让下一篇重要论文，不再错过。

Neural networks are increasingly studied not merely as predictive systems, but as complex systems whose internal computations are themselves objects of scientific inquiry. Recent progress in mechanistic interpretability (MI) has made it possible to identify neurons, features, circuits, population structures, and dynamical patterns associated with model behavior. As these tools improve, attention is shifting from what can be observed inside a model to how those observations support mechanistic explanations. We examine the parallel efforts of neuroscience and MI to address this question and identify recurring inferential bottlenecks when inferring mechanisms from complex neural systems. We propose five principles and organize them into a recursive logic for a more rigorous procedure of mechanistic inference. These principles provide a framework that supports scientific discovery in two senses: it helps turn local interpretability findings into cumulative knowledge of mechanisms within models, and it makes those mechanisms sufficiently precise to generate testable hypotheses about domains beyond the models. Evidence beyond MI is ultimately required to establish what model mechanisms reveal about the world.

We introduce Sage-Taiyi, a metacognition-inspired architecture that uses accumulated scientific understanding to guide what to investigate next and how to investigate it. Through explicit monitoring and control, the system revises its understanding of evidence, assumptions, and unresolved questions, then uses these assessments to adapt research targets and select reusable reasoning methods. On Taiyi-Bench, an AI co-scientist ideation benchmark comprising 265 tasks from 50 papers across ten disciplines, Sage-Taiyi ranks first on all eight metrics of historical rediscovery and open-ended ideation, achieving an Overall score of 54.0 compared with 47.9 for the strongest baseline, AI Scientist-v2. It also performs well on two external scientific ideation benchmarks. Five expert-guided collaborations further connect its proposals to experimental and computational validation across chemistry, materials science, and engineering. In chemistry, reaction-condition optimization raises the yield of cobalt-catalyzed carbonylation from trace amounts to 84% and photocatalytic allylic amination from 13% to 69%. These results support metacognitive regulation as an approach to scientific ideation and its progression toward practical validation.

Mathematical discovery requires preserving partial ideas and the evidence supporting their reuse. We present Ansatz, a research harness whose continual graph memory separates model-accepted claims and dependencies from curated exploration, and Ansatze, a community platform for inspecting, guiding and checking this work. On First Proof, Ansatz recorded nine local verifier closures in each of two ten-problem batches; a partial result in the Second Batch also counted as a pass under the study's criterion. These model-assessed outcomes include continued searches and differ from expert validation. Component studies and re-review expose disagreements and their dependency reach. Open-problem investigations produced candidate results, with five Lean formalizations reported. The platform connects problem discovery, research records, manuscript analysis and formal checking while preserving distinct evidence states. Together, these systems support cumulative human-AI research through persistent investigation and inspectable contributions.

Financial backtests of large language models (LLMs) are meaningful only if the model did not already know the outcomes it is asked to predict. Practitioners guard against this by trusting a vendor's stated knowledge cutoff, by asking the model what it knows, or by instructing it to answer as of a past date. To verify whether any of these safeguards can be trusted, we introduce FinDendro, a benchmark of 2,226 dated U.S. facts from 1999 to 2026, covering monthly macroeconomic series, month-end stock prices and Federal Reserve decisions. Each fact yields four prompts: a value question, Recall and Predict questions that pair each candidate value with a claim of knowing or guessing without a declared date, and a Predict question with a historical declared date. Controls for persistence and dominant outcomes keep chance accuracy near 0.27. Results show that for most frontier models, self-reports understate knowledge. GPT-5 answers 76% of controlled facts correctly but claims to know 38%, and answers 61% of the facts it says it does not know. Knowledge claims can persist beyond the measured knowledge boundary, by up to seven quarters, and a declared date removes most of the claims of prior knowledge while leaving accuracy unchanged. Backtests inside a model's training window therefore cannot be certified leak-free by self-report, instruction or stated cutoff. These findings motivate behavioral measurement of temporal knowledge boundaries, and FinDendro provides a benchmark and procedure for selecting backtest periods based on demonstrated factual knowledge.