Driven by our mission of "uplifting the world with memory," this paper explores the design concept of "memory" that is essential for achieving artificial superintelligence (ASI). Rather than proposing novel methods, we focus on several alternative approaches whose potential benefits are widely imaginable, yet have remained largely unexplored. The currently dominant paradigm, which can be termed "extract then store," involves extracting information judged to be useful from experiences and saving only the extracted content. However, this approach inherently risks the loss of information, as some valuable knowledge particularly for different tasks may be discarded in the extraction process. In contrast, we emphasize the "store then on-demand extract" approach, which seeks to retain raw experiences and flexibly apply them to various tasks as needed, thus avoiding such information loss. In addition, we highlight two further approaches: discovering deeper insights from large collections of probabilistic experiences, and improving experience collection efficiency by sharing stored experiences. While these approaches seem intuitively effective, our simple experiments demonstrate that this is indeed the case. Finally, we discuss major challenges that have limited investigation into these promising directions and propose research topics to address them.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are beginning to reshape how media professionals verify information, yet automated support for detecting check-worthy claims a key step in the fact-checking process remains limited. We introduce the Multi-Check-Worthy (MultiCW) dataset, a balanced multilingual benchmark for check-worthy claim detection spanning 16 languages, 7 topical domains, and 2 writing styles. It consists of 123,722 samples, evenly distributed between noisy (informal) and structured (formal) texts, with balanced representation of check-worthy and non-check-worthy classes across all languages. To probe robustness, we also introduce an equally balanced out-of-distribution evaluation set of 27,761 samples in 4 additional languages. To provide baselines, we benchmark 3 common fine-tuned multilingual transformers against a diverse set of 15 commercial and open LLMs under zero-shot settings. Our findings show that fine-tuned models consistently outperform zero-shot LLMs on claim classification and show strong out-of-distribution generalization across languages, domains, and styles. MultiCW provides a rigorous multilingual resource for advancing automated fact-checking and enables systematic comparisons between fine-tuned models and cutting-edge LLMs on the check-worthy claim detection task.
Modern datasets often contain ballast as redundant or low-utility information that increases dimensionality, storage requirements, and computational cost without contributing meaningful analytical value. This study introduces a generalized, multimodal framework for ballast detection and reduction across structured, semi-structured, unstructured, and sparse data types. Using diverse datasets, entropy, mutual information, Lasso, SHAP, PCA, topic modelling, and embedding analysis are applied to identify and eliminate ballast features. A novel Ballast Score is proposed to integrate these signals into a unified, cross-modal pruning strategy. Experimental results demonstrate that significant portions of the feature space as often exceeding 70% in sparse or semi-structured data, can be pruned with minimal or even improved classification performance, along with substantial reductions in training time and memory footprint. The framework reveals distinct ballast typologies (e.g. statistical, semantic, infrastructural), and offers practical guidance for leaner, more efficient machine learning pipelines.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as agents to solve complex tasks such as question answering (QA), scientific debate, and software development. A standard evaluation procedure aggregates multiple responses from LLM agents into a single final answer, often via majority voting, and compares it against reference answers. However, this process can obscure the quality and distributional characteristics of the original responses. In this paper, we propose a novel evaluation framework based on the empirical cumulative distribution function (ECDF) of cosine similarities between generated responses and reference answers. This enables a more nuanced assessment of response quality beyond exact match metrics. To analyze the response distributions across different agent configurations, we further introduce a clustering method for ECDFs using their distances and the $k$-medoids algorithm. Our experiments on a QA dataset demonstrate that ECDFs can distinguish between agent settings with similar final accuracies but different quality distributions. The clustering analysis also reveals interpretable group structures in the responses, offering insights into the impact of temperature, persona, and question topics.
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has been shown effective in enhancing the visual reflection and reasoning capabilities of Large Multimodal Models (LMMs). However, existing datasets are predominantly derived from either small-scale manual construction or recombination of prior resources, which limits data diversity and coverage, thereby constraining further gains in model performance. To this end, we introduce \textbf{DeepVision-103K}, a comprehensive dataset for RLVR training that covers diverse K12 mathematical topics, extensive knowledge points, and rich visual elements. Models trained on DeepVision achieve strong performance on multimodal mathematical benchmarks, and generalize effectively to general multimodal reasoning tasks. Further analysis reveals enhanced visual perception, reflection and reasoning capabilities in trained models, validating DeepVision's effectiveness for advancing multimodal reasoning. Data: \href{https://huggingface.co/datasets/skylenage/DeepVision-103K}{this url}.
Misclassifications in spam and phishing detection are very harmful, as false negatives expose users to attacks while false positives degrade trust. Existing uncertainty-based detectors can flag potential errors, but possibly be deceived and offer limited interpretability. This paper presents X-MAP, an eXplainable Misclassification Analysis and Profilling framework that reveals topic-level semantic patterns behind model failures. X-MAP combines SHAP-based feature attributions with non-negative matrix factorization to build interpretable topic profiles for reliably classified spam/phishing and legitimate messages, and measures each message's deviation from these profiles using Jensen-Shannon divergence. Experiments on SMS and phishing datasets show that misclassified messages exhibit at least two times larger divergence than correctly classified ones. As a detector, X-MAP achieves up to 0.98 AUROC and lowers the false-rejection rate at 95% TRR to 0.089 on positive predictions. When used as a repair layer on base detectors, it recovers up to 97% of falsely rejected correct predictions with moderate leakage. These results demonstrate X-MAP's effectiveness and interpretability for improving spam and phishing detection.
Large language models and LLM-based agents are increasingly used for cybersecurity tasks that are inherently dual-use. Existing approaches to refusal, spanning academic policy frameworks and commercially deployed systems, often rely on broad topic-based bans or offensive-focused taxonomies. As a result, they can yield inconsistent decisions, over-restrict legitimate defenders, and behave brittlely under obfuscation or request segmentation. We argue that effective refusal requires explicitly modeling the trade-off between offensive risk and defensive benefit, rather than relying solely on intent or offensive classification. In this paper, we introduce a content-based framework for designing and auditing cyber refusal policies that makes offense-defense tradeoffs explicit. The framework characterizes requests along five dimensions: Offensive Action Contribution, Offensive Risk, Technical Complexity, Defensive Benefit, and Expected Frequency for Legitimate Users, grounded in the technical substance of the request rather than stated intent. We demonstrate that this content-grounded approach resolves inconsistencies in current frontier model behavior and allows organizations to construct tunable, risk-aware refusal policies.
This paper introduces Perspectives, an interactive extension of the Discourse Analysis Tool Suite designed to empower Digital Humanities (DH) scholars to explore and organize large, unstructured document collections. Perspectives implements a flexible, aspect-focused document clustering pipeline with human-in-the-loop refinement capabilities. We showcase how this process can be initially steered by defining analytical lenses through document rewriting prompts and instruction-based embeddings, and further aligned with user intent through tools for refining clusters and mechanisms for fine-tuning the embedding model. The demonstration highlights a typical workflow, illustrating how DH researchers can leverage Perspectives's interactive document map to uncover topics, sentiments, or other relevant categories, thereby gaining insights and preparing their data for subsequent in-depth analysis.
We introduce Web-Scale Multimodal Summarization, a lightweight framework for generating summaries by combining retrieved text and image data from web sources. Given a user-defined topic, the system performs parallel web, news, and image searches. Retrieved images are ranked using a fine-tuned CLIP model to measure semantic alignment with topic and text. Optional BLIP captioning enables image-only summaries for stronger multimodal coherence.The pipeline supports features such as adjustable fetch limits, semantic filtering, summary styling, and downloading structured outputs. We expose the system via a Gradio-based API with controllable parameters and preconfigured presets.Evaluation on 500 image-caption pairs with 20:1 contrastive negatives yields a ROC-AUC of 0.9270, an F1-score of 0.6504, and an accuracy of 96.99%, demonstrating strong multimodal alignment. This work provides a configurable, deployable tool for web-scale summarization that integrates language, retrieval, and vision models in a user-extensible pipeline.
Measuring the relatedness between scientific publications is essential in many areas of bibliometrics and science policy. Controlled vocabularies provide a promising basis for measuring relatedness and are widely used in combination with Salton's cosine similarity. The latter is problematic because it only considers exact matches between terms. This article introduces two alternative methods - soft cosine and maximum term similarities - that account for the semantic similarity between non-matching terms. The article compares the accuracy of all three methods using the assignment of publications to topics in the TREC 2006 Genomics Track and the assumption that accurate relatedness measures should assign high relatedness scores to publication pairs within the same topic and low scores to pairs from separate topics. Results show that soft cosine is the most accurate method, while the most widely used version of Salton's cosine is markedly less accurate than the other methods tested. These findings have implications for how controlled vocabularies should be used to measure relatedness.