#01Nov 4, 2026
cs.CV
Motion-guided Contrastive Regularization For Latent World Models
Yiwen Chen, Qiqi Hou, Jisoo Jeong and 3 more
JEPA-style world models learn action-conditioned latent dynamics without reconstructing observations, but distributional regularization alone does not ensure that their representations preserve information needed for control. We identify static collapse, a failure mode in which the encoder preserves episode-specific static content while suppressing manipulation-relevant state changes. Because static content is temporally predictable yet diverse across episodes, this failure can persist despite regularizers such as SIGReg. A controlled study on OGBench-Cube shows that introducing randomized backgrounds substantially degrades planning performance while leaving the underlying manipulation task unchanged. To address this problem, we propose motion-guided contrastive regularization. Our approach compares predicted latent transitions with transitions to candidate observations from the same episode, reducing the usefulness of static background identity for distinguishing action outcomes. Optical-flow similarities provide soft contrastive targets, allowing candidates with similar motion to receive similar supervision. Combined with latent prediction and SIGReg, our objective encourages representations to preserve within-episode state distinctions and similarities between related transitions. Our method improves planning success over LeWorldModel (LeWM) from 52% to 78% on OGBench-Cube with randomized backgrounds and from 14% to 54% on LIBERO-Object, while maintaining comparable performance on four other visual-control benchmarks.
#02Nov 4, 2026
cs.AI
Dull, Dirty, Dangerous? Working Conditions and the Limits of Occupational AI Exposure
Siyi Yu
Automation is often justified as relief from dull, dirty, and dangerous work. I examine how these conditions relate to occupational AI exposure using 21 O*NET items across 754 US occupations. Higher exposure is associated with lower condition scores under a large language model (LLM) measure and AI Occupational Exposure (AIOE), with equal occupation weights and employment weights. Adjustment for physical demands, required education, training and experience, and wages reduces the composite association. The adjusted confidence intervals include zero for LLM exposure and remain below zero for AIOE. Separating repetition from restricted discretion also changes what the combined Dull score conveys. These comparisons show how item groupings and occupational characteristics shape the interpretation of exposure estimates. Occupational profiles offer a starting point for selecting contrasting research settings. Establishing desired automation or realized relief requires evidence about workers' preferences and specific interventions.
#03Nov 4, 2026
physics.flu-dyn
FlowReconBench: Accuracy, calibration and cost of learned and classical flow reconstruction from sparse sensors
Nicolas Tricard, Linzheng Wang, Jason Chen and 1 more
Reconstructing full flow fields from sparse sensors requires prior assumptions about unmeasured regions and physical variables. Yet it remains unclear when learned models outperform classical estimators and which aspects of their predictions can be trusted. FlowReconBench evaluates ten learned and five classical methods on three regimes: a laminar cylinder wake across Reynolds numbers, two-dimensional Kolmogorov turbulence and a large-scale three-dimensional (3D) isotropic turbulence. Methods share leakage-controlled splits and sensor draws and are scored on per-channel error, ensemble spread, calibration, spectra and cost. The leading method changes for each regime. Classical methods perform strongly in low-order and dense-sensing regimes. On the cylinder wake, linear stochastic estimation and gappy proper orthogonal decomposition lead, including for unobserved pressure. In 3D, inverse-distance weighting matches the best learned methods on observed channels. Data-driven methods become superior at decreasing sensor density or poor sensor observability. On Kolmogorov flow, continuous ranked probability score and error yield different method rankings: generative models offer broader but underdispersed ensembles, while deterministic models prioritize pointwise error. Generative models balance this tradeoff through their sampler budget, with a larger budget improving ensemble quality at higher computational cost. In 3D, scaling tests demonstrate that queryable methods are flat in memory, while full-grid construction methods run out of memory. Observing only 2 of 4 fields leaves the problem kinematically underconstrained, yet a latent model can reproduce structural similarities to the ground truth.
#04Nov 4, 2026
cs.LG
Navigating Disagreement Among Criteria for Evaluating Explanation Faithfulness
Grant Shanklin, Jiří Němeček, Asia Biega
Faithfulness requires that algorithmic explanations accurately reflect the model's behavior. Yet existing operationalizations of faithfulness can disagree about whether the same explanation is faithful, leaving developers and auditors to choose among conflicting evaluations. In this paper, we investigate disagreement among evaluation criteria and offer a practical path forward for evaluating explanation faithfulness. We first identify how operationalizations of faithfulness differ. We introduce a faithfulness functional that locates their disagreements in what an explanation claims about the model, which comparisons bear on that claim, and how agreement across those comparisons should be aggregated, and we reconstruct existing evaluation criteria within it. We argue these reconstructions support understanding faithfulness as a common though incompletely specified relation between the model and explanation, so the differences reflect choices left open by the general requirement. Justifying an operationalization then comes down to justifying these choices, which, on our view, draws on explanatory, institutional, and normative considerations. We support this argument with a case study of adverse action notices, reconstructing the evaluation implicit in an industry-proposed procedure and identifying which of its choices the setting justifies and which remain open. Our work gives auditors and practitioners a way to navigate disagreeing evaluations of faithfulness. It also explains why the literature should expect multiple operationalizations, while showing how concrete settings can narrow the choice among them. More broadly, our analysis shows how a shared requirement of faithfulness can support contextually justified evaluations despite disagreement among existing metrics.
#05Nov 4, 2026
cs.AI
BEAKER: An Expert-Curated Benchmark for Embodied Brains in Self-Driving Chemical Laboratories
Fei Lin, Tengchao Zhang, Ziyang Gong and 15 more
Self-Driving Chemical Laboratories (SDCLs) are moving chemical experimentation toward embodied automation, where machines must perceive laboratory scenes, reason about experimental states, and act under physical, procedural, and safety constraints. Although Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly considered as embodied brains for such systems, existing laboratory benchmarks mainly focus on safety, anomaly detection, or general scientific understanding, leaving their execution-oriented embodied capabilities underexplored. To fill this gap, we introduce BEAKER, a Benchmark for evaluating Embodied Actionability, Knowledge, Experimentation, and Reasoning in SDCLs. BEAKER contains 1,000 expert-curated question-answer samples across 11 image and video task types, covering key judgments required for chemical laboratory execution, including affordance grounding, trajectory planning, equipment, state, and safety recognition, apparatus setup, operation and step reasoning, and temporal procedure reasoning. All questions and annotations are manually created and reviewed by chemistry and embodied Artificial Intelligence (AI) experts, without AI-assisted generation or annotation. We evaluate 28 general-purpose, science-oriented, chemistry-specialized, and embodied MLLMs in an offline, single-turn setting. Results show that current models can follow coarse experimental procedures in videos, but still struggle to ground actions into operable regions and feasible trajectories, to recognize fine-grained laboratory apparatus, states, and safety norms, and to order steps in mid-length procedures. BEAKER thus reveals a clear gap between coarse procedural understanding and the precise, action-grounded perception required for laboratory execution, providing a diagnostic benchmark for future MLLMs in SDCLs.