#large language models

#large language models

Anti-intelligence is not stupidity or some sort of cognitive failure. It's the performance of knowing without understanding. It's language severed from memory, context, and and even intention. It's what large language models (LLMs) do so well. They produce coherent outputs through pattern-matching rather than comprehension. Where human cognition builds meaning through the struggle of thought, anti- intelligence arrives fully formed.

Generalist models "fail miserably" at the benchmarks used to measure how AI performs scientific tasks, Alex Zhavoronkov, Insilico's founder and CEO, told Fortune. " You test it five times at the same task, and you can see that it's so far from state of the art...It's basically worse than random. It's complete garbage." Far better are specialist AI models that are trained directly on chemistry or biology data.

To work around those rules, the Humanizer skill tells Claude to replace inflated language with plain facts and offers this example transformation: Before: "The Statistical Institute of Catalonia was officially established in 1989, marking a pivotal moment in the evolution of regional statistics in Spain." After: "The Statistical Institute of Catalonia was established in 1989 to collect and publish regional statistics." Claude will read that and do its best as a pattern-matching machine to create an output that matches the context of the conversation or task at hand.

He's the perfect outsider figure: the eccentric loner who saw all this coming and screamed from the sidelines that the sky was falling, but nobody would listen. Just as Christian Bale portrayed Michael Burry, the investor who predicted the 2008 financial crash, in The Big Short, you can well imagine Robert Pattinson fighting Paul Mescal, say, to portray Zitron, the animated, colourfully obnoxious but doggedly detail-oriented Brit, who's become one of big tech's noisiest critics.

Tokamak fusion reactors rely on heated plasma that is extremely densely packed inside a doughnut-shaped chamber. But researchers thought that plasma could not exceed a certain density - a boundary called the Greenwald limit - without becoming unstable. In a new study, scientists pushed beyond this limit to achieve densities 30% to 65% higher than those normally reached by EAST while keeping the plasma stable.

In fact, when prompted strategically by researchers, Claude delivered the near-complete text of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, The Great Gatsby, 1984, and Frankenstein, in addition to thousands of words from books including The Hunger Games and The Catcher in the Rye. Varying amounts of these books were also reproduced by the other three models. Thirteen books were tested.

Researchers have developed a tool that they say can make stolen high-value proprietary data used in AI systems useless, a solution that CSOs may have to adopt to protect their sophisticated large language models (LLMs). The technique, created by researchers from universities in China and Singapore, is to inject plausible but false data into what's known as a knowledge graph (KG) created by an AI operator. A knowledge graph holds the proprietary data used by the LLM.

Meta has applied large language models to mutation testing to improve compliance coverage across its software systems. The approach integrates LLM-generated mutants and tests into Meta's Automated Compliance Hardening system (ACH), addressing scalability and accuracy limits of traditional mutation testing. The system is intended to keep products and services safe while meeting compliance obligations at scale, helping teams satisfy global regulatory requirements more efficiently.

Contextual integrity defines privacy as the appropriateness of information flows within specific social contexts, that is, disclosing only the information strictly necessary to carry through a given task, such as booking a medical appointment. According to Microsoft's researchers, today's LLMs lack this kind of contextual awareness and can potentially disclose sensitive information, thereby undermining user trust. The first approach focuses on inference-time checks, i.e., safeguards applied when a model generates its response.

AI assistants like ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity-powered by large language models (LLMs)-are emerging as parallel gatekeepers. They're quietly reshaping which brands get recommended long before a buyer ever reaches a search results page. In my previous article, I discussed how Google's AI Overviews are intercepting traffic (even for top-ranking sites). But there's another shift that many businesses haven't recognized: Search engines are no longer the only place where your customers' questions get answered.

A research team based in China used the Claude 2.0 large language model (LLM), created by Anthropic, an AI company in San Francisco, California, to generate peer-review reports and other types of documentation for 20 published cancer-biology papers from the journal eLife. The journal's publisher makes papers freely available online as 'reviewed preprints', and publishes them alongside their referee reports and the original unedited manuscripts. The authors fed the original versions into Claude and prompted it to generate referee reports.

The story of technology is the story of continual disruption and displacement. New systems and processes send some skills into obsolescence, opening the way for new skills and workflows. Generative AI has triggered the latest "de-skilling." But chatbot technology isn't only transforming jobs and shifting our relationship with information itself. It is also inviting us to relinquish our cognitive independence and bring about a sort of dispossession that is unprecedented.

Cornell Tech faculty made a strong showing at the 2025 Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), held Dec. 2-7 in San Diego, presenting 23 research papers at one of the world's premier gatherings for artificial intelligence and machine learning. NeurIPS draws thousands of scholars and industry leaders each year and is widely recognized as a leading forum for breakthroughs in AI, computational neuroscience, statistics, and large-scale modeling.

There's sloppy science, and there's AI slop science. In an ironic twist of fate, beleaguered AI researchers are warning that the field is being choked by a deluge of shoddy academic papers written with large language models, making it harder than ever for high quality work to be discovered and stand out. Part of the problem is that AI research has surged in popularity.

Allie Miller, for example, recently ranked her go-to LLMs for a variety of tasks but noted, "I'm sure it'll change next week." Why? Because one will get faster or come up with enhanced training in a particular area. What won't change, however, is the grounding these LLMs need in high-value enterprise data, which means, of course, that the real trick isn't keeping up with LLM advances, but figuring out how to put memory to use for AI.

This challenge is sparking innovations in the inference stack. That's where Dynamo comes in. Dynamo is an open-source framework for distributed inference. It manages execution across GPUs and nodes. It breaks inference into phases, like prefill and decode. It also separates memory-bound and compute-bound tasks. Plus, it dynamically manages GPU resources to boost usage and keep latency low. Dynamo allows infrastructure teams to scale inference capacity responsively, handling demand spikes without permanently overprovisioning expensive GPU resources.

I wasn't expecting a conversation about single cells and cognition to explain why a large language model (LLM) feels like a person. But that's exactly what happened when I listened to Michael Levin on the Lex Fridman Podcast. Levin wasn't debating consciousness or speculating about artificial intelligence (AI). He was describing how living systems, from clusters of cells to complex organisms, cooperate and solve problems. The explanation was authoritative and grounded, but the implications push beyond biology.

Tim Metz is worried about the "Google Maps-ification" of his mind. Just as many people have come to rely on GPS apps to get around, the 44-year-old content marketer fears that he is becoming dependent on AI. He told me that he uses AI for up to eight hours each day, and he's become particularly fond of Anthropic's Claude. Sometimes, he has as many as six sessions running simultaneously. He consults AI for marriage and parenting advice, and when he goes grocery shopping, he takes photos of the fruits to ask if they are ripe. Recently, he was worried that a large tree near his house might come down, so he uploaded photographs of it and asked the bot for advice. Claude suggested that Metz sleep elsewhere in case the tree fell, so he and his family spent that night at a friend's. Without Claude's input, he said, "I would have never left the house." (The tree never came down, though some branches did.)