Search: “AI Paper Trail”

4 stories in the last 30d

SAEScientist-Bench tests whether AI agents can autonomously run SAE interpretability research on Gemma-2-9B-IT; frontier agents trail expert baselines.

The benchmark requires agents to design contrastive probes and navigate the Gemma Scope dictionary of over 131K features in Gemma-2-9B-IT to discover optimal interpretable features, scored against expert-curated references on Neuronpedia via activation rank, concept selectivity, and causal steering. Across 10 agent configurations and 20 tasks, frontier agents demonstrate genuine discovery capability and approach expert levels at separating target concepts from controls, but lag substantially in causal steering and frequently misinterpret experimental measurements. The authors frame this as establishing experimental model understanding as a measurable capability for closed-loop autonomous AI R&D and post-hoc monitoring for recursive self-improvement.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CLSep 8, 17:45 UTC · 8d agoAI research2

SAEScientist-Bench: Can AI Agents Conduct Autonomous SAE Interpretability Research?

SAEScientist-Bench evaluates whether AI agents can autonomously conduct SAE interpretability research in Gemma-2-9B-IT, finding frontier agents trail expert baselines.

SAEScientist-Bench tests if AI agents can act as scientists using SAE tools for autonomous mechanistic discovery, requiring them to design contrastive probes and navigate a Gemma Scope dictionary of 131K+ features in Gemma-2-9B-IT. Across 10 agent configurations and 20 tasks, frontier agents showed genuine discovery capability but remained well behind expert reference features, lagging most in causal steering. Agents frequently misinterpreted experimental measurements even when designing effective contrasts.

Hugging Face daily papersSep 7, 20:00 UTC · 9d agoAI research1

Unsolved Problem by Fields Medalist Breached by Two High School Students

Two high school students used Claude Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol to help solve an open Lorentzian polynomials problem, posting a 75-page arXiv proof.

Aayush Bathija and Prince Rohatgi of Oak Park High School, mentored by UCLA postdoc Daniel Soskin, published the 75-page paper 'Bounded Ratios for Lorentzian Polynomials' (arXiv 2609.05341), solving an open problem in Fields Medalist June Huh's Lorentzian polynomial theory. The main structural theorem extends bounded coefficient-ratio characterization from quadratic to arbitrary-degree polynomials via discrete convexity conditions. The students used Claude Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol for exploration and proof ideas but independently verified all arguments; the result follows an open letter from 25 Fields Medalists voicing concerns about AI's impact on mathematical rigor.

Hacker News · securitySep 14, 12:23 UTC · 3d agoAI research HN 22↑ · 19 comments

How well do agents use test/verification techniques?

Dan Luu's eval finds coding-agent testing instructions (TDD, formal methods, PBT, skills) mostly fail to beat defaults on Zstd implementation correctness.

The author ran 26 prompt conditions plus 4 skills on a Zstd-in-Rust implementation eval using codex with GPT-5.6, testing TDD, fuzzing, property-based testing, formal methods (Lean 4, TLA+, Verus, Kani, SMT solvers) and community skills. Nothing dramatically outperformed the default no-instruction condition, which did above average; at xhigh effort, fuzzing and PBT conditions did slightly better than formal methods. Pre-registered predictions included TDD underperforming and popular test skills (ECC, Hegel, Trail of Bits) not outperforming. Results are averages of 80 runs per condition plotted against cost.

Hacker News · securitySep 8, 02:58 UTC · 9d agoAI research HN 131↑ · 50 comments