Papers for

ai algorithm developers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Benchmark compares classical and AI searches for geometry problems

RadonBench: A Benchmark of Classical and Learning-Guided Search Techniques for Problems in Combinatorial Geometry

Abstract: Classical optimization and learning-guided search offer complementary approaches to open problems in discrete mathematics, but their outputs are difficult to compare when search spaces, validity checks, and stopping rules differ. We present \emph{RadonBench}, a benchmark for constructing maximum-cardinality Radon-free lattice configurations: finite subsets of $\mathbb{Z}^d$ admitting no integral Radon partition. It remains open whether Radon-free configurations with $11$ points in $\mathbb{Z}^3$ or $21$ points in $\mathbb{Z}^4$ are possible. If they exist, they would improve the corresponding lower bounds on the integer Radon numbers. We compare exhaustive extension, greedy local search, PatternBoost, AlphaZero, and AlphaEvolve. All outputs use one success predicate: a convex target-sized configuration succeeds exactly when its number of integral Radon points is zero. PatternBoost and AlphaZero construct verified Radon-free configurations of sizes $10$ and $20$, one point short of the respective targets; AlphaZero's best convex target terminals have two integral Radon points in both dimensions. Exhaustive extension over fixed seeds and declared finite search boxes likewise reaches a minimum of two integral Radon points. Greedy local search and AlphaEvolve each produce target-sized near misses with one integral Radon point. No audited run reaches zero. These results establish reproducible near-miss baselines over explicitly scoped search domains.

Fri 23 OctMachine Learning
The gist
Finding special sets of points in grids without certain patterns is a tricky math puzzle. The authors created a benchmark called RadonBench to test different search methods, including traditional and AI-based ones, on this problem. They found that none of the tested methods could fully solve the hardest cases but could get very close. This helps show where current approaches stand for solving these kinds of geometry puzzles.
Open → 2610.33259v1

GCAM-Gym offers common interface to test climate policy methods

GCAM-Gym: A Benchmark for Agent-Based Climate Policy Search

Abstract: Comparing climate-policy search methods requires accounting for differences in policy control, available observations, feedback timing, and simulator budgets. We introduce GCAM-Gym, a Gymnasium-compatible environment that supports full-policy evaluation and stepwise control through a common interface and exposes the components of the policy objective. We compare seven search and control systems in three settings: target attainment and cost, cost-temperature trade-offs, and one-step delayed feedback. Each system is evaluated with ten seeds per setting, for a total of 3,210 attempted GCAM evaluations. Four systems share a budget of 24 attempts per seed; among these, CMA-ES achieves the highest interquartile mean (IQM) of the best returns from completed policy evaluations in all three settings. We release the evaluation archive and analysis tools to reconstruct the reported comparisons without running GCAM.

Fri 16 OctComputers and Society
The gist
Testing different methods to find the best climate policies is tricky because of many differences in how policies are controlled and evaluated. The authors created GCAM-Gym, a tool that allows many methods to be compared fairly using the same way to interact with a climate model. They ran tests on seven different methods across three types of challenges and found that one method called CMA-ES performed the best under limited testing attempts. They also provided the data and tools so others can see or repeat their comparisons without running the full climate model themselves.
Open → 2610.23569v1

Cognitive algorithms improved with human and AI guided program fixes

Hypothesis-guided discovery of cognitive algorithms via program refinement

Abstract: Developing cognitive models of algorithmic reasoning from behavioral data is a central problem in cognitive science that challenges current methods. Traditional approaches to cognitive modeling are interpretable and benefit from human expertise, but lack flexibility and scalability. Emerging techniques using large language models (LLMs) for de novo generation of cognitive models are scalable and flexible, but lack a role for human expertise and have mostly been applied to simpler tasks than algorithm recovery. We propose a hybrid system that treats discovery of cognitive algorithms as a program refinement problem. Human-created cognitive models are expressed as probabilistic programs and provided to a system of LLM agents with a mandate to: identify mismatches between model and behavior; propose code-level modifications within researcher-specified constraints; and verify structural fidelity. Revisions propagate to a probabilistic inference module that performs inference for latent variables and data likelihood computations. We evaluate the pipeline on human behavior in a problem-solving paradigm that exposes a variety of cognitive algorithms. Revised models consistently improve model fit relative to ancestral models and reveal a small set of recurring innovations that capture meaningful behavioral variability in this task.

Thu 1 OctArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Understanding how people think and solve problems is hard because human thinking can be complicated. This paper shows a way to improve models that explain human thinking by combining expert-made programs with large AI language models that suggest and check small program changes. These improvements better match how people actually behave in problem-solving tasks. The method helps find key changes that make models more accurate and flexible.
Open → 2610.02523v1

Improving offline policy evaluation using mixed step errors and adaptive critics

Offline Policy Evaluation via Mixed Bellman Residuals and Adaptive Critic Representations

Abstract: Evaluating a target policy using data generated by a different behavior policy remains a fundamental challenge in reinforcement learning. While most existing work relies on the standard one-step Bellman residual, we consider a convex combination of one-step and two-step residuals with a fixed mixing weight. In ideal settings, this mixed Bellman formulation can provide a natural bias--variance trade-off between approximation error under a restricted value-function class and the increased variance arising from multi-step importance weighting. To solve this mixed residual optimization, we adopt a minimax formulation involving a critic function. Unlike standard approaches that rely on a fixed functional class, we construct a data-dependent critic representation using predicted future feature directions which effectively induces a kernel adapted to the underlying transition dynamics. This allows the critic to focus on directions that are most relevant for the estimated Bellman error. To control overfitting, we use sample splitting to construct the critic and estimate the value function on separate data subsets. Simulation studies and MetaWorld tasks illustrate the effect of the mixing parameter and show that intermediate residual combinations can improve value estimation in challenging settings.

Sun 27 SeptMachine Learning
The gist
Estimating how good a decision-making strategy is using data collected from a different strategy is tricky. The authors propose combining simple one-step and more complex two-step error measures to strike a better balance between bias and variance in predictions. They also create a flexible way to represent the critic function that adapts to important features of the environment dynamics. This helps focus on relevant information when estimating the value of the strategy. Tests show this approach can improve the accuracy of estimates in challenging scenarios.
Open → 2609.33186v1