让下一篇重要论文，不再错过。

Anomaly detection (AD) is a critical for trustworthy machine learning and scientific discovery. Existing methods typically define anomalies through local density, isolation heuristics, or distance from a fitted distribution, making them sensitive to neighborhood scale, partitioning choices, or restrictive distributional assumptions. In this work, we introduce a new paradigm by formulating anomaly detection from a diversity perspective. We propose the $\textit{Vendi Anomaly Score}$ (VAS), which detects anomalies by quantifying how much a sample changes the diversity of the dataset, as measured by the Vendi score, when removed. VAS captures both local redundancy and global data structure without relying on density estimation or partitioning heuristics. Moreover, VAS requires no hyperparameter tuning, instead adapting automatically to the spectral structure of the data. VAS is non-parametric and scales linearly with dataset size. Across 148 benchmark embedding datasets derived from 10 source datasets and 4 embedding architectures, VAS achieves state-of-the-art AD performance. We further validate VAS on large-scale ImageNet experiments, where it remains robust as both contamination rate and dataset scale increase.

Chat remains the default surface for many large language model (LLM) tasks, even as agentic tools such as OpenCode excel at coding and automation. Yet the model sees the current dialogue but not the workspace around it. We explore meta access---giving the assistant a structured, permissioned view of the interface itself and propose a ladder of levels: feature tutoring; metadata, settings, and preference access; retrieval over summaries and messages, confirmed mutation, and full orchestration. Meta access can turn a chat client from many screens into one entry point for finding, navigating, organising, and operating it, while raising risks around grounding, privacy, prompt injection, and trust. General-purpose agentic harnesses are runtimes; because they can change their own settings, meta access becomes reflexive and needs a separate control-plane boundary. We ground this in the Meta Chat prototype of the Chat AI client. It builds bounded context from, e.g., summaries, settings, and relevant messages; links references to conversations, topics, and personas; supports confirmed, reversible changes; offers a browsable tutorial library; and recommends personas as user-started conversations. By exposing application state in structured form, meta access can extend screen readers from widget descriptions to semantic workspace operations. Meta access thus turns chat from a window onto one conversation into a control layer for the whole workspace, extending chat toward agentic capability without surrendering user control. As assistants become embedded in IDEs, dashboards, office suites, and operating systems, AI-era interfaces should expose a structured, permissioned model of their state and capabilities, ideally by opening their existing metamodels through a debugger-like interface.

Coding agents are among the most economically consequential deployments of LLMs to date, making reliable evaluation increasingly important. Yet even benchmarks that are carefully validated at release can become stale. As models improve, they can discover valid solutions that existing verifiers reject, while changes to evaluation infrastructure can invalidate assumptions embedded in tasks and tests. We call the resulting accumulation of defects benchmark maintenance debt: a growing gap between benchmark scores and the capabilities they are intended to measure. We introduce a continuous-validation workflow for agentic benchmarks that combines community reports, task artifacts, agent traces, automated oracle checks, and human-gated repairs. We apply this workflow to Terminal-Bench 2.0, a benchmark that underwent extensive human and LM-assisted review and red-teaming before release. Our audit identifies issues in roughly 30% of the benchmark, and we release the resulting repairs as Terminal-Bench 2.1. These repairs change evaluation results: accuracy increased by over 10 percentage points and leaderboard positions move by up to three ranks, even as the overall ranking remains highly correlated (Spearman rho = 0.958). We evaluate how resource allocation shapes benchmark conclusions. We show that fixed wall-clock can materially change agent performance: For example, extending the time limit closes a 20pp harness gap on GPT 5.4 and shrinks a 30 pp gap on GPT 5.4 mini to 5 pp. Benchmark maintenance is therefore not only about repairing task artifacts: resource budgets are part of the measurement specification and must be validated alongside the tasks themselves. More broadly, benchmark maintenance debt is not just accumulated implementation bugs: our results show that as models improve, both evaluation assumptions and resource settings may need to be revalidated.

Generative creative interfaces routinely report the user's position within a space of possibilities. Such displays imply that the quantities shown were measured from the artefact; in a growing class of systems they are instead predicted by a language model describing its own output, and the two are indistinguishable on screen. Most creative domains lack an agreed measurement against which such a self-report can be checked; audio admits one. In a measurement study of a working LLM-driven timbre interface, what a user can cause proves separable from what the interface reports. The first is exactly characterisable: the reachable set is a zonotope in parameter space whose dimension increases by one per sound placed, so the space the model may act within is demonstrably the user's own. The second is inaccurate. The displayed position differs from measurement by approximately three times the width of that region, and the error has two independent sources: model-predicted coordinates, whose accuracy varies twofold between the two models evaluated, and the interpolation step, which arises from combining synthesiser parameters and is unaffected by model quality. End to end, 27 of 36 refinement instructions produced no perceptible change, and under the weaker model the facility performed no action while reporting convergence. Effective agency (what a user can cause) and epistemic agency (whether they can know it) are therefore separable and independently engineered: structurally enforced constraints survive model failure, whereas guarantees resting on the model's own report do not. The failure mode that remains is silence presented as success. We close with a short protocol for building and auditing such displays.

Law changes over time. A court decides a case under the law in force on that day, and legal QA benchmarks grade answers against today's law. We checked 156,650 decisions of four Thai courts. Up to 67% of them cite law that has since been amended or repealed. We introduce NitiBench+, the sequel of our NitiBench, a Thai legal QA benchmark with 1,670 items across 17 domains, built from decisions of three courts. For each cited section it holds both the text in force on the decision date and the current text, and its retrieval corpus holds every dated version of every Thai statute section. Answers are graded on the Thai Bar Council rubric, the Bar-standard score, and on the overlap between the cited sections and the court's. The report has two parts. Part I measures the cost of the wrong text on 13 open-weight models. Reading the current text of amended law drops the Bar-standard score by 0.25 and missing repealed law drops it by 0.79. The penalty comes from rule changes, 0.45 on the 428 rule-changed items and none on the 331 wording-only items, and Citation F1 does not see it. The text in force is the fair setting. Part II benchmarks today's models on that setting. A public leaderboard ranks 26 models on a held-out test split of 500 items stratified by domain, with a validation split of the same shape released for public use, from memory alone, with the court's sections provided, and as a retrieval agent over the law in force, with the cost per item and the hallucinated citations. The best model scores 7.78 out of 10 and the best open-weight model 6.39. Without a search tool only five open-weight models recall any Thai law, and with it twenty of the 26 models gain and six lose. Leaderboard will take new models as they are released. Legal benchmarks must track dates, and on the right text today's models still leave a wide gap on Thai law.