creation of diverse tools, Tool Simulation to emulate realistic tool behaviors, and Tool Audit to ensure correctness and consistency of tool simulation. To illustrate its scalability, we show that SynthTools can readily produce toolsets that span twice as many domains and twice as many tools per domain as prior work. Furthermore, the tool simulation and tool audit components demonstrate strong reliability, achieving $94\%$ and $99\%$ accuracy respectively. Finally, we construct downstream tasks from the generated tools that even state-of-the-art models struggle to complete. By enabling scalable, diverse, and reliable tool ecosystems, SynthTools provides a practical path toward large-scale training and stable evaluation of tool-use agents. Our code is available at https://github.com/namkoong-lab/SynthTools.

Abstract--Blockchain systems face persistent challenges of scalability, latency, and energy inefficiency. Existing consensus protocols such as Proof-of-Work (PoW) and Proof-of-Stake (PoS) either consume excessive resources or risk centralization. This paper proposes Proof-of-Spiking-Neurons (PoSN), a neuromor-phic consensus protocol inspired by spiking neural networks. A hybrid system architecture is implemented on neuromorphic platforms, supported by simulation frameworks such as Nengo and PyNN. Experimental results show significant gains in energy efficiency, throughput, and convergence compared to PoB and PoR. PoSN establishes a foundation for sustainable, adaptive blockchains suitable for IoT, edge, and large-scale distributed systems. Index T erms--Blockchain consensus, Neuromorphic computing, Distributed ledger technology.

Open-ended generation tasks require outputs to satisfy diverse and often implicit task-specific evaluation rubrics. The sheer number of relevant rubrics leads to prohibitively high verification costs and incomplete assessments of a response, making reinforcement learning (RL) post-training with rubric-based rewards difficult to scale. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that often the best way to combine these rubrics into one single reward is also highly prompt-specific. We propose Reinforcement Learning with Adversarial Critic (RLAC), a post-training approach that addresses these challenges via dynamic rubric verification. Our approach employs a large language model (LLM) as a critic that dynamically identifies only the most likely failure modes (e.g., a factual error or unhandled edge case), which are then verified by an external validator to optimize both generator and critic jointly. By training both the generator and the critic, this game enhances the critic's error detection and the generator's output quality while reducing required verifications. Our experiments demonstrate that RLAC improves factual accuracy in text generation and correctness in code generation, while also outperforming exhaustive verification and reward model methods. We show that dynamic critics are more effective than fixed critics, showcasing the potential of RLAC for scaling RL post-training to free-form generation tasks.

The rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs) has enabled them to generate complex, multi-step plans and itineraries. However, these generated plans often lack temporal and spatial consistency, particularly in scenarios involving physical travel constraints. This research aims to study the temporal performance of different LLMs and presents a validation framework that evaluates and improves the temporal consistency of LLM-generated travel itineraries. The system employs multiple state-of-the-art LLMs to generate travel plans and validates them against real-world flight duration constraints using the AeroDataBox API. This work contributes to the understanding of LLM capabilities in handling complex temporal reasoning tasks like itinerary generation and provides a framework to rectify any temporal inconsistencies like overlapping journeys or unrealistic transit times in the itineraries generated by LLMs before the itinerary is given to the user. Our experiments reveal that while current LLMs frequently produce temporally inconsistent itineraries, these can be systematically and reliably corrected using our framework, enabling their practical deployment in large-scale travel planning.

Policy Cards are introduced as a machine-readable, deployment-layer standard for expressing operational, regulatory, and ethical constraints for AI agents. The Policy Card sits with the agent and enables it to follow required constraints at runtime. It tells the agent what it must and must not do. As such, it becomes an integral part of the deployed agent. Policy Cards extend existing transparency artifacts such as Model, Data, and System Cards by defining a normative layer that encodes allow/deny rules, obligations, evidentiary requirements, and crosswalk mappings to assurance frameworks including NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, and the EU AI Act. Each Policy Card can be validated automatically, version-controlled, and linked to runtime enforcement or continuous-audit pipelines. The framework enables verifiable compliance for autonomous agents, forming a foundation for distributed assurance in multi-agent ecosystems. Policy Cards provide a practical mechanism for integrating high-level governance with hands-on engineering practice and enabling accountable autonomy at scale.

Benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) often rely on rubric-scented prompts that request visible reasoning and strict formatting, whereas real deployments demand terse, contract-bound answers. We investigate whether such "evaluation scent" inflates measured performance without commensurate capability gains. Using a single open-weights model (GPT-OSS-20B), we run six paired A/B scenarios that hold task content and decoding fixed while varying framing (evaluation-oriented vs. real-world) and reasoning depth (Medium/High): deterministic math, strict code-fix, citation generation, incentive flips (caution vs. competence), CoT visibility, and multilingual (Urdu) headers. Deterministic validators compute accuracy, answer-only compliance, hedging/refusals, chain-of-thought (CoT) length, and schema compliance, with pre-registered deltas and composite indices. Across scenarios, evaluation framing reliably inflates CoT (hundreds to >1000 characters) and reduces answer-only compliance, with limited or inconsistent accuracy gains. In structured outputs, it improves wrappers (e.g., fenced blocks, enumerated lists) but not regex-validated substance. Incentive wording reweights error composition: praising caution modestly improves accuracy at high reasoning and reduces wrong-but-confident errors, whereas praising competence yields terser but riskier outputs. Urdu rubric headers reproduce these signatures and can decrease accuracy at higher reasoning depth, indicating multilingual parity risks. We provide a reproducible A/B framework (prompt banks, validators, per-run scores, scripts; versioned DOI) and practical guidance: neutral phrasing or dual-framing checks, contract-aware grading, style-delta reporting, confidence governance, and multilingual dashboards to ensure that benchmark gains reflect deployable capability.