Daily Papers

Stronger AI agents do not automatically produce better organizations: teams must also learn which work arrangements to retain and when to reconsider them. We propose a modeling specification for recursive organization improvement and evaluate it through an executable checker, a public-record mapping, and controlled simulation. The specification connects actor-visible histories, organizational memory, decision rights, and evidence-carrying change contracts. The mechanism study crosses six decision rules, three memory conditions, and three task environments under fixed resource ceilings. In a stationary environment, cumulative evidence raises balanced evaluation's normalized net value per task from 0.45224 to 0.48007. Repeated reassessment's disadvantage relative to this comparator falls from 0.01702 with reset evidence to 0.00007 with cumulative evidence. A reversal of the best workflow reveals the opposite cost: indefinite retention delays adaptation, while a finite window restores eventual performance at a transition cost. In exploratory controls, matching trial acquisition and label reuse reduces the apparent reassessment gain from 0.00607 to 0.00191. Program replacement adds no stable benefit across the tested reversal times. The study identifies evidence acquisition, reuse, and timely updating as mechanisms that must be separated from evaluator replacement when assessing organizational improvement.

Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models have shown strong generalization in robotic manipulation by combining semantic knowledge from pretrained vision-language models with expressive action-generation policies. Diffusion-based action generators are particularly effective for modeling temporally coherent action chunks, but these chunks are typically executed open-loop after inference. This limits responsiveness when objects move, contacts change, or the scene evolves during execution. We propose VLA-Feedback, a two-timescale architecture that combines low-frequency diffusion planning with high-frequency visual feedback. Rather than fully denoising an action chunk before execution, VLA-Feedback retains its final denoising step as a lightweight feedback interface, allowing each action to be corrected using the latest observation before it is executed. This design preserves the expressiveness of the diffusion planner while enabling real-time action correction without rerunning the full vision-language diffusion model. VLA-Feedback matched GR00T on static LIBERO tasks while improving average success on dynamic simulation tasks from 27.5% to 85.0%. On real-robot tasks, it improved average success from 51% to 73%. Additional materials can be found on our project page: https://vla-feedback.github.io.

Commercial contracts are known to be a valuable source for deriving project-specific requirements. However, contract negotiations mainly occur among the legal counsel of the parties involved. The participation of non-legal stakeholders, including requirement analysts, engineers, and solution architects, whose primary responsibility lies in ensuring the seamless implementation of contractual terms, is often indirect and inadequate. Consequently, a significant number of sentences in contractual clauses, though legally accurate, can appear unfair from an implementation perspective to non-legal stakeholders. This perception poses a problem since requirements indicated in the clauses are obligatory and can involve punitive measures and penalties if not implemented as committed in the contract. Therefore, the identification of potentially unfair clauses in contracts becomes crucial. In this work, we conduct an empirical study to analyze the perspectives of different stakeholders regarding contractual fairness. We then investigate the ability of Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) to identify unfairness in contractual sentences by comparing chain of thought prompting and semi-supervised fine-tuning approaches. Using BERT-based fine-tuning, we achieved an accuracy of 84% on a dataset consisting of proprietary contracts. It outperformed chain of thought prompting using Vicuna-13B by a margin of 9%.

Foundation-model features are increasingly used to ask what information neural activity represents, often by comparing prediction gains between nested encoding models. We show that such multimodal contrasts can change sign when only the conditioning predictor is reconstructed. Using fMRI from the Natural Scenes Dataset, DINOv2 visual features, and MPNet embeddings of MS COCO captions and Localized Narratives, a caption-narrative contrast in the additional predictive contribution of vision favors narratives when one short caption is compared with a long narrative (+0.012/+0.015 in Places), but favors captions after approximate word-count matching (-0.031/-0.023). The shift occurs across every measured ROI in both subjects and is driven primarily by differences in language-only prediction. Comparable contrasts also survive removal of image-specific content-word identity in several ROIs. These results show that nested neural contrasts do not identify represented content by themselves: predictor construction is part of the experimental design, and matched controls are required for representational claims.

A coding agent combines a model with a harness, which decides what the model sees, which tools it can use, and how the work continues. We ask whether changing the harness changes the result when the model and task stay fixed. We compare two configurations of the same harness on three coding benchmarks. The control supplies the full conversation in time order, while the treatment keeps the same record but mechanically shortens older tool results as the context fills and responds to repeated or stalled work. Under tight context, the treatment raises mean per-task fail-to-pass fraction (F2PF) in all three pressure comparisons and increases complete solutions on SWE-bench Verified and SWE-bench Pro. The tight-window Verified comparison uses 169 tasks, a 20,480-token window, and a fixed 480-second attempt endpoint; on this cohort, treatment raises mean per-task F2PF from 28 percent to 49 percent and complete solutions from 43 to 72. Without model-specific retuning, the same frozen treatment also raises both endpoints on the same cohort for three additional models with different designs. In the wide-window Qwen3.6 comparisons, observed arm outcomes are close on Verified and Pro, while FeatureBench retains a higher mean per-task F2PF under treatment. On the wide-window Verified cohort, treatment also serves fewer prompt tokens per turn. Because changing the harness changed what unchanged model weights could accomplish, coding-agent evaluations should treat the model and harness together as the tested solver.

We study principal-agent problems in which a principal commits to an outcome-dependent payment scheme -- called contract -- in order to induce an agent to take a costly, unobservable action leading to favorable outcomes. We consider a generalization of the classical (single-round) version of the problem in which the principal interacts with the agent by committing to contracts over multiple rounds. The principal has no information about the agent, and they have to learn an optimal contract by only observing the outcome realized at each round. We focus on settings in which the size of the agent's action space is small. We design an algorithm that learns an approximately-optimal contract with high probability in a number of rounds polynomial in the size of the outcome space, when the number of actions is constant. Our algorithm solves an open problem by Zhu et al.[2022]. Moreover, it can also be employed to provide a mathcal{O}(T^{4/5}) regret bound in the related online learning setting in which the principal aims at maximizing their cumulative utility, thus considerably improving previously-known regret bounds.