Cover image

Benchmarks with Benefits: What DeepScholar-Bench Really Measures

TL;DR DeepScholar-Bench introduces a live (continuously refreshable) benchmark and a holistic automated evaluation for generative research synthesis. Its reference pipeline, DeepScholar‑base, is simple yet competitive. The headline: today’s best systems organize text well but miss key facts, under-retrieve important sources, and fail verifiability at scale. That’s not a death knell—it’s a roadmap. Why this matters for business readers Enterprise “research copilots” promise to digest the live web, summarize options, and provide auditable citations. In practice, three gaps keep showing up: ...

August 30, 2025 · 5 min · Zelina
Cover image

Edge of Reason: Orchestrating LLMs Without a Conductor

TL;DR Most multi‑agent LLM frameworks still rely on a central organizer that becomes expensive, rigid, and a single point of failure. Symphony proposes a fully decentralized runtime—a capability ledger, a beacon‑based selection protocol, and weighted Chain‑of‑Thought (CoT) voting—to coordinate lightweight 7B‑class models on consumer GPUs. In benchmarks (BBH, AMC), Symphony outperforms centralized baselines like AutoGen and CrewAI, narrowing the gap across model quality and adding fault tolerance with ~negligible orchestration overhead. ...

August 30, 2025 · 5 min · Zelina
Cover image

Faking It to Make It: When Synthetic Data Actually Works

The latest tutorial by Li, Huang, Li, Zhou, Zhang, and Liu surveys how GANs, diffusion models, and LLMs now mass‑produce synthetic text, tables, graphs, time series, and images for data‑mining workloads. That’s the supply side. The demand side—execs asking “will this improve my model and keep us compliant?”—is where most projects stall. This piece extracts a decision framework from the tutorial and extends it with business‑grade evaluation and governance so you can decide when synthetic data is a shortcut—and when it’s a trap. ...

August 30, 2025 · 5 min · Zelina
Cover image

Preference Chains of Command: Making LLM Agents Pick Like People

The gist Most “LLM agents for cities” sound magical until you ask them a basic planning question—which mode would this person actually take at 8am in Cambridge? This paper’s answer is refreshingly concrete: put a belief–desire–intention (BDI) graph around the agent, retrieve analogous people and contexts (Graph RAG), score paths through that graph to get prior choice probabilities, then let the LLM remodel those priors with current conditions (weather, time, place). The authors call this a Preference Chain. ...

August 25, 2025 · 5 min · Zelina
Cover image

Spin Doctors: Why RL Fine‑Tuning Mostly Rotates, Not Reinvents

The short of it Reinforcement‑learning fine‑tuning (RL‑FT) often looks like magic: you SFT a model until it aces your dataset, panic when it forgets math or coding edge cases, then run PPO and—voilà—generalization returns. A new paper argues the mechanism isn’t mystical at all: RL‑FT mostly rotates a model’s learned directions back toward broadly useful features, rather than unlocking novel capabilities. In practical terms, cheap surgical resets (shallow layers or top‑rank components) can recover much of that OOD skill without running an expensive RL pipeline. ...

August 25, 2025 · 5 min · Zelina
Cover image

Stackelbergs & Stakeholders: Turning Bits into Boardroom Moves

TL;DR: BusiAgent proposes a client‑centric, multi‑agent LLM framework that formalizes roles (CEO/CFO/CTO/MM/PM) with an extended Continuous‑Time MDP, coordinates them via entropy‑guided brainstorming (peer‑level) and multi‑level Stackelberg games (vertical), and squeezes extra performance from contextual Thompson sampling for prompt optimization—wrapped in a QA stack that fuses STM/LTM memories with a knowledge base. It’s a serious attempt to connect granular analytics to boardroom decisions. The big win is organizational alignment; the big risks are evaluation rigor, token economics, and ops reliability at scale. ...

August 24, 2025 · 5 min · Zelina
Cover image

USB‑C for Agents, Stress‑Tested: What MCP‑Universe Really Reveals

The pitch: a unified plug—and a tougher test The Model Context Protocol (MCP) is often described as the “USB‑C of AI tools”: one standardized way for agents to talk to external services (maps, finance data, browsers, repos, etc.). MCP‑Universe, a new benchmark from Salesforce AI Research, finally stress‑tests that idea with real MCP servers rather than toy mocks. It derives success from execution outcomes, not multiple‑choice guesswork—exactly what enterprises need to trust automation. ...

August 23, 2025 · 4 min · Zelina
Cover image

Quants With a Plan: Agentic Workflows That Outtrade AutoML

If AutoML is a fast car, financial institutions need a train with tracks—a workflow that knows where it’s going, logs every switch, and won’t derail when markets regime-shift. A new framework called TS-Agent proposes exactly that: a structured, auditable, LLM-driven agent that plans model development for financial time series instead of blindly searching. Unlike generic AutoML, TS-Agent formalizes modeling as a multi-stage decision process—Model Pre-selection → Code Refinement → Fine-tuning—and anchors each step in domain-curated knowledge banks and reflective feedback from real runs. The result is not just higher accuracy; it’s traceability and consistency that pass governance sniff tests. ...

August 20, 2025 · 5 min · Zelina
Cover image

Keys to the Kingdom: How LLMs Can Audit Crypto Logic Before It Breaks

We’ve gotten good at spotting API misuse in crypto code (think “don’t use ECB,” “don’t hardcode IVs”). But many production failures don’t come from the obvious API call—they’re born in the logic that surrounds it: the parameter checks, corner-case math, and brittle “optimizations.” That’s where CryptoScope steps in: an LLM-powered framework that reads crypto code like a human auditor, guided by a domain corpus and structured prompts, to uncover logic-level vulnerabilities without executing the code. ...

August 18, 2025 · 4 min · Zelina
Cover image

Knows the Facts, Misses the Plot: LLMs’ Knowledge–Reasoning Split in Clinical NLI

The gist A new clinical natural language inference (NLI) benchmark isolates what models know from how they reason—and the results are stark. State‑of‑the‑art LLMs ace targeted fact checks (≈92% accuracy) but crater on the actual reasoning tasks (≈25% accuracy). The collapse is most extreme in compositional grounding (≈4% accuracy), where a claim depends on multiple interacting clinical constraints (e.g., drug × dose × diagnosis × schedule). Scaling yielded fluent prose, not reliable inference. ...

August 18, 2025 · 4 min · Zelina