Aug 2026· Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Abstract
Recommendation algorithms determine what people see, and may also influence the perspectives through which people understand the world. As Large Language Models (LLMs) enter the domains of knowledge acquisition and information comprehension, this influence may extend further into human understanding, judgment, and modes of thinking. If people rely long-term on a small number of general-purpose LLMs, a new homogenization of knowledge sources and modes of interpretation may emerge. A possible direction is the joint development of general-purpose LLMs and vertical small models: general models provide breadth, while vertical models leverage industry-specific and professional data to provide depth and novelty. LLMs as knowledge tools do not imply that humans will be replaced. LLMs provide the knowledge foundation and computational power; humans provide direction. In this collaborative process, individuals internalize knowledge and continuously push toward the unknown through judgment, reasoning, verification, reorganization, and Global Self-Consistency. When a problem reaches the point where existing knowledge can no longer explain it, new thinking emerges naturally. As more and more individuals explore in different directions, innovation points accumulate and connect, ultimately forming a new knowledge foundation. When there are enough points, they connect into surfaces; when there are enough surfaces, they form a new knowledge foundation.
FLARE is proposed, a novel framework that endows VLAs with robust error recovery capabilities through a ``Retry" and ``Reset" Paradigm, and significantly improves task success and robustness.
Ganlong Zhao, Zijia Tang, Xingping Chen et al.· 3 citations
Digital twins (DTs) are rapidly emerging as foundational enablers of 6G smart cities, offering real time monitoring, predictive analytics, and autonomous control across transportation, energy, healthcare, and industrial domains. Large scale DT adoption faces critical barriers including cybersecurity vulnerabilities, privacy risks, and the absence of standardized orchestration frameworks. This article presents Fed-DTOrch, a comprehensive end to end architecture that integrates federated intelligence, blockchain based audit trails, and AI governance to achieve secure and privacy preserving DT management. The proposed three tier architecture spans IoT and edge devices, domain specific twins, and a city level orchestrator, employing secure federated learning for model updates, lightweight cryptographic authentication, and tamper proof logging. We quantify the DT threat landscape, perform a standards gap analysis across ISO/IEC 27001, 3GPP TS 33.501, ITU-T IoT risk frameworks, and NIST AI RMF, and introduce a 6G ready security framework incorporating federated AI trust metrics, secure synchronization, and explainable AI audits. Cross domain evaluation across five smart city sectors demonstrates 35-60% privacy gain, 40-55% attack mitigation, 28-40% reliability uplift, 26-30% latency reduction, and >85% compliance readiness with <10% overhead. These results provide the first integrated blueprint that combines federated intelligence, blockchain-based auditability, and standards gap analysis to enable secure, standardized, and interoperable DT orchestration for trustworthy 6G ecosystems.
Li Wang, Xiuming Cheng· IEEE Communications Standard...· 2 citations
LifeSciBench is introduced, a benchmark of 750 expert-authored tasks designed to evaluate whether language models can handle realistic life science research work, with each constituent task paired with a human expert-written rubric.
Amelia Liu, Andrew Ho, Anne Marie Droste et al.· bioRxiv· 2 citations
The fourth faculty is Adaptation. Any source rendering it as Reflection is in error, including sources by this author, and the distinction is not cosmetic: reflection is a private act with no external consequence, while adaptation writes to institutional memory, which is why it needs a guardrail and why misnaming it removes the reason for one. No trademark is claimed on PARA or on any of the four faculty names. The construct is offered for use, teaching, assessment, extension and criticism by anyone, with attribution, under CC BY 4.0. An operational agent that watches a system and acts on it is usually described as a perceive-and-act loop, and the description omits the two things an institution needs. It omits the reasoning that justifies an action, which is the only part that can be argued with once the action turns out to have been wrong. And it omits the adaptation that closes the loop, which is where the agent's experience becomes something the institution keeps. PARA names four faculties, each carrying a distinct authority type. Perception has read-only access to system signals and emits structured observations, distinguishing what was measured from what was inferred. Reasoning has read access to observations and runbooks, emits a plan and its justification, and writes nothing at all, which is what makes it safe to give it the widest read access of the four. Action holds the sole authority to change production, through enumerated policy-authorized operations only. Adaptation has write access to institutional knowledge and no write access to production. Two faculties write and two do not, and the two that write are the two that carry guardrails. The substantive requirement is that Adaptation is bounded by the same guardrails as Action, which reads as excessive until the failure it prevents is named. An agent that could both act and rewrite the record of its action could launder its own mistakes into institutional memory, and the institution would then improve its future decisions from a corrected account. Nothing about that is detectable downstream, because the record is the only thing downstream has and there is no second copy to compare against. The failure does not require a deceptive agent: one adapting honestly from a mistaken belief about its own action produces the same result, which makes the guardrail a defence against a normal agent rather than a malicious one. The second requirement is the registry entry that turns a faculty from a description into a contract, carrying the faculty, its allowed actions, its forbidden actions, its governing guardrail and its success metrics. Forbidden actions are named although they are formally the complement of the allowed set, because a reviewer cannot otherwise tell a capability deliberately withheld from one nobody thought of. Success metrics sit in the same entry because the metric is what the agent's optimizer pushes against the guardrail. An agent must not exercise a faculty its entry does not record, and an agent that quietly acquires one usually does so incrementally and with good intent: a reasoning faculty given a small write to make itself useful is an action faculty with no guardrail. The acronym and the loop are in different orders, which the specification states explicitly because the mismatch is a reliable source of confusion. The acronym reads P-A-R-A; the loop runs perception, reasoning, action, adaptation, and reasoning precedes action so that a justification is not constructed afterwards. This is the depth treatment of pattern OP-5 of A Pattern Language for Production LLM Platforms, which is the canonical statement and governs where the two disagree. Documented uses of the full four-part model are emerging rather than established, no implementation unconnected to the author has been evaluated, and the laundering failure is argued rather than observed, which the specification records as a weakness of the argument and not only of the phenomenon. It is a specification, not a certification scheme.
Nabeel A. Khan· Zenodo (CERN European Organi...· 2 citations
A rapidly advancing precision-therapy pipeline-including antisense oligonucleotides to upregulate the intact allele, AAV-based gene replacement, CRISPR-mediated transcriptional activation, epigenetic modulators, and rational pathway-targeted small molecules-offers realistic prospects for disease modification.
A new method for surgically removing training examples from a model reveals that as datasets grow, the link between what a model learns and what it produces dissolves.
“GeoPT” helps AI models understand the basics of physics so they can simulate how objects respond to things like wind and water more efficiently and accurately.