Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery (RAMIS) enhances surgeon dexterity, with newer platforms leveraging haptic feedback to further improve performance. Such force information has broader potential to inform performance assessment, tactile localization, and surgical autonomy. This motivates the need for accessible approaches to integrating force sensing into RAMIS tools. This work presents a method for integrating a six-axis commercial force sensor into the distal end of a standard cable-driven surgical instrument, enabling end-effector force measurement while preserving the original mechanical functionality of the device. The proposed design emphasizes reproducibility and accessibility for research applications, requiring no specialized manufacturing tools. A transformer neural network integrates force sensor measurements with robot state information to aid estimation of applied forces at the end-effector, compensating for internal cable forces arising from actuation. Our proposed approach achieved normalized errors below 6%, and generalized to unseen conditions better than purely proximal data-driven sensing approaches. High internal cable forces caused sensor saturation and reduced axial force observability, which can degrade performance along the tool's major axis and under higher load conditions. Given current levels of performance, the balance of system integrability and performance enables applications and research into timely topics of haptic feedback, skill assessment, and force-informed autonomy in RAMIS. Videos and code are available at https://enhanced-telerobotics.github.io/shaft force sensing.
Large Language Models have revolutionized interactive applications; however, their finite context windows pose a critical data management challenge for maintaining stateful, long-term interactions. Existing memory approaches often rely on simplistic extraction methods that lead to incomplete memories or use rigid, single-purpose memory extraction prompts tailored to a single use case, such as chatbots. Consequently, they lack generalizability and perform poorly across diverse downstream tasks. To bridge this gap, we introduce the Memory Base, a novel data management paradigm for managing the persistent state of long-term interactions. It is characterized by three core principles: selective extraction of high-value memories from raw information streams; inherent statefulness and evolution, where memory content is progressively summarized, corrected, and temporally weighted to prioritize recent interactions; and a generalizable abstraction paradigm designed for robust transferability across diverse applications, including education, recommendation, and agent memory. Building on this foundation, we present VikingMem, an end-to-end Memory Base Management System implemented on the VikingDB vector engine. VikingMem materializes this paradigm through interconnected event and entity abstractions. It features event-centric memory extraction to selectively handle complex information streams, while entities are dynamically updated by events to achieve stateful evolution. Using temporal compression via a topic-wise timeline and time-weighted recall, the system progressively produces high-level summary memories, prioritizes recent items, and compresses and fades older ones. Extensive evaluations on long-term memory benchmarks demonstrate that VikingMem outperformes baselines by up to 30% in memory retrieval effectiveness while maintaining the low latency essential for interactive applications.
Multi-label topic classification without labeled training data is a challenging task, specially when documents contain complex relational information. We present a zero-shot multi-label topic classification framework and systematically investigate how per-article knowledge graph augmentation affects its performance. The base framework classifies topics in documents without labeled training data and has four variants: article-only classification, keyword-enhanced classification, and self-consistency decoding variants of both. Then, we augment each base variant with per article knowledge graph. This graph is extracted from the input document through a pipeline similar to KGGen based on subject-predicate-object triples. We test all eight methods, four base and four graph augmented on fifteen LLMs and eight multi-label datasets across different domains. For the base framework, keyword-enhanced classification (AK) is the best performing method, and six out of fifteen LLMs surpass the sentence-encoder baseline. Graph augmentation has positive and negative impacts on small and large models, respectively. This shows that larger models already contain enough relational information from pretraining. Furthermore, the self-consistency decoding variant does not show performance improvements in any experiment while increasing computation costs about fivefold.
Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) LLMs rely on sparse, router-driven expert activation, yet how safety alignment interacts with routed expert specialization remains underexplored. A common intuition is that safety behavior may be controlled by routing harmful requests to distinct refusal-oriented experts. In this work, we provide empirical evidence for a different picture: routing patterns in aligned MoE LLMs are largely topic-driven, while safety behavior can be altered with little change to the model's intrinsic routing path. Motivated by this observation, we present **RASET** (**R**outer-**A**gnostic **S**afety-critical **E**xpert **T**uning), a red-teaming framework that probes safety enforcement that is localized in a small subset of experts while preserving the model's intrinsic routing behavior. **RASET** identifies safety-critical experts via a contrastive routing-sensitivity criterion and applies parameter-efficient tuning only to the selected experts, minimizing semantic disruption relative to router-steering interventions. These results reveal a distinct MoE safety risk, highlighting the need for expert-aware alignment mechanisms.
We introduce MMTM, a modular pipeline for topic discovery in long-form video that integrates speech recognition, audio and visual embeddings, and BERTopic clustering through a deterministic similarity-gated fusion. Evaluated cross-lingually on German (Tagesschau) and English (NBC) broadcast news, joint tri-modal modeling substantially improves topic quality: noise drops from 0.27 to 0.06, transition rate from 0.70 to 0.21, and normalized entropy rises from 0.84 to 0.92, indicating more coherent and temporally stable topics. Cluster validity (Calinski-Harabasz) improves by 5-12X across embedding spaces. Lexical coherence (NPMI) rises from 0.77 to 0.86 on German but is corpus-dependent and does not transfer to the shorter NBC broadcasts. We release the pipeline code and a human-validated 54-hour multimodal video topic corpus with dual-annotator visual evaluation and LLM-assisted labeling.
We study large-scale literature search from two complementary angles: improving the retrieval pipeline, and stress-testing the human reference list as an evaluation target. First, we implement a Deep Research pipeline that processes the full query paper and expands the retrieved results breadth-first along their bibliographies, and show that it substantially outperforms vanilla API-only search, raising recall on RollingEval-Jun25 (a 250-paper literature-search benchmark) from below 20% to above 80%. Second, we use a neutral LLM-as-a-judge to determine if human references are sound ground truth for the task. We find significant limitations: only 51% of human citations are judged moderately relevant or higher, against 86--88% for the strongest AI-based re-rankers. We study this gap on the OpenAlex co-authorship graph, finding that humans are 2.5x more likely than the best AI re-rankers to cite a direct collaborator. Together, our results argue against single-axis literature-search evaluation: recall, topical-relevance scoring, ranked-list diversity, and a co-authorship-distance diagnostic each measure complementary properties of citation quality and should be reported jointly.
Scientific discovery is an inherently creative and uncertain process, requiring reasoning beyond the recall of known knowledge. While many benchmarks have been proposed to evaluate large language model (LLM) performance on deep research tasks via multi-hop retrieval, their innovative reasoning abilities essential for true scientific discovery remain largely untested. We introduce a benchmark framework for evaluating model performance in scientific discovery and reasoning, building up from a raw problem to the classical null hypothesis test. In our framework, models initially receive only the topic and research question from a recent paper, with technical details progressively revealed. At each stage of information disclosure, the model is tasked with generating hypotheses that address the research question, which is compared with the conclusions from the original paper and evaluated via automated semantic similarity of constituent atomic claims. This progressive evaluation of semantic divergence from ground-truth conclusions enables assessment of a model's innovativeness (under minimal information) to grounded reasoning capabilities (under full experimental details), both critical for using LLMs for scientific discovery purposes. Our framework provides a foundation for systematically evaluating scientific reasoning and discovery capabilities in LLMs, crucial for advancing the development of next-generation AI scientist/co-scientist systems. Specifically, here we evaluate GPT-5, GPT-5.4, Gemini 2.5 pro, and Gemini 3.1 pro preview across 45 papers spanning bioactive materials, mechanical materials, and nanomaterials. We find that GPT-5.4 and Gemini 3.1 pro outperform their previous generation counterparts as expected, and GPT-5.4 in particular maintains 0.7 F1 score alignment with ground truth conclusions even under minimal context.
The topic of Co-creation, i.e., AI agents interacting with humans to generate outputs (e.g., art), has gained significant attention recently. However, most studies focus on adult-human interactions in a digital setting. This paper explores a novel ludic co-creation scenario involving children and Large Language Models (LLMs) interacting through a physical board game to create written stories. Our goal is to develop a multi-agent framework capable of producing high-quality narratives suitable for young players. At the core of our approach is an iterative Writer-Editor process in which one LLM generates stories while another evaluates them and provides feedback for refinement. Through a simulation study involving multiple LLMs, we show that this iterative interaction consistently improves the perceived quality of generated stories across successive loops. The results indicate that a small number of refinement steps may be sufficient to achieve high-quality outputs in interactive storytelling systems.
As scientific literature grows rapidly, automated survey generation has become a key capability for AI scientists and human researchers. However, existing systems suffer from limited analytical depth due to reliance on abstracts and isolated paper processing, and unreliable citations from imprecise retrieval and post-hoc grounding, producing superficial surveys and may mislead researchers. We present DeepSurvey, an agentic system that addresses both. To enhance depth, DeepSurvey extracts structured keynotes from full-text papers, models cross-paper relationships through clustering and comparative analysis, and integrates code-repository analysis to recover implementation-level details. To fortify reliability, it combines citation-graph expansion with hybrid filtering for topic-focussed retrieval, enforces evidence-constrained citation assignment, and deploys multi-granularity agentic refinement to validate citation-claim alignment. Experiments show that DeepSurvey achieves the highest content score (8.644/10) and citation quality (12.3% and 9.3% recall and precision gains over the strongest baseline), generalizes more robustly across domains (0.14 vs 0.22 to 0.69 CS-to-non-CS drop), and is preferred over human-written surveys by domain experts (83.3% overall quality, 100% content depth).
AI-augmented classrooms generate rich teacher and student feedback before graded outcomes become available, yet these signals can be difficult to translate into timely instructional decisions. We propose an interpretable decision layer: a transparent mechanism that ranks course topics requiring attention without using grades or post-hoc outcome labels. The approach combines three signals: student learning difficulty prevalence, disagreement between learner self-reports and observed difficulties, and unresolved teacher concerns. The output is a ranked set of topic priorities with per-topic decision records explaining each ranking. In one graduate CS course offering ($n=5$ instructor interviews; $n=279$ survey responses), prioritized topics aligned with instructor concerns (top-5 overlap 3/5; Spearman $ρ=0.80$) and student-reported topic difficulty ($ρ=0.46$, $p=.048$). Multi-signal integration also surfaced learners not identified through individual signal sources alone (AUC $=0.96$ vs. $0.91$ for gap prevalence alone). Reflective thinking, help-seeking, and self-efficacy provided additional evidence that student behavioral signals align with learning-related constructs. While preliminary, these findings suggest that transparent coordination mechanisms may help support human-AI co-agency when feedback is incomplete.