A Unified Theory of Random Projection for Influence Functions

Influence functions and related data attribution scores take the form of $g^{\top}F^{-1}g^{\prime}$, where $F\succeq 0$ is a curvature operator. In modern overparametrized models, forming or inverting $F\in\mathbb{R}^{d\times d}$ is prohibitive, motivating scalable influence computation via random projection with a sketch $P \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times d}$. This practice is commonly justified via the Johnson--Lindenstrauss (JL) lemma, which ensures approximate preservation of Euclidean geometry for a fixed dataset. However, JL does not address how sketching behaves under inversion. Furthermore, there is no existing theory that explains how sketching interacts with other widely-used techniques, such as ridge regularization and structured curvature approximations. We develop a unified theory characterizing when projection provably preserves influence functions. When $g,g^{\prime}\in\text{range}(F)$, we show that: 1) Unregularized projection: exact preservation holds iff $P$ is injective on $\text{range}(F)$, which necessitates $m\geq \text{rank}(F)$; 2) Regularized projection: ridge regularization fundamentally alters the sketching barrier, with approximation guarantees governed by the effective dimension of $F$ at the regularization scale; 3) Factorized influence: for Kronecker-factored curvatures $F=A\otimes E$, the guarantees continue to hold for decoupled sketches $P=P_A\otimes P_E$, even though such sketches exhibit row correlations that violate i.i.d. assumptions. Beyond this range-restricted setting, we analyze out-of-range test gradients and quantify a leakage term that arises when test gradients have components in $\ker(F)$. This yields guarantees for influence queries on general test points. Overall, this work develops a novel theory that characterizes when projection provably preserves influence and provides principled guidance for choosing the sketch size in practice.

FlyAOC: Evaluating Agentic Ontology Curation of Drosophila Scientific Knowledge Bases

Scientific knowledge bases accelerate discovery by curating findings from primary literature into structured, queryable formats for both human researchers and emerging AI systems. Maintaining these resources requires expert curators to search relevant papers, reconcile evidence across documents, and produce ontology-grounded annotations - a workflow that existing benchmarks, focused on isolated subtasks like named entity recognition or relation extraction, do not capture. We present FlyBench to evaluate AI agents on end-to-end agentic ontology curation from scientific literature. Given only a gene symbol, agents must search and read from a corpus of 16,898 full-text papers to produce structured annotations: Gene Ontology terms describing function, expression patterns, and historical synonyms linking decades of nomenclature. The benchmark includes 7,397 expert-curated annotations across 100 genes drawn from FlyBase, the Drosophila (fruit fly) knowledge base. We evaluate four baseline agent architectures: memorization, fixed pipeline, single-agent, and multi-agent. We find that architectural choices significantly impact performance, with multi-agent designs outperforming simpler alternatives, yet scaling backbone models yields diminishing returns. All baselines leave substantial room for improvement. Our analysis surfaces several findings to guide future development; for example, agents primarily use retrieval to confirm parametric knowledge rather than discover new information. We hope FlyBench will drive progress on retrieval-augmented scientific reasoning, a capability with broad applications across scientific domains.

OATS: Online Data Augmentation for Time Series Foundation Models

Time Series Foundation Models (TSFMs) are a powerful paradigm for time series analysis and are often enhanced by synthetic data augmentation to improve the training data quality. Existing augmentation methods, however, typically rely on heuristics and static paradigms. Motivated by dynamic data optimization, which shows that the contribution of samples varies across training stages, we propose OATS (Online Data Augmentation for Time Series Foundation Models), a principled strategy that generates synthetic data tailored to different training steps. OATS leverages valuable training samples as principled guiding signals and dynamically generates high-quality synthetic data conditioned on them. We further design a diffusion-based framework to produce realistic time series and introduce an explore-exploit mechanism to balance efficiency and effectiveness. Experiments on TSFMs demonstrate that OATS consistently outperforms regular training and yields substantial performance gains over static data augmentation baselines across six validation datasets and two TSFM architectures. The code is available at the link https://github.com/microsoft/TimeCraft.

Your Reasoning Benchmark May Not Test Reasoning: Revealing Perception Bottleneck in Abstract Reasoning Benchmarks

Reasoning benchmarks such as the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) and ARC-AGI are widely used to assess progress in artificial intelligence and are often interpreted as probes of core, so-called ``fluid'' reasoning abilities. Despite their apparent simplicity for humans, these tasks remain challenging for frontier vision-language models (VLMs), a gap commonly attributed to deficiencies in machine reasoning. We challenge this interpretation and hypothesize that the gap arises primarily from limitations in visual perception rather than from shortcomings in inductive reasoning. To verify this hypothesis, we introduce a two-stage experimental pipeline that explicitly separates perception and reasoning. In the perception stage, each image is independently converted into a natural-language description, while in the reasoning stage a model induces and applies rules using these descriptions. This design prevents leakage of cross-image inductive signals and isolates reasoning from perception bottlenecks. Across three ARC-style datasets, Mini-ARC, ACRE, and Bongard-LOGO, we show that the perception capability is the dominant factor underlying the observed performance gap by comparing the two-stage pipeline with against standard end-to-end one-stage evaluation. Manual inspection of reasoning traces in the VLM outputs further reveals that approximately 80 percent of model failures stem from perception errors. Together, these results demonstrate that ARC-style benchmarks conflate perceptual and reasoning challenges and that observed performance gaps may overstate deficiencies in machine reasoning. Our findings underscore the need for evaluation protocols that disentangle perception from reasoning when assessing progress in machine intelligence.

Taming Hyperparameter Sensitivity in Data Attribution: Practical Selection Without Costly Retraining

Data attribution methods, which quantify the influence of individual training data points on a machine learning model, have gained increasing popularity in data-centric applications in modern AI. Despite a recent surge of new methods developed in this space, the impact of hyperparameter tuning in these methods remains under-explored. 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. This poses a critical open challenge for the practical application of data attribution methods. To address this challenge, we advocate for better theoretical understandings of hyperparameter behavior to inform efficient tuning strategies. As a case study, we provide a theoretical analysis of the regularization term that is critical in many variants of influence function methods. Building on this analysis, we propose a lightweight procedure for selecting the regularization value without model retraining, and validate its effectiveness across a range of standard data attribution benchmarks. Overall, our study identifies a fundamental yet overlooked challenge in the practical application of data attribution, and highlights the importance of careful discussion on hyperparameter selection in future method development.

Daunce: Data Attribution through Uncertainty Estimation

Training data attribution (TDA) methods aim to identify which training examples influence a model's predictions on specific test data most. By quantifying these influences, TDA supports critical applications such as data debugging, curation, and valuation. Gradient-based TDA methods rely on gradients and second-order information, limiting their applicability at scale. While recent random projection-based methods improve scalability, they often suffer from degraded attribution accuracy. Motivated by connections between uncertainty and influence functions, we introduce Daunce - a simple yet effective data attribution approach through uncertainty estimation. Our method operates by fine-tuning a collection of perturbed models and computing the covariance of per-example losses across these models as the attribution score. Daunce is scalable to large language models (LLMs) and achieves more accurate attribution compared to existing TDA methods. We validate Daunce on tasks ranging from vision tasks to LLM fine-tuning, and further demonstrate its compatibility with black-box model access. Applied to OpenAI's GPT models, our method achieves, to our knowledge, the first instance of data attribution on proprietary LLMs.

Measuring Fine-Grained Relatedness in Multitask Learning via Data Attribution

Measuring task relatedness and mitigating negative transfer remain a critical open challenge in Multitask Learning (MTL). This work extends data attribution -- which quantifies the influence of individual training data points on model predictions -- to MTL setting for measuring task relatedness. We propose the MultiTask Influence Function (MTIF), a method that adapts influence functions to MTL models with hard or soft parameter sharing. Compared to conventional task relatedness measurements, MTIF provides a fine-grained, instance-level relatedness measure beyond the entire-task level. This fine-grained relatedness measure enables a data selection strategy to effectively mitigate negative transfer in MTL. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate that the proposed MTIF efficiently and accurately approximates the performance of models trained on data subsets. Moreover, the data selection strategy enabled by MTIF consistently improves model performance in MTL. Our work establishes a novel connection between data attribution and MTL, offering an efficient and fine-grained solution for measuring task relatedness and enhancing MTL models.

GraSS: Scalable Influence Function with Sparse Gradient Compression

Gradient-based data attribution methods, such as influence functions, are critical for understanding the impact of individual training samples without requiring repeated model retraining. However, their scalability is often limited by the high computational and memory costs associated with per-sample gradient computation. In this work, we propose GraSS, a novel gradient compression algorithm and its variants FactGraSS for linear layers specifically, that explicitly leverage the inherent sparsity of per-sample gradients to achieve sub-linear space and time complexity. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, achieving substantial speedups while preserving data influence fidelity. In particular, FactGraSS achieves up to 165% faster throughput on billion-scale models compared to the previous state-of-the-art baselines. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/TRAIS-Lab/GraSS.

A Snapshot of Influence: A Local Data Attribution Framework for Online Reinforcement Learning

Online reinforcement learning (RL) excels in complex, safety-critical domains, yet it faces challenges such as sample inefficiency, training instability, and a lack of interpretability. Data attribution offers a principled way to trace model behavior back to individual training samples. However, in online RL, each training sample not only drives policy updates but also influences future data collection, violating the fixed dataset assumption in existing attribution methods. In this paper, we initiate the study of data attribution for online RL, focusing on the widely used Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) algorithm. We start by establishing a local attribution framework, interpreting model checkpoints with respect to the records in the recent training buffer. We design two target functions, capturing agent action and cumulative return respectively, and measure each record's contribution through gradient similarity between its training loss and these targets. We demonstrate the power of this framework through three concrete applications: diagnosis of learning, temporal analysis of behavior formation, and targeted intervention during training. Leveraging this framework, we further propose an algorithm, iterative influence-based filtering (IIF), for online RL training that iteratively performs experience filtering to refine policy updates. Across standard RL benchmarks (classic control, navigation, locomotion) to RLHF for large language models, IIF reduces sample complexity, speeds up training, and achieves higher returns. Overall, these results advance interpretability, efficiency, and effectiveness of online RL.

Detecting and Filtering Unsafe Training Data via Data Attribution

Large language models (LLMs) are vulnerable to unsafe training data that even small amounts of unsafe data can lead to harmful model behaviors. Detecting and filtering such unsafe training data is essential for trustworthy model development. Current state-of-the-art (SOTA) approaches typically rely on training moderation classifiers which requires significant computational overhead and are limited to predefined taxonomies, making them less adaptable to evolving safety concerns. Moreover, these classifiers lack insight into the training process, limiting their effectiveness in filtering unsafe data. To address these limitations, we propose DABUF, leveraging data attribution to detect and filter unsafe training data by attributing harmful model outputs to influential training data points. DABUF enables flexible identification of various unsafe data types without predefined taxonomies. However, in practice, model outputs can be complex with combined safe linguistic features and unsafe content, leading to reduced attribution accuracy. In such cases, DABUF will integrate moderation classifiers to identify a minimal subset of unsafe training data for targeted attribution (such as jailbreak). When model outputs are relatively straightforward, DABUF uses model outputs directly as the attribution targets. We evaluate the performance on two different tasks: in filtering jailbreaking training data and in identifying and mitigating gender bias. DABUF outperforms SOTA approaches by up to 7.5\% in detection AUPRC in jailbreaking scenarios, and 44.1\% in detecting gender bias. Moreover, retraining on DABUF-filtered data leads to higher model safety across experiments, underscoring its versatility in addressing a broad spectrum of unsafe data issues.