Modeling Programming Skills with Source Code Embeddings for Context-aware Exercise Recommendation

In this paper, we propose a context-aware recommender system that models students' programming skills using embeddings of the source code they submit throughout a course. These embeddings predict students' skills across multiple programming topics, producing profiles that are matched to the skills required by unseen homework problems. To generate recommendations, we compute the cosine similarity between student profiles and problem skill vectors, ranking exercises according to their alignment with each student's current abilities. We evaluated our approach using real data from students and exercises in an introductory programming course at our university. First, we assessed the effectiveness of our source code embeddings for predicting skills, comparing them with token-based and graph-based alternatives. Results showed that Jina embeddings outperformed TF-IDF, CodeBERT-cpp, and GraphCodeBERT across most skills. Additionally, we evaluated the system's ability to recommend exercises aligned with weekly course content by analyzing student submissions collected over seven course offerings. Our approach consistently produced more suitable recommendations than baselines based on correctness or solution time, indicating that predicted programming skills provide a stronger signal for problem recommendation.

TraceMem: Weaving Narrative Memory Schemata from User Conversational Traces

Sustaining long-term interactions remains a bottleneck for Large Language Models (LLMs), as their limited context windows struggle to manage dialogue histories that extend over time. Existing memory systems often treat interactions as disjointed snippets, failing to capture the underlying narrative coherence of the dialogue stream. We propose TraceMem, a cognitively-inspired framework that weaves structured, narrative memory schemata from user conversational traces through a three-stage pipeline: (1) Short-term Memory Processing, which employs a deductive topic segmentation approach to demarcate episode boundaries and extract semantic representation; (2) Synaptic Memory Consolidation, a process that summarizes episodes into episodic memories before distilling them alongside semantics into user-specific traces; and (3) Systems Memory Consolidation, which utilizes two-stage hierarchical clustering to organize these traces into coherent, time-evolving narrative threads under unifying themes. These threads are encapsulated into structured user memory cards, forming narrative memory schemata. For memory utilization, we provide an agentic search mechanism to enhance reasoning process. Evaluation on the LoCoMo benchmark shows that TraceMem achieves state-of-the-art performance with a brain-inspired architecture. Analysis shows that by constructing coherent narratives, it surpasses baselines in multi-hop and temporal reasoning, underscoring its essential role in deep narrative comprehension. Additionally, we provide an open discussion on memory systems, offering our perspectives and future outlook on the field. Our code implementation is available at: https://github.com/YimingShu-teay/TraceMem

Quantum-Audit: Evaluating the Reasoning Limits of LLMs on Quantum Computing

Language models have become practical tools for quantum computing education and research, from summarizing technical papers to explaining theoretical concepts and answering questions about recent developments in the field. While existing benchmarks evaluate quantum code generation and circuit design, their understanding of quantum computing concepts has not been systematically measured. Quantum-Audit addresses this gap with 2,700 questions covering core quantum computing topics. We evaluate 26 models from leading organizations. Our benchmark comprises 1,000 expert-written questions, 1,000 questions extracted from research papers using LLMs and validated by experts, plus an additional 700 questions including 350 open-ended questions and 350 questions with false premises to test whether models can correct erroneous assumptions. Human participants scored between 23% and 86%, with experts averaging 74%. Top-performing models exceeded the expert average, with Claude Opus 4.5 reaching 84% accuracy, though top models showed an average 12-point accuracy drop on expert-written questions compared to LLM-generated ones. Performance declined further on advanced topics, dropping to 73% on security questions. Additionally, models frequently accepted and reinforced false premises embedded in questions instead of identifying them, with accuracy below 66% on these critical reasoning tasks.

AI-Assisted Scientific Assessment: A Case Study on Climate Change

The emerging paradigm of AI co-scientists focuses on tasks characterized by repeatable verification, where agents explore search spaces in 'guess and check' loops. This paradigm does not extend to problems where repeated evaluation is impossible and ground truth is established by the consensus synthesis of theory and existing evidence. We evaluate a Gemini-based AI environment designed to support collaborative scientific assessment, integrated into a standard scientific workflow. In collaboration with a diverse group of 13 scientists working in the field of climate science, we tested the system on a complex topic: the stability of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). Our results show that AI can accelerate the scientific workflow. The group produced a comprehensive synthesis of 79 papers through 104 revision cycles in just over 46 person-hours. AI contribution was significant: most AI-generated content was retained in the report. AI also helped maintain logical consistency and presentation quality. However, expert additions were crucial to ensure its acceptability: less than half of the report was produced by AI. Furthermore, substantial oversight was required to expand and elevate the content to rigorous scientific standards.

Don't Shoot The Breeze: Topic Continuity Model Using Nonlinear Naive Bayes With Attention

Utilizing Large Language Models (LLM) as chatbots in diverse business scenarios often presents the challenge of maintaining topic continuity. Abrupt shifts in topics can lead to poor user experiences and inefficient utilization of computational resources. In this paper, we present a topic continuity model aimed at assessing whether a response aligns with the initial conversation topic. Our model is built upon the expansion of the corresponding natural language understanding (NLU) model into quantifiable terms using a Naive Bayes approach. Subsequently, we have introduced an attention mechanism and logarithmic nonlinearity to enhance its capability to capture topic continuity. This approach allows us to convert the NLU model into an interpretable analytical formula. In contrast to many NLU models constrained by token limits, our proposed model can seamlessly handle conversations of any length with linear time complexity. Furthermore, the attention mechanism significantly improves the model's ability to identify topic continuity in complex conversations. According to our experiments, our model consistently outperforms traditional methods, particularly in handling lengthy and intricate conversations. This unique capability offers us an opportunity to ensure the responsible and interpretable use of LLMs.

Human Control Is the Anchor, Not the Answer: Early Divergence of Oversight in Agentic AI Communities

Oversight for agentic AI is often discussed as a single goal ("human control"), yet early adoption may produce role-specific expectations. We present a comparative analysis of two newly active Reddit communities in Jan--Feb 2026 that reflect different socio-technical roles: r/OpenClaw (deployment and operations) and r/Moltbook (agent-centered social interaction). We conceptualize this period as an early-stage crystallization phase, where oversight expectations form before norms reach equilibrium. Using topic modeling in a shared comparison space, a coarse-grained oversight-theme abstraction, engagement-weighted salience, and divergence tests, we show the communities are strongly separable (JSD =0.418, cosine =0.372, permutation $p=0.0005$). Across both communities, "human control" is an anchor term, but its operational meaning diverges: r/OpenClaw} emphasizes execution guardrails and recovery (action-risk), while r/Moltbook} emphasizes identity, legitimacy, and accountability in public interaction (meaning-risk). The resulting distinction offers a portable lens for designing and evaluating oversight mechanisms that match agent role, rather than applying one-size-fits-all control policies.

PERSPECTRA: A Scalable and Configurable Pluralist Benchmark of Perspectives from Arguments

Pluralism, the capacity to engage with diverse perspectives without collapsing them into a single viewpoint, is critical for developing large language models that faithfully reflect human heterogeneity. Yet this characteristic has not been carefully examined in the LLM research community and remains absent from most alignment studies. Debate-oriented sources provide a natural entry point for pluralism research. Previous work builds on online debate sources but remains constrained by costly human validation. Other debate-rich platforms such as Reddit and Kialo also offer promising material: Reddit provides linguistic diversity and scale but lacks clear argumentative structure, while Kialo supplies explicit pro/con graphs but remains overly concise and detached from natural discourse. We introduce PERSPECTRA, a pluralist benchmark that integrates the structural clarity of Kialo debate graphs with the linguistic diversity of real Reddit discussions. Using a controlled retrieval-and-expansion pipeline, we construct 3,810 enriched arguments spanning 762 pro/con stances on 100 controversial topics. Each opinion is expanded to multiple naturalistic variants, enabling robust evaluation of pluralism. We initialise three tasks with PERSPECTRA: opinion counting (identifying distinct viewpoints), opinion matching (aligning supporting stances and discourse to source opinions), and polarity check (inferring aggregate stance in mixed discourse). Experiments with state-of-the-art open-source and proprietary LLMs, highlight systematic failures, such as overestimating the number of viewpoints and misclassifying concessive structures, underscoring the difficulty of pluralism-aware understanding and reasoning. By combining diversity with structure, PERSPECTRA establishes the first scalable, configurable benchmark for evaluating how well models represent, distinguish, and reason over multiple perspectives.

DRAGON: Robust Classification for Very Large Collections of Software Repositories

The ability to automatically classify source code repositories with ''topics'' that reflect their content and purpose is very useful, especially when navigating or searching through large software collections. However, existing approaches often rely heavily on README files and other metadata, which are frequently missing, limiting their applicability in real-world large-scale settings. We present DRAGON, a repository classifier designed for very large and diverse software collections. It operates entirely on lightweight signals commonly stored in version control systems: file and directory names, and optionally the README when available. In repository classification at scale, DRAGON improves F1@5 from 54.8% to 60.8%, surpassing the state of the art. DRAGON remains effective even when README files are absent, with performance degrading by only 6% w.r.t. when they are present. This robustness makes it practical for real-world settings where documentation is sparse or inconsistent. Furthermore, many of the remaining classification errors are near misses, where predicted labels are semantically close to the correct topics. This property increases the practical value of the predictions in real-world software collections, where suggesting a few related topics can still guide search and discovery. As a byproduct of developing DRAGON, we also release the largest open dataset to date for repository classification, consisting of 825 thousand repositories with associated ground-truth topics, sourced from the Software Heritage archive, providing a foundation for future large-scale and language-agnostic research on software repository understanding.

MFN Decomposition and Related Metrics for High-Resolution Range Profiles Generative Models

High-resolution range profile (HRRP ) data are in vogue in radar automatic target recognition (RATR). With the interest in classifying models using HRRP, filling gaps in datasets using generative models has recently received promising contributions. Evaluating generated data is a challenging topic, even for explicit data like face images. However, the evaluation methods used in the state-ofthe-art of HRRP generation rely on classification models. Such models, called ''black-box'', do not allow either explainability on generated data or multi-level evaluation. This work focuses on decomposing HRRP data into three components: the mask, the features, and the noise. Using this decomposition, we propose two metrics based on the physical interpretation of those data. We take profit from an expensive dataset to evaluate our metrics on a challenging task and demonstrate the discriminative ability of those.

Do Neural Networks Lose Plasticity in a Gradually Changing World?

Continual learning has become a trending topic in machine learning. Recent studies have discovered an interesting phenomenon called loss of plasticity, referring to neural networks gradually losing the ability to learn new tasks. However, existing plasticity research largely relies on contrived settings with abrupt task transitions, which often do not reflect real-world environments. In this paper, we propose to investigate a gradually changing environment, and we simulate this by input/output interpolation and task sampling. We perform theoretical and empirical analysis, showing that the loss of plasticity is an artifact of abrupt tasks changes in the environment and can be largely mitigated if the world changes gradually.