#01Nov 5, 2026
cs.LG
Hybrid Machine Learning for Imbalanced Landing-Phase Safety Event Prediction from Flight Data
Taha Asghar, Bilal Mufti, Syed Qasim Zaheer and 1 more
Landing-phase safety-event prediction requires the detection of rare abnormal approaches within strongly imbalanced multivariate flight data. Capturing coupled temporal behavior while distinguishing event-specific signatures across airport operating contexts remains a central modeling challenge. This study proposes an interpretable hybrid feature-fusion framework for multiclass landing-phase safety-event prediction. A long short-term memory (LSTM) autoencoder trained on nominal flight windows characterizes deviations from routine approach behavior. Its continuous reconstruction-error descriptor is fused with parameter-specific statistical flight-history features and supplied to a class-weighted XGBoost classifier to distinguish Normal, Speed High, Path High, and Flaps Late windows. The framework is evaluated using 53,750 NASA DASHlink approach windows from three arrival airports. Pooled and airport-specific learning strategies are compared alongside component-level benchmarks, repeated pipeline retraining, and feature-attribution analysis. The results demonstrate strong class-balanced detection, with mean macro recall above 0.90 across all airports under repeated partitioning and retraining. Component comparisons establish the importance of class weighting and show that continuous feature fusion outperforms reconstruction-error-only and hard-gate alternatives. Airport-level comparisons reveal benefits from local specialization at the two airports with larger datasets and from pooled training at the airport with the smallest dataset. Feature attributions associate predictions with operationally relevant vertical-path, configuration, speed, and approach-context variables. The framework provides an interpretable approach to rare-event detection and practical guidance for adapting flight-data monitoring models to airport-level data availability.
#02Nov 5, 2026
cs.AI
Learning a patient world model for health system simulation in intensive care
Yingtai Li, Ruoyan Wang, Yu Li and 1 more
Designing healthcare strategies requires anticipating their clinical and operational consequences before implementation, a task that often relies on health system simulation. Such a simulation necessitates modeling how patient states evolve and generate care demands. However, conventional approaches typically tailor compact state transitions to a single policy question and omit history-dependent dynamics, thus requiring the redefinition of states and transitions when there is a new question that entails different clinical information. We propose to learn a patient world model from longitudinal EHRs using a neural network to provide a shared clinical representation of patient trajectories that can serve simulation questions across scenarios. Taking ICU operations as an example, we train the model on MIMIC-IV, freeze it, and couple its time-queryable predictions to shared ICU calendars, resources, and queues via scenario-specific mappings, so that one model renders admission demand, care tasks, and discharge proposals across simulations evaluating ICU bed capacity, care dispatch, and post-ICU transfer capacity. Experiments show that our model matches Markov and semi-Markov comparators in aggregate occupancy and directional responses to capacity and dispatch policies. It also reproduces policy gains from replayed observed trajectories. For patients entering the same support state from different prior trajectories, the learned representation captures a 24-h recovery difference (-6.4 predicted versus -6.7 observed percentage points), a contrast missed by compact state models, which propagates into distinct simulated care demand, queue burden, and bed use. These results indicate that a learned world model of patient dynamics has the potential to replace question-specific state models, allowing new care policies to be evaluated by reconfiguring the scenario without model rebuilding.
#03Nov 5, 2026
cs.AI
The Gold Rush in AI4Math, II: What are signatures of AI-assisted Proofs?
Yuanchuan Guo, Jiashun Jin, Zheng Tracy Ke and 1 more
The growing use of AI in mathematics raises a question: can we detect AI involvement in proofs, separately from AI assistance with writing? Historical arXiv papers, recent papers disclosing substantive AI use, and manuscripts released by OpenAI provide a rich empirical basis for studying this question. However, several challenges remain: lack of matched case-control pairs; potential incompleteness of disclosure; and lack of ready-to-use features designed to capture signals of AI involvement in proofs. To address these challenges, we construct five cohorts comprising 8,281 papers by combining existing manuscripts with those we produced using generative AI. These cohorts span different levels of AI involvement and include matched pairs of papers addressing the same research problems. We then introduce ProofTrace, a framework that represents each paper as a graph of immediate proof support (GIPS) and extracts interpretable features of mathematical organization. Our study yields three discoveries. First, principal-component projections of our features reveal a qualitative gradient of AI involvement, where AI-reworded papers remain close to human papers, the two AI-generated cohorts depart in broadly shared directions, and papers disclosing substantive AI use occupy intermediate positions which shifts toward AI-generated cohorts over time. Second, we identify recurring signatures of AI-generated proofs, such as fewer externally cited results, greater reliance on intermediate conclusions, and altered graph connectivity; many of these signatures persist under controls for research field, manuscript length, or graph size. Finally, in a separate detection experiment, ProofTrace distinguishes human-written papers from those disclosing substantive AI use. Its performance remains stable under AI rewording, whereas the performance of state-of-the-art text-based detectors declines sharply.
#04Nov 5, 2026
cs.CL
Label-Wording Augmentation in a Typed-Decision Encoder: Gains on Unfamiliar Words, Not on Abbreviations or Codes
Vladimir Beskorovainyi
Typed-decision models score options that the caller supplies at request time, so their accuracy depends on label wording that the model's developer does not control. We compare two releases of a 307M-parameter multilingual cross-encoder, Ru-Jev, trained on thirteen Russian-language tasks; the later release adds an augmentation that presents labels in several surface forms. Holding questions fixed and varying only how eighteen routing labels are worded, we evaluate ten label vocabularies, produced by three separate processes and checked for overlap with the training data, with five candidates per question and, for eight of them, also with eighteen. On held-out vocabularies made of ordinary or borrowed words (English-derived jargon, office slang, department names), the augmented release is more accurate in every setting, by up to 0.24. Eleven of these fourteen gains survive a Holm correction (slang with eighteen candidates and descriptive sentences with five do not), and for jargon on all labels the label-level interval excludes zero in both settings. On abbreviations and opaque codes it gives no usable gain: on abbreviations it is not better, and worse on the clean slice, and on opaque codes both releases stay at or below chance once labels related to training options are removed. In most cells where accuracy rises, the risk-coverage area falls, but with eighteen candidates confident errors rise on jargon and slang. On two datasets neither release saw, accuracy moves by -8.4 and +5.6 points. We also report four evaluation hazards from comparing the two releases.
#05Nov 5, 2026
cs.AI
Benchmarks as Software: Terminal-Bench and the Case for Continuous Benchmarks
E. Kelly Buchanan, Crystal Zhou, Scott W. Linderman and 1 more
Coding agents are among the most economically consequential deployments of LLMs to date, making reliable evaluation increasingly important. Yet even benchmarks that are carefully validated at release can become stale. As models improve, they can discover valid solutions that existing verifiers reject, while changes to evaluation infrastructure can invalidate assumptions embedded in tasks and tests. We call the resulting accumulation of defects benchmark maintenance debt: a growing gap between benchmark scores and the capabilities they are intended to measure. We introduce a continuous-validation workflow for agentic benchmarks that combines community reports, task artifacts, agent traces, automated oracle checks, and human-gated repairs. We apply this workflow to Terminal-Bench 2.0, a benchmark that underwent extensive human and LM-assisted review and red-teaming before release. Our audit identifies issues in roughly 30% of the benchmark, and we release the resulting repairs as Terminal-Bench 2.1. These repairs change evaluation results: accuracy increased by over 10 percentage points and leaderboard positions move by up to three ranks, even as the overall ranking remains highly correlated (Spearman rho = 0.958). We evaluate how resource allocation shapes benchmark conclusions. We show that fixed wall-clock can materially change agent performance: For example, extending the time limit closes a 20pp harness gap on GPT 5.4 and shrinks a 30 pp gap on GPT 5.4 mini to 5 pp. Benchmark maintenance is therefore not only about repairing task artifacts: resource budgets are part of the measurement specification and must be validated alongside the tasks themselves. More broadly, benchmark maintenance debt is not just accumulated implementation bugs: our results show that as models improve, both evaluation assumptions and resource settings may need to be revalidated.