arXiv:2609.12575v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Ambiguity is often treated as a bug for AI systems to resolve---but in human communication and culture, ambiguity can also be a generative resource. From humour to politics to art, people express themselves in words and images that are open enough to invite different interpretations, yet constrained enough to be interpretable. We operationalise this notion of calibrated ambiguity with a task drawn from the parlour game Dixit. We compare differences in clues generated by human vs multimodal language models, based on a novel coding rubric for calibrated ambiguity, and find that models consistently exhibit ambiguity collapse (i.e., their outputs are over-specified, leaving no room for multiple legitimate interpretations). Unlike human clues, AI-generated clues also exhibit cultural flattening; they almost never make reference to culturally-situated knowledge, even when prompted to use allusion and figurative language.

arXiv:2406.14194v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The emergence of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) marks significant strides towards achieving general artificial intelligence. However, these advancements are accompanied by concerns about biased outputs, a challenge that has yet to be thoroughly explored. Existing benchmarks are not sufficiently comprehensive in evaluating biases due to their limited data scale, single questioning format and narrow sources of bias. To address this problem, we introduce VLBiasBench, a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate biases in LVLMs. VLBiasBench, features a dataset that covers nine distinct categories of social biases, including age, disability status, gender, nationality, physical appearance, race, religion, profession, social economic status, as well as two intersectional bias categories: race x gender and race x social economic status. To build a large-scale dataset, we use Stable Diffusion XL model to generate 46,848 high-quality images, which are combined with various questions to creat 128,342 samples. These questions are divided into open-ended and close-ended types, ensuring thorough consideration of bias sources and a comprehensive evaluation of LVLM biases from multiple perspectives. We conduct extensive evaluations on 15 open-source models as well as two advanced closed-source models, yielding new insights into the biases present in these models. Our benchmark is available at https://github.com/Xiangkui-Cao/VLBiasBench.

arXiv:2603.07940v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern science is reaching a critical inflection point. Instruments across disciplines, from particle physics and astronomy to genomics and climate modeling, now produce data of such scale, diversity, and interdependence that traditional analytical methods can no longer keep pace. This growing imbalance between data generation and data understanding signals the need for a new scientific paradigm. We propose that intelligent, human-supervised AI agents operating over deep-learning algorithms, represent the next evolution of the scientific method. Built upon large language models and multimodal learning, these agents can interpret scientific intent, design and execute analytical workflows, and ensure traceability through domain-specific languages that preserve human oversight and accountability. Particle physics, a historic incubator of computational innovation, offers the ideal testbed for this transition. At the Institute of High Energy Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Dr. Sai system embodies this vision, a multi-agent reasoning framework deployed within collider research at the CEPC. This emerging approach does not replace human scientists but extends their cognitive reach, enabling discovery to scale with complexity and redefining how knowledge itself is produced in the age of intelligent machines. The significance of this paradigm transcends particle physics, offering a blueprint for all data-driven sciences facing the same complexity ceiling.