Opening — Why this matters now Multi‑agent AI systems are having a moment. Debate, reflection, consensus — all the cognitive theater we associate with human committees is now being reenacted by clusters of large language models. In finance, that sounds reassuring. Multiple agents, multiple perspectives, fewer blind spots. Or so the story goes. This paper politely ruins that assumption. ...
Opening — Why this matters now Healthcare AI has a credibility problem. Models boast benchmark-breaking accuracy, yet quietly fall apart when moved from lab notebooks to hospital workflows. Latency, human-in-the-loop bottlenecks, and fragile classifiers all conspire against real-world deployment. Leukemia diagnosis—especially Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL)—sits right in the crosshairs of this tension: early detection saves lives, but manual microscopy is slow, subjective, and error-prone. ...
Opening — Why this matters now Text-to-image was a party trick. Text-to-3D became a demo. Text-to-something you can actually assemble is where the stakes quietly change. As generative AI spills into engineering, manufacturing, and robotics, the uncomfortable truth is this: most AI-generated objects are visually plausible but physically useless. They look right, but they don’t fit, don’t connect, and certainly don’t come with instructions a human can follow. ...
Opening — Why this matters now Circular economy rhetoric is everywhere. Circular economy decision-making is not. Most end-of-life products still follow a depressingly simple rule: disassemble until it hurts, or stop when the operator gets tired. The idea that we might formally decide when to stop disassembling — based on value, cost, safety, and information — remains oddly underdeveloped. This gap is no longer academic. EV batteries, e‑waste, and regulated industrial equipment are forcing operators to choose between speed, safety, and sustainability under real constraints. ...
Opening — Why this matters now For years, AGI safety discussions have revolved around a single, looming figure: the model. One system. One alignment problem. One decisive moment. That mental model is tidy — and increasingly wrong. The paper “Distributional AGI Safety” argues that AGI is far more likely to emerge not as a monolith, but as a collective outcome: a dense web of specialized, sub‑AGI agents coordinating, trading capabilities, and assembling intelligence the way markets assemble value. AGI, in this framing, is not a product launch. It is a phase transition. ...
Opening — Why this matters now LLM compression is having an identity crisis. On one side, we have brute-force pragmatists: quantize harder, prune deeper, pray nothing important breaks. On the other, we have theoreticians insisting that something essential is lost — coherence, memory, truthfulness — but offering little beyond hand-waving and validation benchmarks. As LLMs creep toward edge deployment — embedded systems, on-device assistants, energy‑capped inference — this tension becomes existential. You can’t just say “it seems fine.” You need guarantees. Or at least something better than vibes. ...
Opening — Why this matters now We are deploying black-box AI systems faster than we are understanding them. Large language models, vision–language agents, and robotic controllers are increasingly asked to do things, not just answer questions. And yet, when these systems fail, the failure is rarely spectacular—it is subtle, conditional, probabilistic, and deeply context-dependent. ...
Opening — Why this matters now The AI alignment debate has a familiar rhythm: align the values first, deploy later. Sensible, reassuring—and increasingly detached from reality. In practice, we are already delegating consequential decisions to systems we do not fully understand, let alone perfectly align. Trading algorithms rebalance portfolios, recommendation engines steer attention, and autonomous agents negotiate, schedule, and filter on our behalf. The real question is no longer “Is the AI aligned?” but “Is it aligned enough to justify delegation, given what it can do better than us?” ...
Opening — Why this matters now Large language models don’t think—but they do accumulate influence. And that accumulation is exactly where most explainability methods quietly give up. As LLMs move from single-shot text generators into multi-step reasoners, agents, and decision-making systems, we increasingly care why an answer emerged—not just what token attended to what prompt word. Yet most attribution tools still behave as if each generation step lives in isolation. That assumption is no longer just naïve; it is actively misleading. ...
Opening — Why this matters now As LLM agents graduate from clever chatbots to decision‑making systems, their failures are becoming less amusing and more expensive. We are no longer talking about wrong trivia answers; we are talking about broken schedules, invalid plans, unsafe workflows, and agents confidently violating constraints they were never told—explicitly—not to break. ...