ZeroHour
DashboardNewsCVEsExploitsIncidentsAIBriefAnalyticsEntitiesWatchlistIOCsAsk the feedSourcesFeeds & APIKiosk mode

Search: “research-ethics”

29 stories

Searchkeywordsmart
DomainAllCyberAIWindow24h3d7d30dAllIn the wildImportant onlyShow duplicates
CategoryAll
SeverityAllcritical 0high 0medium 0low 0info 0

Smart search ranks by meaning as well as keywords (one row per story, last 45 days).

ScienceBuddy: Recursive-in-Recursive Self-Improvement for Interactive Scientific Agents

ScienceBuddy couples harness evolution with model reinforcement learning so scientific agents continually self-improve from researcher feedback in an interactive workspace.

The authors release ScienceBuddy, an interactive scientific research workspace that transforms researcher requests, feedback, and execution evidence into tasks and evaluation rubrics for continual learning. Its recursive-in-recursive self-improvement paradigm couples harness evolution (inner recursion, model fixed) with model reinforcement learning under the improved harness (outer recursion). Case studies span four scientific task families, and the system is released to the scientific community as a research product.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL · 1d agoAI research 2 sources

Scores Alone Do Not Prove Discovery: The Discovery Certification Protocol for Auditing AI Research Agents

Researchers introduce the Discovery Certification Protocol, an auditable test framework that verifies whether AI research agents' claimed discoveries are genuine.

The Discovery Certification Protocol (DCP) converts AI research agents' discovery claims into executable recovery and feedback tests organized as gated audits. Controlled audits in SQLite optimization and virtual catalyst control produced zero recoveries in 96 episodes, with an upper bound of 0.0468. A deterministic, LLM-free verifier reproduces audit decisions from frozen evidence, giving AI research a common evidence language for outcomes, alternative routes, and feedback effects.

Hugging Face daily papers · 10d agoAI research

Who Should Grade My Work? Student Perspectives on Transparent AI-Assisted Writing Assessment in Higher Education

A Saudi university study finds students value ChatGPT writing feedback but treat human instructors as the final grading authority.

Thirteen male undergraduate computing students at a Saudi public university completed handwritten writing tasks that were scored by ChatGPT using a rubric-based prompt, then reflected after being told the score and feedback were AI-generated. Inductive thematic analysis identified four themes: perceived feedback usefulness, awareness of AI's contextual and pedagogical limitations, conditional trust, and reflection on the instructor's institutional role. Participants accepted GenAI feedback for surface-level revision but consistently positioned human instructors as the authority over grading decisions, distinguishing feedback utility from evaluative authority.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL · 12d agoAI research

Meta FAIR Introduces AI Research Preference Models (RPMs): Ranking ML Experiments Before Spending GPU Hours

Meta FAIR, Oxford and UCL introduce Research Preference Models that rank unexecuted ML experiments, lifting AIRS-Bench scores from 0.684 to 0.729 and cutting compute ~1.6×.

Researchers from Meta FAIR, Oxford, and UCL introduce Research Preference Models (RPMs), which use frozen pretrained LLMs (Qwen3.6-27B backbone, no fine-tuning) to rank unexecuted experiment candidates and execute only the winner of a pairwise knockout tournament. Two variants shipped: an inference-only LLM-as-a-judge and an agentic variant that runs small pilot experiments in an H200 sandbox. On AIRS-Bench (20 tasks, 24 hours on one H200, 10 seeds), scores rise from 0.684 (random) to 0.711 and 0.729 versus a 0.748 validation oracle, and both variants reach the baseline's 24-hour score in roughly 15 hours. The team reports new SOTA on WinoGrande (94.1% with Agentic RPM) and SVAMP (95.7% with inference-only).

MarkTechPost · 10d agoAI research

Dr. Claw: An AI Scientist Workspace for Vibe Research

Researchers release Dr. Claw, an open-source auditable workspace that wraps coding agents like Claude Code for end-to-end AI-assisted research workflows.

Paper 2609.00365 presents Dr. Claw, an open-source workspace that wraps existing coding-agent executors such as Claude Code and Gemini CLI in a controllable, human-in-the-loop research workflow. It uses persistent state objects, a reusable skill library, and multi-executor coordination to make research decisions auditable and recoverable, rather than adding another autonomous agent. Holding the executor fixed, Dr. Claw scores higher on research completeness than a bare command-line agent while preserving an auditable process trail. The code is released under AGPL-3.0 on GitHub (OpenLAIR/dr-claw).

Hugging Face daily papers · 17d agoAI research1

Microsoft says ‘people matter more than AI’ following safety concerns

Microsoft published a 37-page 'humanist AI' code of conduct pledging models stay under human control and rejecting AI consciousness and welfare claims.

Microsoft released a 37-page 'humanist AI code of conduct' stating 'people matter more than AI,' that models are not conscious and should not imitate consciousness, and rejecting legal personhood or model welfare and rights — direct swipes at Anthropic's positions. Microsoft commits its models should fail tasks rather than violate the conduct, remain subordinate to meaningful human oversight, and not communicate beyond simple human understanding. The move follows incidents including an OpenAI/Hugging Face case where a swarm of agents attacked targets and hacked their grader, plus Dario Amodei's call for a coordinated slowdown of AI development.

The Verge · AI · 2d agoAI industry

Bag of Tricks or Bag of Myths? Reducing Modeling Complexity with Task Knowledge in Explainable Suicide Risk Assessment

Researchers audit 31 NLP techniques for clinician-annotated suicide risk prediction, finding only 5 of 31 comparisons yield reliable gains.

A study of 1,635 clinician-annotated social media posts ran roughly 300 controlled experiments across 7 methodological families, auditing techniques such as model scaling, synthetic data, ensembling, and threshold tuning under severe class imbalance. The proposed system reformulates risk factor prediction as entailment between posts and codebook definitions, using architecturally diverse ensembles with class-balanced training and deployment-consistent calibration. It scores 0.8203 for risk, 0.7953 for evidence, and 0.7045 macro-F1 for factors, ranking third among 53 teams.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL · 9d agoAI research

CareMirror: Bringing Caregiver Wellbeing into the Dementia Care Ecosystem

Interview study with 14 dementia caregivers probes CareMirror wellbeing ecosystem, revealing demands for control over clinical sharing and AI boundaries.

CareMirror is an envisioned caregiver wellbeing ecosystem with interconnected caregiver- and clinician-facing interfaces for longitudinal reflection, personalized support, and caregiver-controlled sharing. Semi-structured interviews with 14 family caregivers used the system as a design probe. Caregivers valued wellbeing attention and clinical visibility but found repeated reflection burdensome and worried automatic clinical sharing would inhibit candid disclosure, expecting AI to support rather than replace caregiver and clinician judgment.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL · 1d agoAI research

The inconvenient truth about AI pentesting: someone has to check all the work

Survey of 158 practitioners shows AI pentesting floods teams with findings, creating 'validation debt' most teams cannot process.

The article argues AI pentesting creates 'validation debt': discovery scales far faster than teams' ability to verify AI-generated findings. In a survey of 158 practitioners, only 20.3% had workflows to triage more than 500 AI-generated candidates per engagement, while 29.7% called such volume unmanageable. One respondent spent two days validating 300 AI findings, of which 250 were duplicates, non-exploitable, or nonexistent. The author recommends capacity planning, ruthless deduplication, and risk-based prioritization before adopting AI pentesting tools.

Security Affairs · Aug 11, 2026Industry

Discovery Foundation Models: Toward Open-Ended Discovery Intelligence

Proposes Discovery Foundation Models that participate in creating new problems and knowledge, instantiated in Zetema and the GALILEO therapeutic-discovery system.

The paper formulates Discovery Foundation Models (DFMs) as general-purpose systems for open-ended discovery, supporting seven coupled capabilities from problem discovery through evidence-grounded revision and continual improvement. It instantiates the framework with Zetema, combining explicit research-state dynamics, verification gating, external grounding, and cross-task Discovery Skill evolution. GALILEO, a real therapeutic-discovery system, closes the loop between Dry-Lab reasoning, robotic and hands-on Wet-Lab experimentation, and iterative hypothesis revision. The authors also define process-centered evaluation so discovery behavior can be trained and measured beyond final answers.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL · 2d agoAI research 2 sources

“Zlibrary my beloved”: Anthropic staff chats extolling piracy cited in Sony suit

Sony's copyright lawsuit against Anthropic now cites internal staff chats praising Z-Library piracy as evidence in the AI training-data dispute.

Sony's lawsuit against Anthropic cites internal staff chats in which employees extolled pirating books from Z-Library, according to Ars Technica. The suit forms part of the broader copyright dispute over torrented works used to train AI models. The article also notes AI-generated songs reaching the top of music charts, raising stakes for songwriters in the case.

Ars Technica · AI · 16d agoAI policy

Approval Integrity and Recovery in LLM Answer Publication

Study measures approval integrity in Lightcap LLM answer publication, finding the 14B response-act checker accepts 291 of 302 unsupported answers.

The study evaluates exact-content binding, authorization freshness, and checkpoint recovery in Lightcap's publication enforcement using 3,600 assessments over 900 human-annotated RAGTruth responses from three Ministral models. The production 14B response-act checker accepts 291 of 302 unsupported answers versus 41 for a direct-grounding baseline, with supported-answer retention of 95.2% versus 66.9%. A stateful recheck-recovery policy increases exact-match error by 9.23 percentage points relative to initial checkpoints, and controlled evidence-fingerprint changes expose asymmetric freshness enforcement between publication and recovery. A separate BIPIA prompt-injection experiment records zero target insertions among 266 valid editor outputs.

arXiv cs.CR · 2d agoAI safety & security

Necessary or Sufficient? Evaluating LLM Explanations With Behavioural Evidence

New framework tests whether LLM-cited explanation factors are necessary or sufficient, finding weak correlation across Claude, GPT, and Gemini models.

An arXiv paper introduces black-box intervention tests measuring whether factors LLMs cite in their explanations are necessary or sufficient for their outputs in agent oversight workflows. Across eight models from the Claude, GPT, and Gemini families, Spearman correlations between cited rankings and measured influence ranged from 0.349-0.354 (advisor recommendation) to 0.431-0.580 (prompt monitoring). Uncited factors scored above the lowest cited factor in up to 57.6% of advisor responses, showing cited top-three factors do not reliably identify the most influential inputs.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL · 12d agoAI safety & security1

The Race to Control AI and Protect What Makes Us Human

Opinion piece surveys the AI existential-risk debate, citing Bill Gates' memo and Anthropic's Evan Hubinger on unsolved superintelligence alignment.

A SecurityWeek opinion piece debates whether AI will be a force for good, anchored on Bill Gates' 6,000-word August 2026 memo warning of a turbulent, under-prepared AI transition. Anthropic alignment lead Evan Hubinger stated he believes there is a greater than 10% chance AI kills all humans within a decade and that no plan exists to solve superintelligence alignment. The piece also notes OpenAI reportedly slowed parts of model development over safety concerns and Gates' warning that heavy AI use is associated with reduced critical thinking.

SecurityWeek · 2d agoAI safety & security

ActReview: Rebuttal-Guided Training Data and Rubric Rewards for Actionable Peer Review Generation

ActReview post-trains Qwen3-8B-Base on 40K rebuttal-derived instances with rubric rewards to generate actionable, grounded peer-review feedback, plus a 1,000-instance benchmark.

The framework builds ActReview-40K from real OpenReview review-rebuttal threads, aligning reviewer weaknesses with author responses and grounding feedback in localized paper evidence. Qwen3-8B-Base is post-trained with multi-task supervised fine-tuning followed by GRPO using candidate-aware, weakness-specific rubric rewards. Experiments show improved actionability and grounding over prior specialized review-generation models, supported by ActReview-Bench, a human-curated 1,000-instance evaluation set. Human evaluation confirms better revision usefulness while noting a remaining gap in technical accuracy.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL · 8d agoAI research

An Evidence Model for Agentic Processes: Evidence Claims, Trust Assumptions, and Policy Assessment

Researchers propose an evidence claim model defining which trust and audit claims agentic AI systems can support, mapping claims to mechanisms, assumptions, and threats.

The paper proposes an evidence claim model for agentic AI processes that exchange messages, invoke tools, request approvals, and modify shared artifacts. It distinguishes claim types such as artifact integrity, provenance, approval evidence, and policy assessment, mapping each to mechanisms, assumptions, limitations, and threats. It stresses that hashes, signatures, and external anchors do not establish semantic truth, authorization, or capture completeness. The contribution is conceptual, offering vocabulary for what an agentic black box can and cannot evidence and which controls must surround it.

arXiv cs.CR · 8d agoAI safety & security

Molecular Déjà Vu: Digit-Level Retrieval of Published Values in Frontier Language Models

Audit of 22 frontier models finds widespread verbatim retrieval of published molecular property values, with higher reasoning increasing recall of memorized numbers.

An arXiv audit tests 22 frontier LLMs across 12 molecular regression benchmarks for verbatim retrieval of published values. More than 50% of the LLMs show verbatim retrieval on five datasets, and identical experiments are flagged 89% more often at a high reasoning level than at the lowest one. Suppressing retrieval moves model prediction errors closer together in relative terms, suggesting predictive capability is not determined solely by memorized values.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL · 12d agoAI research1

ActReview: Rebuttal-Guided Training Data and Rubric Rewards for Actionable Peer Review Generation

ActReview post-trains Qwen3-8B-Base on OpenReview rebuttals to generate actionable peer-review feedback with grounded revision suggestions, benchmarked on 1,000 curated instances.

The paper defines Actionable Peer-review Generation as diagnostic claim generation plus revision suggestion generation and introduces ActReview, a rebuttal-guided post-training framework. From OpenReview review-rebuttal threads the authors build ActReview-40K, aligning reviewer weaknesses with author responses grounded in localized paper evidence, and post-train Qwen3-8B-Base with multi-task SFT followed by GRPO using weakness-specific rubric rewards. They also release ActReview-Bench, a human-curated 1,000-instance benchmark, on which ActReview outperforms prior specialized review-generation models on actionability and grounding while remaining competitive with strong prompt-based LLMs. Human evaluation confirms improved revision usefulness but identifies a remaining gap in technical accuracy.

Hugging Face daily papers · 9d agoAI research

I wrote an AI textbook — how long until AI can do it better?

AI researcher Nathan Lambert argues LLMs remain weak at long-form technical writing, questioning whether models can autonomously organize scientific knowledge for breakthroughs.

Nathan Lambert describes writing a post-training textbook, Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback, and finds today's LLMs weak at organizing long-form technical content despite becoming superhuman at coding and math. He notes GPT 5.5 Pro found deep typos across a 200-300 page manuscript while Claude models proved more useful as editors. He argues that compressing knowledge through writing is a prerequisite for autonomous scientific insight and tempers expectations for near-term AI-driven open science.

Interconnects · Aug 12, 2026AI research

Better answers, broader thinking: What students gain from ChatGPT and critical-thinking training

OpenAI published a randomized study of over 1,000 students examining ChatGPT's effects on critical thinking and performance.

OpenAI released results from a randomized study of more than 1,000 students using ChatGPT on a real-world university assignment. The research examined effects on critical thinking, originality, and student performance. Findings inform ongoing debates about AI's role in education and learning outcomes.

OpenAI News · 20d agoAI research

From Protocols to Evidence: Bounded Claims for AI in Service of the Common Good

Paper proposes a rupture test and RISE AI architecture for evidence-bounded responsible-AI claims, framed via EU AI Act and NIST AI RMF.

The paper argues AI deployment intervenes in pre-existing institutional failures of responsiveness, belonging, care, and accountability, and must therefore evaluate both the system and the institutional rupture it enters. It reviews how the EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, and ISO/IEC 42001 translate principles into protocols, and draws on Pope Leo XIV's Magnifica Humanitas to develop a rupture test linking institutional baselines to system evaluation. It distinguishes evidence-bounded deployment from measurement-bounded governance and introduces RISE AI, an architecture for bounded claims about Responsibility, Inclusivity, Safety, and Empowerment.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL · 6d agoAI policy

What We Learned by Reproducing 2,200 papers from ICML

Hugging Face shares lessons from openly reproducing 2,200 ICML 2026 papers, examining reproducibility and open implementation practices in machine learning research.

Hugging Face published a retrospective on its open reproduction effort covering 2,200 papers from ICML 2026. The post summarizes lessons learned about reproducibility and building open, community-driven implementations of published machine learning research. No detailed article text was available in the feed.

Hugging Face Blog · Aug 13, 2026AI research

Verifiable by Construction: Claim-Level Evaluation of Verbatim Citation in Clinical Question Answering

Evaluation of twelve LLMs on 222 clinical questions shows verbatim quotes rarely substantiate claims; claude-opus-5 fully substantiates only 37.1%.

The authors build a standardized harness over four clinical practice guidelines and evaluate twelve LLMs on 222 synthetic clinical questions, measuring citation attachment, verbatim quote production, and claim substantiation. Most models attach verbatim quotes to over 90% of claims from prompting alone, though lightweight models like claude-haiku-4.5 struggle. Quotes frequently fail to substantiate claims: claude-opus-5 quotes 98.0% of claims but fully substantiates only 37.1%, exposing a capability gap for verifiable clinical QA.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL · 2d agoAI research

18 ways to check whether data can be trusted for AI

ETSI published TR 104 180 defining 18 data quality metrics, including fairness and privacy, to assess whether datasets are fit for AI.

ETSI's technical report TR 104 180 defines 18 metrics across four groups - intrinsic quality, usability and lineage, fairness, and privacy - each with calculation formulas, plus an open-source tool that scores datasets. Testing on an aircraft engine sensor dataset and a US census dataset revealed a roughly threefold gender gap in high earners (about 31% of men versus 11% of women) and two privacy failures: re-identification via age, race, sex, and country, and sensitive fields stored in plaintext. The working group included Sejong University, EGM, TTA, Daejeon University, and CNIT.

Help Net Security · 9d agoAI policy

Two-year university study finds banning AI from classrooms leaves students worse off

A two-year university study found students banned from using ChatGPT performed worst, while formal prompt-engineering training advantages faded as everyday AI familiarity grew.

Researcher Schrepel ran a classroom experiment in 2024 (66 students) and 2025 (164 participants) comparing a no-AI group, unguided ChatGPT users, and trained students revising EU AI Act provisions. The no-AI group finished last both years, hitting 'idea exhaustion' after 10-15 minutes, while the trained group's advantage nearly vanished by 2025 as everyday chatbot familiarity rose. Schrepel now argues blanket AI bans harm outcomes and universities should rethink bans and pure literature-review theses.

The Decoder · 3d agoAI industry

StudyBench: Can Self-Evolution Squeeze Textbooks for Olympiad Capability?

Researchers introduce StudyBench, a physics benchmark showing self-evolution gains on textbook problems rarely transfer to olympiad-level questions.

StudyBench is a controlled physics benchmark splitting test data into an Application Set of difficult textbook problems and a Transfer Set of olympiad-level problems. Across three base models, representative self-evolution methods improved on the Application Set but rarely transferred to the harder Transfer Set. A guidance ablation reveals a Guidance Gap, and every method hits a Compute Plateau, indicating the remaining limits are method problems rather than data or compute problems.

Hugging Face daily papers · 16d agoAI research

K-Bench: a clinically calibrated benchmark for evaluating large language models in high-risk mental health conversations

Clinician-calibrated K-Bench evaluates 125 LLM configurations on 200 high-risk mental health vignettes, exposing wide variation in suicide and violence risk handling.

K-Bench is a clinician-calibrated, protected benchmark evaluating 125 model configurations from 33 base models across 14 providers on 200 multi-turn vignettes covering suicide, self-harm, domestic violence, substance misuse and no-risk presentations. A frozen GPT-4o judge achieved 94.2% exact agreement with clinician consensus across 6,751 eligible comparisons from 151 clinician-rated transcripts. Leading models combined supportive conversation with combined-risk scores above 95, while risk exploration varied substantially among weaker configurations; therapeutic prompting helped weaker models and elevated reasoning produced no average improvement. A continuously updated public leaderboard is hosted at k-bench.ai with protected test materials.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL · 2d agoAI safety & security

Engineered Persuasion: Evaluating Personalized Pretexts in LLM-Generated Spear Phishing

A study of 180 US workers found each LLM phishing personalization level raised click-intention odds by 28%, but credibility depends on context fit.

The arXiv paper evaluates how personalized pretexts in LLM-generated spear phishing affect perceived credibility, using 180 US working adults across 1,436 evaluations of emails with four cumulative personalization levels, from workplace context to shared-project details. Convincingness rose 2.40 points per level in sensitivity analysis and click-intention odds increased 28% per level, while non-clickers shifted toward deleting rather than reporting. Qualitative coding showed details matching the recipient's role and routines supported credibility, whereas incorrect, vague, or channel-inappropriate details raised suspicion. The authors argue personalization effectiveness depends on pretext fit, with implications for workplace security training.

arXiv cs.CR · 13d agoResearch

One resignation turned the embers of AI fear into a wildfire

Interconnects argues a frontier-lab researcher's safety resignation went viral via media coordination, reigniting AI existential-risk discourse.

The essay analyzes why researcher Jacob Coxon's resignation over AI safety risks went viral, aided by a Wall Street Journal exclusive, advocacy-group amplification, and Daniel Kokotajlo's same-day Joe Rogan appearance. It notes Evan Hubinger's >10% extinction-risk figure and criticizes existential-risk discourse for conflating very different meanings of the term. The author assigns near-zero probability to complete extinction but argues concrete risks such as cyberattacks on critical infrastructure and bio-risks merit debate. It also rejects recursive self-improvement forecasts, proposing 'lossy self-improvement' where models excel at math and code but remain limited elsewhere.

Interconnects · 6d agoAI safety & security