跳到正文
5月27日周三
  1. Ethan Mollick:One Useful Thing

    Choosing to Stay Human

    If you go to your favorite social media site, you will find it full of posts that start to look suspiciously similar to each other:

5月8日周五
  1. Berkeley AI Research

    Adaptive Parallel Reasoning: The Next Paradigm in Efficient Inference Scaling

    Overview of adaptive parallel reasoning. What if a reasoning model could decide for itself when to decompose and parallelize independent subtasks, how many concurrent threads to spawn, and how to coordinate them based on the problem at hand? We provide a detailed analysis of recent progress in the field of parallel reasoning, especially Adaptive Parallel Reasoning. Disclosure: this post is part landscape survey, part perspective on adaptive parallel reasoning. One of the authors (Tony Lian) co-led ThreadWeaver ( Lian et al., 2025 ), one of the methods discussed below. The authors aim to present each approach on its own terms. Motivation Recent progress in LLM reasoning capabilities has been largely driven by inference-time scaling, in addition to data and parameter scaling ( OpenAI et al., 2024 ; DeepSeek-AI et al., 2025 ). Models that explicitly output reasoning tokens (through intermediate steps, backtracking, and exploration) now dominate math, coding, and agentic benchmarks. These behaviors allow models to explore alternative hypotheses, correct earlier mistakes, and synthesize conclusions rather than committing to a single solution ( Wen et al., 2025 ). The problem is that sequential reasoning scales linearly with the amount of exploration. Scaling sequential reasoning tokens comes at a cost, as models risk exceeding effective context limits ( Hsieh et al., 2024 ). The accumulation of intermediate exploration paths makes it challenging for the model to disambiguate amongst distractors when attending to information in its context, leading to a degradation of model performance, also known as context-rot ( Hong, Troynikov and Huber, 2025 ). Latency also grows proportionally with reasoning length. For complex tasks requiring millions of tokens for exploration and planning, it’s not uncommon to see users wait tens of minutes or even hours for an answer ( Qu et al., 2025 ). As we continue to scale along the output sequence length dimension, we also make inference slo

4月20日周一
  1. Berkeley AI Research

    Gradient-based Planning for World Models at Longer Horizons

    GRASP is a new gradient-based planner for learned dynamics (a “world model”) that makes long-horizon planning practical by (1) lifting the trajectory into virtual states so optimization is parallel across time, (2) adding stochasticity directly to the state iterates for exploration, and (3) reshaping gradients so actions get clean signals while we avoid brittle “state-input” gradients through high-dimensional vision models. Large, learned world models are becoming increasingly capable. They can predict long sequences of future observations in high-dimensional visual spaces and generalize across tasks in ways that were difficult to imagine a few years ago. As these models scale, they start to look less like task-specific predictors and more like general-purpose simulators. But having a powerful predictive model is not the same as being able to use it effectively for control/learning/planning. In practice, long-horizon planning with modern world models remains fragile: optimization becomes ill-conditioned, non-greedy structure creates bad local minima, and high-dimensional latent spaces introduce subtle failure modes. In this blog post, I describe the problems that motivated this project and our approach to address them: why planning with modern world models can be surprisingly fragile, why long horizons are the real stress test, and what we changed to make gradient-based planning much more robust. This blog post discusses work done with Mike Rabbat, Aditi Krishnapriyan, Yann LeCun, and Amir Bar (* denotes equal advisorship), where we propose GRASP. What is a world model? These days, the term “world model” is quite overloaded, and depending on the context can either mean an explicit dynamics model or some implicit, reliable internal state that a generative model relies on (e.g. when an LLM generates chess moves, whether there is some internal representation of the board). We give our loose working definition below. Suppose you take actions $a_t \in \mathcal{A}$ and ob

3月13日周五
  1. Berkeley AI Research

    Identifying Interactions at Scale for LLMs

    --> Understanding the behavior of complex machine learning systems, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), is a critical challenge in modern artificial intelligence. Interpretability research aims to make the decision-making process more transparent to model builders and impacted humans, a step toward safer and more trustworthy AI. To gain a comprehensive understanding, we can analyze these systems through different lenses: feature attribution , which isolates the specific input features driving a prediction ( Lundberg & Lee, 2017 ; Ribeiro et al., 2022 ); data attribution , which links model behaviors to influential training examples ( Koh & Liang, 2017 ; Ilyas et al., 2022 ); and mechanistic interpretability , which dissects the functions of internal components ( Conmy et al., 2023 ; Sharkey et al., 2025 ). Across these perspectives, the same fundamental hurdle persists: complexity at scale . Model behavior is rarely the result of isolated components; rather, it emerges from complex dependencies and patterns. To achieve state-of-the-art performance, models synthesize complex feature relationships, find shared patterns from diverse training examples, and process information through highly interconnected internal components. Therefore, grounded or reality-checked interpretability methods must also be able to capture these influential interactions . As the number of features, training data points, and model components grow, the number of potential interactions grows exponentially, making exhaustive analysis computationally infeasible. In this blog post, we describe the fundamental ideas behind SPEX and ProxySPEX , algorithms capable of identifying these critical interactions at scale. Attribution through Ablation Central to our approach is the concept of ablation , measuring influence by observing what changes when a component is removed. Feature Attribution: We mask or remove specific segments of the input prompt and measure the resulting shift in the prediction

1月10日周六
  1. Berkeley AI Research

    Information-Driven Design of Imaging Systems

    An encoder (optical system) maps objects to noiseless images, which noise corrupts into measurements. Our information estimator uses only these noisy measurements and a noise model to quantify how well measurements distinguish objects. Many imaging systems produce measurements that humans never see or cannot interpret directly. Your smartphone processes raw sensor data through algorithms before producing the final photo. MRI scanners collect frequency-space measurements that require reconstruction before doctors can view them. Self-driving cars process camera and LiDAR data directly with neural networks. What matters in these systems is not how measurements look, but how much useful information they contain. AI can extract this information even when it is encoded in ways that humans cannot interpret. And yet we rarely evaluate information content directly. Traditional metrics like resolution and signal-to-noise ratio assess individual aspects of quality separately, making it difficult to compare systems that trade off between these factors. The common alternative, training neural networks to reconstruct or classify images, conflates the quality of the imaging hardware with the quality of the algorithm. We developed a framework that enables direct evaluation and optimization of imaging systems based on their information content. In our NeurIPS 2025 paper , we show that this information metric predicts system performance across four imaging domains, and that optimizing it produces designs that match state-of-the-art end-to-end methods while requiring less memory, less compute, and no task-specific decoder design. Why mutual information? Mutual information quantifies how much a measurement reduces uncertainty about the object that produced it. Two systems with the same mutual information are equivalent in their ability to distinguish objects, even if their measurements look completely different. This single number captures the combined effect of resolution, noise, samp