arXiv:2512.15943v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As organizations scale adoption of generative AI, model cost optimization and operational efficiency have emerged as critical factors determining sustainability and accessibility. While Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate impressive capabilities across diverse tasks, their extensive computational requirements make them cost-prohibitive for routine enterprise use. This limitation motivates the exploration of Small Language Models (SLMs), which can deliver comparable performance in targeted applications while drastically reducing infrastructure overhead (Irugalbandara et al., 2023). In this work, we investigate the feasibility of replacing LLM-driven workflows with optimized SLMs. We trained a domain-adapted SLM to execute representative tasks traditionally handled by LLMs, such as document summarization, query answering, and structured data interpretation. As part of the experiment, we investigated the fine-tuning of facebook/opt-350m model (single epoch only) using the Hugging Face TRL (Transformer Reinforcement Learning), specifically the Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) trainer. The OPT-350M model was released by Meta AI in 2022 as part of the OPT (Open Pretrained Transformer) family of models. Similar studies demonstrate that even models at the 350M parameter scale can meaningfully contribute to instruction-tuning pipelines (Mekala et al., 2024). Experimental results demonstrated that our fine-tuned SLM achieves exceptional performance with a 77.55\% pass rate on ToolBench evaluation, significantly outperforming all baseline models including ChatGPT-CoT (26.00\%), ToolLLaMA-DFS (30.18\%), and ToolLLaMA-CoT (16.27\%). These findings emphasize that thoughtful design and targeted training of SLMs can significantly lower barriers to adoption, enabling cost-effective, large-scale integration of generative AI into production systems.

arXiv:2512.16856v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI safety and alignment research has predominantly been focused on methods for safeguarding individual AI systems, resting on the assumption of an eventual emergence of a monolithic Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). The alternative AGI emergence hypothesis, where general capability levels are first manifested through coordination in groups of sub-AGI individual agents with complementary skills and affordances, has received far less attention. Here we argue that this patchwork AGI hypothesis needs to be given serious consideration, and should inform the development of corresponding safeguards and mitigations. The rapid deployment of advanced AI agents with tool-use capabilities and the ability to communicate and coordinate makes this an urgent safety consideration. We therefore propose a framework for distributional AGI safety that moves beyond evaluating and aligning individual agents. This framework centers on the design and implementation of virtual agentic sandbox economies (impermeable or semi-permeable), where agent-to-agent transactions are governed by robust market mechanisms, coupled with appropriate auditability, reputation management, and oversight to mitigate collective risks.

arXiv:2512.16433v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent systems have demonstrated the ability to improve performance on a variety of predictive tasks by leveraging collaborative decision making. However, the lack of effective evaluation methodologies has made it difficult to estimate the risk of bias, making deployment of such systems unsafe in high stakes domains such as consumer finance, where biased decisions can translate directly into regulatory breaches and financial loss. To address this challenge, we need to develop fairness evaluation methodologies for multi-agent predictive systems and measure the fairness characteristics of these systems in the financial tabular domain. Examining fairness metrics using large-scale simulations across diverse multi-agent configurations, with varying communication and collaboration mechanisms, we reveal patterns of emergent bias in financial decision-making that cannot be traced to individual agent components, indicating that multi-agent systems may exhibit genuinely collective behaviors. Our findings highlight that fairness risks in financial multi-agent systems represent a significant component of model risk, with tangible impacts on tasks such as credit scoring and income estimation. We advocate that multi-agent decision systems must be evaluated as holistic entities rather than through reductionist analyses of their constituent components.

arXiv:2512.16455v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In this paper, we describe a federated compute platform dedicated to support Artificial Intelligence in scientific workloads. Putting the effort into reproducible deployments, it delivers consistent, transparent access to a federation of physically distributed e-Infrastructures. Through a comprehensive service catalogue, the platform is able to offer an integrated user experience covering the full Machine Learning lifecycle, including model development (with dedicated interactive development environments), training (with GPU resources, annotation tools, experiment tracking, and federated learning support) and deployment (covering a wide range of deployment options all along the Cloud Continuum). The platform also provides tools for traceability and reproducibility of AI models, integrates with different Artificial Intelligence model providers, datasets and storage resources, allowing users to interact with the broader Machine Learning ecosystem. Finally, it is easily customizable to lower the adoption barrier by external communities.

arXiv:2512.16795v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) grounds large language models (LLMs) in external evidence, but fails when retrieved sources conflict or contain outdated or subjective information. Prior work address these issues independently but lack unified reasoning supervision. We propose a reasoning-trace-augmented RAG framework that adds structured, interpretable reasoning across three stages : (1) document-level adjudication, (2) conflict analysis, and (3) grounded synthesis, producing citation-linked answers or justified refusals. A Conflict-Aware Trust-Score (CATS) pipeline is introduced which evaluates groundedness, factual correctness, refusal accuracy, and conflict-behavior alignment using an LLM-as-a-Judge. Our 539-query reasoning dataset and evaluation pipeline establish a foundation for conflict-aware, interpretable RAG systems. Experimental results demonstrate substantial gains over baselines, most notably with Qwen, where Supervised Fine-Tuning improved End-to-End answer correctness from 0.069 to 0.883 and behavioral adherence from 0.074 to 0.722.

arXiv:2509.05361v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Transformative AI systems may pose unprecedented catastrophic risks, but the U.S. Constitution places significant constraints on the government's ability to govern this technology. This paper examines how the First Amendment, administrative law, and the Fourteenth Amendment shape the legal vulnerability of two regulatory proposals: model licensing and AI research classification. While the First Amendment may provide some degree of protection for model algorithms or outputs, this protection does not foreclose regulation. Policymakers must also consider administrative legal requirements, due to both agency review and authority. Finally, while substantive due process and equal protection pose minimal obstacles, procedural due process requires the government to clearly define when developers vest a legal interest in their models. Given this analysis, effective AI governance requires careful implementation to avoid these legal challenges.

arXiv:2512.01241v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are routinely used by physicians and patients for medical advice, yet their clinical safety profiles remain poorly characterized. We present NOHARM (Numerous Options Harm Assessment for Risk in Medicine), a benchmark using 100 real primary care-to-specialist consultation cases to measure frequency and severity of harm from LLM-generated medical recommendations. NOHARM covers 10 specialties, with 12,747 expert annotations for 4,249 clinical management options. Across 31 LLMs, potential for severe harm from LLM recommendations occurs in up to 22.2% (95% CI 21.6-22.8%) of cases, with harm of omission accounting for 76.6% (95% CI 76.4-76.8%) of errors. Safety performance is only moderately correlated (r = 0.61-0.64) with existing AI and medical knowledge benchmarks. The best models outperform generalist physicians on safety (mean difference 9.7%, 95% CI 7.0-12.5%), and a diverse multi-agent approach improves safety compared to solo models (mean difference 8.0%, 95% CI 4.0-12.1%). Therefore, despite strong performance on existing evaluations, widely used AI models can produce severely harmful medical advice at nontrivial rates, underscoring clinical safety as a distinct performance dimension necessitating explicit measurement.