Large Language Models

178 posts

pinterest3 min readCurated summary

On the (re)-prioritization of open-source AI

Pinterest argues that AI competition is shifting beyond ever-larger proprietary models. Open-source models now deliver comparable quality at a fraction of the cost, while compact models fine-tuned for specific tasks can outperform general-purpose systems. The company’s strategy is to combine open-source models with Pinterest-specific data, internal systems, and deep product integration. ## Open-Source Models and Cost Efficiency - Pinterest reports achieving performance comparable to leading proprietary AI models at less than 10% of the cost. - The company is shifting more investment toward fine-tuned open-source models, especially for visual and multimodal applications. - As core LLM architectures become increasingly commoditized, competitive advantage is moving toward: - Domain-specific data - Personalization - Product integration - End-to-end system optimization ## Choosing What to Build, Buy, or Adapt Pinterest evaluates foundation-model strategy by modality: - **User modeling and recommendation** - These systems are tightly coupled to a product’s behavior and are generally built internally. - Pinterest uses long-term user-action sequences and a graph containing hundreds of billions of user, board, and content nodes. - Examples include PinFM for representation learning and PinRec for generative recommendations. - **Visual models** - Pinterest largely trains visual encoders and diffusion models in-house. - Its visual-search data and image-board collections provide the weakly supervised datasets needed for large-scale training. - Internal models benefit from Pinterest’s specialized visual domain. - **Text models** - Pinterest has historically relied more on open-source and proprietary third-party LLMs. - Progress in reasoning and language modeling depends heavily on enormous datasets and compute resources, making external models practical. ## Domain-Specific Data as the Differentiator - Open-source multimodal architectures are narrowing the capability gap with proprietary models. - Pinterest’s experience reflects an older machine-learning pattern: model architectures become broadly available, while value comes from specialized data and fine-tuning. - Its visual encoders, including UVE and PinCLIP, improved retrieval by training on Pinterest image and visual-search data rather than using generic embeddings. - Pinterest Canvas similarly adapts an internally trained diffusion model for image editing and enhancement, outperforming larger general-purpose visual-generation models in those use cases. ## Pinterest Assistant and Specialized Tools - Pinterest Assistant combines: - Multimodal retrieval systems - Recommendation services - Specialized generative models - A core multimodal LLM - Most recommendation and agentic capabilities are handled by Pinterest-native tools built on its user and visual foundation models. - The central LLM acts primarily as an intelligent router, handling query understanding, planning, and tool calling rather than performing every task itself. - This architecture allows Pinterest to improve the overall product by optimizing smaller, specialized components instead of relying solely on a larger general-purpose model. Pinterest’s recommendation is to use open-source models as adaptable building blocks, then differentiate through proprietary data, specialized models, and tight integration with the product. The most effective AI systems may therefore be smaller, cheaper, and more purpose-built than frontier general-purpose models.

Read original(opens in new tab)
awsOriginal article

New serverless customization in Amazon SageMaker AI accelerates model fine-tuning (opens in new tab)

Amazon SageMaker AI has introduced a new serverless customization capability designed to accelerate the fine-tuning of popular models like Llama, DeepSeek, and Amazon Nova. By automating resource provisioning and providing an intuitive interface for advanced reinforcement learning techniques, this feature reduces the model customization lifecycle from months to days. This end-to-end workflow allows developers to focus on model performance rather than infrastructure management, from initial training through to final deployment. **Automated Infrastructure and Model Support** * The service provides a serverless environment where SageMaker AI automatically selects and provisions compute resources based on the specific model architecture and dataset size. * Supported models include a broad range of high-performance options such as Amazon Nova, DeepSeek, GPT-OSS, Meta Llama, and Qwen. * The feature is accessible directly through the Amazon SageMaker Studio interface, allowing users to manage their entire model catalog in one location. **Advanced Customization and Reinforcement Learning** * Users can choose from several fine-tuning techniques, including traditional Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and more advanced methods. * The platform supports modern optimization techniques such as Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards (RLVR), and Reinforcement Learning from AI Feedback (RLAIF). * To simplify the process, SageMaker AI provides recommended defaults for hyperparameters like batch size, learning rate, and epochs based on the selected tuning technique. **Experiment Tracking and Security** * The workflow introduces a serverless MLflow application, enabling seamless experiment tracking and performance monitoring without additional setup. * Advanced configuration options allow for fine-grained control over network encryption and storage volume encryption to ensure data security. * The "Continue customization" feature allows for iterative tuning, where users can adjust hyperparameters or apply different techniques to an existing customized model. **Evaluation and Deployment Flexibility** * Built-in evaluation tools allow developers to compare the performance of their customized models against the original base models to verify improvements. * Once a model is finalized, it can be deployed with a few clicks to either Amazon SageMaker or Amazon Bedrock. * A centralized "My Models" dashboard tracks all custom iterations, providing detailed logs and status updates for every training and evaluation job. This serverless approach is highly recommended for teams that need to adapt large language models to specific domains quickly without the operational overhead of managing GPU clusters. By utilizing the integrated evaluation and multi-platform deployment options, organizations can transition from experimentation to production-ready AI more efficiently.

awsOriginal article

Amazon Bedrock adds 18 fully managed open weight models, including the new Mistral Large 3 and Ministral 3 models (opens in new tab)

Amazon Bedrock has significantly expanded its generative AI offerings by adding 18 new fully managed open-weight models from providers including Google, Mistral AI, NVIDIA, and OpenAI. This update brings the platform's total to nearly 100 serverless models, allowing developers to leverage a broad spectrum of specialized capabilities through a single, unified API. By providing access to these high-performing models without requiring infrastructure changes, AWS enables organizations to rapidly evaluate and deploy the most cost-effective and capable tools for their specific workloads. ### Specialized Mistral AI Releases The launch features four new models from Mistral AI, headlined by Mistral Large 3 and the edge-optimized Ministral series. * **Mistral Large 3:** Optimized for long-context tasks, multimodal reasoning, and instruction reliability, making it suitable for complex coding assistance and multilingual enterprise knowledge work. * **Ministral 3 (3B, 8B, and 14B):** These models are specifically designed for edge-optimized deployments on a single GPU. * **Use Cases:** While the 3B model excels at real-time translation and data extraction on low-resource devices, the 14B version is built for advanced local agentic workflows where privacy and hardware constraints are primary concerns. ### Broadened Model Provider Portfolio Beyond the Mistral updates, AWS has integrated several other open-weight options to address diverse industry requirements ranging from mobile applications to global scaling. * **Google Gemma 3 4B:** An efficient multimodal model designed to run locally on laptops, supporting on-device AI and multilingual processing. * **Global Provider Support:** The expansion includes models from MiniMax AI, Moonshot AI, NVIDIA, OpenAI, and Qwen, ensuring a competitive variety of reasoning and processing capabilities. * **Multimodal Capabilities:** Many of the new additions support vision-based tasks, such as image captioning and document understanding, alongside traditional text-based functions. ### Streamlined AI Development and Integration The primary technical advantage of this update is the ability to swap between diverse models using the Amazon Bedrock unified API. * **Infrastructure Consistency:** Developers can switch to newer, more efficient models without rewriting application code or managing underlying servers. * **Evaluation and Deployment:** The serverless architecture allows for immediate testing of different model weights (such as moving from 3B to 14B) to find the optimal balance between performance and latency. * **Enterprise Tooling:** These models integrate with existing Bedrock features, allowing for simplified agentic workflows and tool-use implementations. To take full advantage of these updates, developers should utilize the Bedrock console to experiment with the new Mistral and Gemma models for edge and multimodal use cases. The unified API structure makes it practical to run A/B tests between these open-weight models and established industry favorites to optimize for specific cost and performance targets.

naverOriginal article

Naver TV (opens in new tab)

The development of NSona, an LLM-based multi-agent persona platform, addresses the persistent gap between user research and service implementation by transforming static data into real-time collaborative resources. By recreating user voices through a multi-party dialogue system, the project demonstrates how AI can serve as an active participant in the daily design and development process. Ultimately, the initiative highlights a fundamental shift in cross-functional collaboration, where traditional role boundaries dissolve in favor of a shared starting point centered on AI-driven user empathy. ## Bridging UX Research and Daily Collaboration * The project was born from the realization that traditional UX research often remains isolated from the actual development cycle, leading to a loss of insight during implementation. * NSona transforms static user research data into dynamic "persona bots" that can interact with project members in real-time. * The platform aims to turn the user voice into a "live" resource, allowing designers and developers to consult the persona during the decision-making process. ## Agent-Centric Engineering and Multi-Party UX * The system architecture is built on an agent-centric structure designed to handle the complexities of specific user behaviors and motivations. * It utilizes a Multi-Party dialogue framework, enabling a collaborative environment where multiple AI agents and human stakeholders can converse simultaneously. * Technical implementation focused on bridging the gap between qualitative UX requirements and LLM orchestration, ensuring the persona's responses remained grounded in actual research data. ## Service-Specific Evaluation and Quality Metrics * The team moved beyond generic LLM benchmarks to establish a "Service-specific" evaluation process tailored to the project's unique UX goals. * Model quality was measured by how vividly and accurately it recreated the intended persona, focusing on the degree of "immersion" it triggered in human users. * Insights from these evaluations helped refine the prompt design and agent logic to ensure the AI's output provided genuine value to the product development lifecycle. ## Redefining Cross-Functional Collaboration * The AI development process reshaped traditional Roles and Responsibilities (RNR); designers became prompt engineers, while researchers translated qualitative logic into agentic structures. * Front-end developers evolved their roles to act as critical reviewers of the AI, treating the model as a subject of critique rather than a static asset. * The workflow shifted from a linear "relay" model to a concentric one, where all team members influence the product's core from the same starting point. To successfully integrate AI into the product lifecycle, organizations should move beyond using LLMs as simple tools and instead view them as a medium for interdisciplinary collaboration. By building multi-agent systems that reflect real user data, teams can ensure that the "user's voice" is not just a research summary, but a tangible participant in the development process.

slack3 min readCurated summary

Streamlining Security Investigations with Agents

Slack’s Security Engineering team uses a multi-agent AI system to investigate security alerts across billions of daily events. After finding that a single prompt produced inconsistent results, the team replaced it with a controlled workflow of specialized model invocations, structured outputs, and application-level orchestration. The resulting system improves consistency, enables evidence review, and allocates more capable models only where they add the most value. ## From Prompt Prototype to Controlled Workflow - The initial prototype consisted of a roughly 300-word prompt defining: - The analyst’s role - Available data sources - Investigation methodology - Report formatting - Response classifications - A stdio-based MCP server safely exposed selected security data sources to the model. - A coding-agent CLI served as the prototype execution environment. - Results varied significantly: - Sometimes the model cross-referenced evidence effectively. - Other times it reached convenient or unsupported conclusions too quickly. - Prompt refinements helped somewhat, but prompts were ultimately too limited for fine-grained process control. ## Structured Investigation Tasks - Slack decomposed the investigation into a sequence of model invocations. - Each invocation performs one well-defined task and returns a structured output. - The application chains these tasks together and passes only the necessary context between stages. - Structured outputs use JSON schemas to constrain model responses. - They improve predictability, but can still fail when schemas are too complex and remain vulnerable to hallucination or attempts to circumvent constraints. - Guidance such as “question your evidence” became an explicit workflow step rather than merely an instruction in a prompt. ## Persona-Based Agent Architecture - Slack drew inspiration from research on meta-prompting, multi-persona collaboration, and security tabletop exercises. - Instead of representing multiple personas within one model call, Slack implemented each persona as an independent model invocation. - Every agent/task pair has: - A defined responsibility - A carefully designed output structure - Specific prompts and instructions - Potentially different models and tools - The application orchestrates the agents and controls how knowledge moves through the investigation. ## The Investigation Loop - **Director agent** - Guides the investigation from beginning to end. - Forms questions for domain experts. - Uses a journaling tool to plan and organize progress. - Decides how to continue based on reviewed findings and timelines. - **Expert agents** - Investigate questions using specialized knowledge and data sources. - Slack currently uses four domains: - **Access:** Authentication, authorization, and perimeter services - **Cloud:** Infrastructure, compute, orchestration, and networking - **Code:** Source code and configuration management - **Threat:** Threat intelligence and analysis - **Critic agent** - Acts as a meta-expert reviewing domain findings. - Applies a defined rubric to assess quality. - Adds analysis and credibility scores to individual findings. - Helps identify reliable evidence and reduce hallucinations. - Returns its conclusions to the Director, closing the investigation loop. - The Critic’s mildly adversarial role provides an independent challenge to expert conclusions. ## The Knowledge Pyramid - Different stages use different model capabilities and costs. - Domain experts operate at the base: - They query complex data sources. - They may make many tool calls. - Processing their results can consume substantial tokens. - The Critic reviews the larger set of expert findings and identifies the most valuable or credible evidence. - Higher-level reasoning can therefore use a smaller, more focused context. - Because each stage is independent, Slack can select different model versions, prompts, tools, and output formats for different tasks. Slack’s main recommendation is to treat complex agent behavior as an explicitly orchestrated workflow rather than relying on one increasingly elaborate prompt. Specialized agents, structured outputs, independent critique, and tiered model usage provide more predictable investigations while preserving the flexibility of AI-assisted analysis.

Read original(opens in new tab)
naverOriginal article

Naver TV (opens in new tab)

Naver’s Integrated Search team is transitioning from manual fault response to an automated system using LLM Agents to manage the increasing complexity of search infrastructure. By integrating Large Language Models into the DevOps pipeline, the system evolves through accumulated experience, moving beyond simple alert monitoring to intelligent diagnostic analysis and action recommendation. ### Limitations of Traditional Fault Response * **Complex Search Flows:** Naver’s search architecture involves multiple interdependent layers, which makes manual root cause analysis slow and prone to human error. * **Fragmented Context:** Existing monitoring requires developers to manually synthesize logs and metrics from disparate telemetry sources, leading to high cognitive load during outages. * **Delayed Intervention:** Human-led responses often suffer from a "detection-to-action" lag, especially during high-traffic periods or subtle service regressions. ### Architecture of DevOps Agent v1 * **Initial Design:** Focused on automating basic data gathering and providing preliminary textual reports to engineers. * **Infrastructure Integration:** Built using a specialized software stack designed to bridge frontend (FE) and backend (BE) telemetry within the search infrastructure. * **Standardized Logic:** The v1 agent operated on a fixed set of instructions to perform predefined diagnostic tasks when triggered by specific system alarms. ### Evolution to DevOps Agent v2 * **Overcoming V1 Limitations:** The first iteration struggled with maintaining deep context and providing diverse actionable insights, necessitating a more robust agentic structure. * **Enhanced Memory and Learning:** V2 incorporates a more sophisticated architecture that allows the agent to reference historical failure data and learn from past incident resolutions. * **Advanced Tool Interaction:** The system was upgraded to handle more complex tool-calling capabilities, allowing the agent to interact more deeply with internal infrastructure APIs. ### System Operations and Evaluation * **Trigger Queue Management:** Implements a queuing system to efficiently process and prioritize multiple concurrent system alerts without overwhelming the diagnostic pipeline. * **Anomaly Detection:** Utilizes advanced detection methods to distinguish between routine traffic fluctuations and genuine service anomalies that require LLM intervention. * **Rigorous Evaluation:** The agent’s performance is measured through a dedicated evaluation framework that assesses the accuracy of its diagnoses against known ground-truth incidents. ### Scaling and Future Challenges * **Context Expansion:** Efforts are focused on integrating a wider range of metadata and environmental context to provide a holistic view of system health. * **Action Recommendation:** The system is moving toward suggesting specific recovery actions, such as rollbacks or traffic rerouting, rather than just identifying the problem. * **Sustainability:** Ensuring the DevOps Agent remains maintainable and cost-effective as the underlying search infrastructure and LLM models continue to evolve. Organizations managing high-scale search traffic should consider LLM-based agents as integrated infrastructure components rather than standalone tools. Moving from reactive monitoring to a proactive, experience-based agent system is essential for reducing the mean time to recovery (MTTR) in complex distributed environments.

naverOriginal article

Naver TV (opens in new tab)

This session from NAVER Engineering Day 2025 explores how developers can transition AI from a simple assistant into a functional project collaborator through local automation. By leveraging local Large Language Models (LLMs) and the Model Context Protocol (MCP), development teams can automate high-friction tasks such as build failure diagnostics and crash log analysis. The presentation demonstrates that integrating these tools directly into the development pipeline significantly reduces the manual overhead required for routine troubleshooting and reporting. ### Integrating LLMs with Local Environments * Utilizing **Ollama** allows teams to run LLMs locally, ensuring data privacy and reducing latency compared to cloud-based alternatives. * The **mcp-agent** (Model Context Protocol) serves as the critical bridge, connecting the LLM to local file systems, tools, and project-specific data. * This infrastructure enables the AI to act as an "agent" that can autonomously navigate the codebase rather than just processing static text prompts. ### Build Failure and Crash Monitoring Automation * When a build fails, the AI agent automatically parses the logs to identify the root cause, providing a concise summary instead of requiring a developer to sift through thousands of lines of terminal output. * For crash monitoring, the system goes beyond simple summarization by analyzing stack traces and identifying the specific developer or team responsible for the affected code segment. * By automating the initial diagnostic phase, the time between an error occurring and a developer beginning the fix is dramatically shortened. ### Intelligent Reporting via Slack * The system integrates with **Slack** to deliver automated, context-aware reports that categorize issues by severity and impact. * These reports include actionable insights, such as suggested fixes or links to relevant documentation, directly within the communication channel used by the team. * This ensures that project stakeholders remain informed of the system's health without requiring manual status updates from engineers. ### Considerations for LLM and MCP Implementation * While powerful, the combination of LLMs and MCP agents is not a "silver bullet"; it requires careful prompt engineering and boundary setting to prevent hallucination in technical diagnostics. * Effective automation depends on the quality of the local context provided to the agent; the more structured the logs and metadata, the more accurate the AI's conclusions. * Organizations should evaluate the balance between the computational cost of running local models and the productivity gains achieved through automation. To successfully implement AI-driven automation, developers should start by targeting specific, repetitive bottlenecks—such as triaging build errors—before expanding the agent's scope to more complex architectural tasks. Focusing on the integration between Ollama and mcp-agent provides a secure, extensible foundation for building a truly "smart" development workflow.

kakaoOriginal article

[AI_TOP_10 (opens in new tab)

The AI TOP 100 contest was designed to shift the focus from evaluating AI model performance to measuring human proficiency in solving real-world problems through AI collaboration. By prioritizing the "problem-solving process" over mere final output, the organizers sought to identify individuals who can define clear goals and navigate the technical limitations of current AI tools. The conclusion of this initiative suggests that true AI literacy is defined by the ability to maintain a "human-in-the-loop" workflow where human intuition guides AI execution and verification. ### Core Philosophy of Human-AI Collaboration * **Human-in-the-Loop:** The contest emphasizes a cycle of human analysis, AI problem-solving, and human verification. This ensures that the human remains the "pilot" who directs the AI engine and takes responsibility for the quality of the result. * **Strategic Intervention:** Participants were encouraged to provide AI with structural context it might struggle to perceive (like complex table relationships) and to perform data pre-processing to improve AI accuracy. * **Task Delegation:** For complex iterative tasks, such as generating images for a montage, solvers were expected to build automated pipelines using AI agents to handle repetitive feedback loops while focusing human effort on higher-level strategy. ### Designing Against "One-Shot" Solutions * **Low Barrier, High Ceiling:** Problems were designed to be intuitive enough for anyone to understand but complex enough to prevent "one-shot" solutions (the "click-and-solve" trap). * **Targeting Technical Weaknesses:** Organizers intentionally embedded technical hurdles that current LLMs struggle with, forcing participants to demonstrate how they bridge the gap between AI limitations and a correct answer. * **The Difficulty Ladder:** To account for varying domain expertise (e.g., OCR experience), problems utilized a multi-part structure. This included "Easy" starting questions to build momentum and "Medium" hint questions that guided participants toward solving the more difficult "Killer" components. ### The 4-Pattern Problem Framework * **P1 - Insight (Analysis & Definition):** Identifying meaningful opportunities or problems within complex, unstructured data. * **P2 - Action (Implementation & Automation):** Developing functional code or workflows to execute a defined solution. * **P3 - Persuasion (Strategy & Creativity):** Generating logical and creative content to communicate technical solutions to non-technical stakeholders. * **P4 - Decision (Optimization):** Making optimal choices and simulations to maximize goals under specific constraints. ### Quality Assurance and Score Calibration * **4-Stage Pipeline:** Problems moved from Ideation to Drafting (testing for one-shot immunity), then to Candidate (analyzing abuse vulnerabilities), and finally to a Final selection based on difficulty balance. * **Cross-Model Validation:** Internal and alpha testers solved problems using various models including Claude, GPT, and Gemini to ensure that no single tool could bypass the intended human-led process. * **Effort-Based Scoring:** Instead of uniform points, scores were calibrated based on the "effort cost" and human competency required to solve them. This resulted in varying total points per problem to better reflect the true difficulty of the task. In the era of rapidly evolving AI, the ability to "use" a tool is becoming less valuable than the ability to "collaborate" with it. This shift requires a move toward building automated pipelines and utilizing a "difficulty ladder" approach to tackle complex, multi-stage problems that AI cannot yet solve in a single iteration.

figma2 min readCurated summary

Creativity meets precision with Gemini 3 Pro Image Pro | Figma Blog

Google’s Nano Banana Pro, part of Gemini 3 Pro, brings more precise and context-aware image editing to creative workflows. The model can generate variations while preserving a design’s visual identity, including its palette, typography, composition, and subject likeness. Figma presents it as a tool for refining and extending ideas across products rather than simply regenerating images. ## Design Coherence Across Variations - Nano Banana Pro retains a design’s “visual DNA,” including color, texture, type, composition, and imagery. - In Figma Buzz, it creates branded social-asset variations while preserving logos, simple illustrations, and overall composition. - It can adapt illustrations for different contexts, such as converting a set of winter-themed images into dark-mode versions with minimal prompting. ## Extending Existing Work - The model can place illustrations into new environments while matching lighting and mood-board references. - In Figma Slides, it embedded an astrology-app illustration into a cozy reading scene and added complementary details such as a star-shaped light. - It can reframe portraits, change camera angles, and update backgrounds while maintaining a person’s likeness. - This makes it useful for keeping employee headshots and other brand imagery visually consistent. ## Building Composite Scenes - Figma Weave enables users to combine graphics, copy, photography, and other visual elements into unified scenes. - Nano Banana Pro helps maintain coherence when disparate assets are composited together. - These scenes can be extended with Google’s Veo for motion, as well as 3D models, upscalers, background-removal tools, and prompt-refinement models. ## Editing in Context Across Figma - The model is integrated into Figma’s products, including Buzz, Design, Slides, and Weave. - Users can refine existing images instead of starting over, making targeted changes to text, spot colors, and other details. - Typography can be localized, faces remain natural, and the surrounding visual context is preserved. Nano Banana Pro is most valuable when creative teams need fast iteration without sacrificing brand consistency or image integrity. Figma recommends experimenting with it directly as a flexible tool for refining, remixing, and expanding visual concepts.

Read original(opens in new tab)
googleOriginal article

Generative UI: A rich, custom, visual interactive user experience for any prompt (opens in new tab)

Google Research has introduced a novel Generative UI framework that enables AI models to dynamically construct bespoke, interactive user experiences—including web pages, games, and functional tools—in response to any natural language prompt. This shift from static, predefined interfaces to AI-generated environments allows for highly customized digital spaces that adapt to a user's specific intent and context. Evaluated through human testing, these custom-generated interfaces are strongly preferred over traditional, text-heavy LLM outputs, signaling a fundamental evolution in human-computer interaction. ### Product Integration in Gemini and Google Search The technology is currently being deployed as an experimental feature across Google’s main AI consumer platforms to enhance how users visualize and interact with data. * **Dynamic View and Visual Layout:** These experiments in the Gemini app use agentic coding capabilities to design and code a complete interactive response for every prompt. * **AI Mode in Google Search:** Available for Google AI Pro and Ultra subscribers, this feature uses Gemini 3’s multimodal understanding to build instant, bespoke interfaces for complex queries. * **Contextual Customization:** The system differentiates between user needs, such as providing a simplified interface for a child learning about the microbiome versus a data-rich layout for an adult. * **Task-Specific Tools:** Beyond text, the system generates functional applications like fashion advisors, event planners, and science simulations for topics like RNA transcription. ### Technical Architecture and Implementation The Generative UI implementation relies on a multi-layered approach centered around the Gemini 3 Pro model to ensure the generated code is both functional and accurate. * **Tool Access:** The model is connected to server-side tools, including image generation and real-time web search, to enrich the UI with external data. * **System Instructions:** Detailed guidance provides the model with specific goals, formatting requirements, and technical specifications to avoid common coding errors. * **Agentic Coding:** The model acts as both a designer and a developer, writing the necessary code to render the UI on the fly based on its interpretation of the user’s prompt. * **Post-Processing:** Outputs undergo a series of automated checks to address common issues and refine the final visual experience before it reaches the browser. ### The Shift from Static to Generative Interfaces This research represents a move away from the traditional software paradigm where users must navigate a fixed catalog of applications to find the tool they need. * **Prompt-Driven UX:** Interfaces are generated from prompts as simple as a single word or as complex as multi-paragraph instructions. * **Interactive Comprehension:** By building simulations on the fly, the system creates a dynamic environment optimized for deep learning and task completion. * **Preference Benchmarking:** Research indicates that when generation speed is excluded as a factor, users significantly prefer these custom-built visual tools over standard, static AI responses. To experience this new paradigm, users can select the "Thinking" option from the model menu in Google Search’s AI Mode or engage with the Dynamic View experiment in the Gemini app to generate tailored tools for specific learning or productivity tasks.

googleOriginal article

DS-STAR: A state-of-the-art versatile data science agent (opens in new tab)

DS-STAR is an advanced autonomous data science agent developed to handle the complexity and heterogeneity of real-world data tasks, ranging from statistical analysis to visualization. By integrating a specialized file analysis module with an iterative planning and verification loop, the system can interpret unstructured data and refine its reasoning steps dynamically based on execution feedback. This architecture allows DS-STAR to achieve state-of-the-art performance on major industry benchmarks, effectively bridging the gap between natural language queries and executable, verified code. ## Comprehensive Data File Analysis The framework addresses a major limitation of current agents—the over-reliance on structured CSV files—by implementing a dedicated analysis stage for diverse data formats. * The system automatically scans a directory to extract context from heterogeneous formats, including JSON, unstructured text, and markdown files. * A Python-based analysis script generates a textual summary of the data structure and content, which serves as the foundational context for the planning phase. * This module ensures the agent can navigate complex, multi-file environments where critical information is often spread across non-relational sources. ## Iterative Planning and Verification Architecture DS-STAR utilizes a sophisticated loop involving four specialized roles to mimic the workflow of a human expert conducting sequential analysis. * **Planner and Coder:** A Planner agent establishes high-level objectives, which a Coder agent سپس translates into executable Python scripts. * **LLM-based Verification:** A Verifier agent acts as a judge, assessing whether the generated code and its output are sufficient to solve the problem or if the reasoning is flawed. * **Dynamic Routing:** If the Verifier identifies gaps, a Router agent guides the refinement process by adding new steps or correcting errors, allowing the cycle to repeat for up to 10 rounds. * **Intermediate Review:** The agent reviews intermediate results before proceeding to the next step, similar to how data scientists use interactive environments like Google Colab. ## Benchmarking and State-of-the-Art Performance The effectiveness of the DS-STAR framework was validated through rigorous testing against existing agents like AutoGen and DA-Agent. * The agent secured the top rank on the public DABStep leaderboard, raising accuracy from 41.0% to 45.2% compared to previous best-performing models. * Performance gains were consistent across other benchmarks, including KramaBench (39.8% to 44.7%) and DA-Code (37.0% to 38.5%). * DS-STAR showed a significant advantage in "hard" tasks—those requiring the synthesis of information from multiple, varied data sources—demonstrating its superior versatility in complex environments. By automating the time-intensive tasks of data wrangling and verification, DS-STAR provides a robust template for the next generation of AI assistants. Organizations looking to scale their data science capabilities should consider adopting iterative agentic workflows that prioritize multi-format data understanding and self-correcting execution loops.

lineOriginal article

Security Threat Cases and Countermeasures (opens in new tab)

Developing AI products introduces unique security vulnerabilities that extend beyond traditional software risks, ranging from package hallucinations to sophisticated indirect prompt injections. To mitigate these threats, organizations must move away from trusting LLM-generated content and instead implement rigorous validation, automated threat modeling, and input/output guardrails. The following summary details the specific risks and mitigation strategies identified by LY Corporation’s security engineering team. ## Slopsquatting and Package Hallucinations - AI models frequently hallucinate non-existent library or package names when providing coding instructions (e.g., suggesting `huggingface-cli` instead of the correct `huggingface_hub[cli]`). - Attackers exploit this by registering these hallucinated names on public registries to distribute malware to unsuspecting developers. - Mitigation requires developers to manually verify all AI-suggested commands and dependencies before execution in any environment. ## Prompt Injection and Arbitrary Code Execution - As seen in CVE-2024-5565 (Vanna AI), attackers can inject malicious instructions into prompts to force the application to execute arbitrary code. - This vulnerability arises when developers grant LLMs the autonomy to generate and run logic within the application context without sufficient isolation. - Mitigation involves treating LLM outputs as untrusted data, sanitizing user inputs, and strictly limiting the LLM's ability to execute system-level commands. ## Indirect Prompt Injection in Integrated AI - AI assistants integrated into office environments (like Gemini for Workspace) are susceptible to indirect prompt injections hidden within emails or documents. - A malicious email can contain "system-like" instructions that trick the AI into hiding content, redirecting users to phishing sites, or leaking data from other files. - Mitigation requires the implementation of robust guardrails that scan both the input data (the content being processed) and the generated output for instructional anomalies. ## Permission Risks in AI Agents and MCP - The use of Model Context Protocol (MCP) and coding agents creates risks where an agent might overstep its intended scope. - If an agent has broad access to a developer's environment, a malicious prompt in a public repository could trick the agent into accessing or leaking sensitive data (such as salary info or private keys) from a private repository. - Mitigation centers on the principle of least privilege, ensuring AI agents are restricted to specific, scoped directories and repositories. ## Embedding Inversion and Vector Store Vulnerabilities - Attacks targeting the retrieval phase of RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) systems can lead to data leaks. - Embedding Inversion techniques may allow attackers to reconstruct original sensitive text from the vector embeddings stored in a database. - Securing AI products requires protecting the integrity of the vector store and ensuring that retrieved context does not bypass security filters. ## Automated Security Assessment Tools - To scale security, LY Corporation is developing internal tools like "ConA" for automated threat modeling and "LAVA" for automated vulnerability assessment. - These tools aim to identify AI-specific risks during the design and development phases rather than relying solely on manual reviews. Effective AI security requires a shift in mindset: treat every LLM response as a potential security risk. Developers should adopt automated threat modeling and implement strict input/output validation layers to protect both the application infrastructure and user data from evolving AI-based exploits.

googleOriginal article

Accelerating the magic cycle of research breakthroughs and real-world applications (opens in new tab)

Google Research is accelerating a "magic cycle" where breakthrough scientific discoveries and real-world applications continuously reinforce one another through advanced AI models and open platforms. By leveraging agentic tools and large-scale foundations, the company is transforming complex data into actionable insights across geospatial analysis, genomics, and quantum computing. This iterative process aims to solve critical global challenges while simultaneously uncovering new frontiers for future innovation. ### Earth AI and Geospatial Reasoning * Google has integrated various geospatial models—including those for flood forecasting, wildfire tracking, and air quality—into a unified Earth AI program. * The newly introduced Geospatial Reasoning Agent uses Large Language Models (LLMs) to allow non-experts to ask complex questions and receive plain-language answers derived from diverse datasets. * Riverine flood models have been significantly expanded, now providing forecasts for over 2 billion people across 150 countries. * New Remote Sensing and Population Dynamics Foundations have been released to help researchers understand nuanced correlations in planetary data and supply chain management. ### DeepSomatic and Genomic Research * Building on ten years of genomics work, DeepSomatic is an AI tool designed to identify somatic mutations (genetic variants in tumors) to assist in cancer research. * The tool follows the development of previous foundational models like DeepVariant and DeepConsensus, which helped map human and non-human genomes. * These advancements aim to move the medical field closer to precision medicine by providing health practitioners with higher-resolution data on genetic variations. ### The Magic Cycle of Research and Development * Google highlights "Quantum Echoes" as a key breakthrough in quantum computing, contributing to the broader goal of solving fundamental scientific problems through high-scale computation. * The acceleration of discovery is largely attributed to "agentic tools" that assist scientists in navigating massive datasets and uncovering new research opportunities. * The company emphasizes a collaborative approach, making foundation models available to trusted testers and partners like the WHO and various international research institutes. To maximize the impact of these breakthroughs, organizations should look toward integrating multimodal AI agents that can bridge the gap between specialized scientific data and practical decision-making. By utilizing open platforms and foundation models, the broader scientific community can translate high-level research into scalable solutions for climate resilience, healthcare, and global policy.

airbnb2 min readCurated summary

GraphQL Data Mocking at Scale with LLMs and @generateMock

Airbnb’s `@generateMock` directive combines GraphQL schemas, product context, design references, and LLMs to generate realistic, type-safe mock data automatically. Integrated into the existing Niobe code-generation workflow, it reduces manual mock maintenance and helps client engineers prototype and test features before backend implementation is complete. ## Challenges with GraphQL Mocking - Manually creating large JSON responses or schema-generated objects is tedious and error-prone. - Client engineers often hardcode data or modify networking logic when the server is not yet ready, slowing frontend development. - Handwritten mocks drift out of sync as queries and schemas evolve. - Random generators and field-level resolvers lack the domain knowledge needed for convincing, meaningful data. ## Airbnb’s Goals - Eliminate hand-written mock data and ongoing maintenance. - Generate realistic data suitable for demos, snapshots, and tests. - Keep engineers in their normal local development workflow without requiring separate tools or repositories. ## The `@generateMock` Directive - Engineers can add `@generateMock` to GraphQL operations, fragments, or fields. - Optional arguments customize the generated data: - `id` identifies a mock and names generated helper functions. - `hints` provide instructions such as destinations, content, or desired density. - `designURL` links to a design mockup so generated names, addresses, and other values better match the intended UI. - The directive can be repeated with different arguments to create multiple mock variations. ## Integration with Niobe - After adding or changing `@generateMock` in a `.graphql` file, engineers run Niobe just as they would for ordinary GraphQL code generation. - Niobe generates: - JSON files containing the mock responses. - TypeScript, Kotlin, or Swift helpers for consuming the mocks. - Generated functions return instantiated, type-safe model objects for demo apps, snapshot tests, and unit tests. - Engineers can edit the generated JSON manually; Niobe preserves those changes during later generation runs. ## Context Used by the LLM Niobe supplies the LLM with information needed to create realistic results: - The mocked operations, fragments, fields, and their dependencies. - The relevant subset of the GraphQL schema and inline documentation. - Only schema types and fields needed to resolve the query, avoiding unnecessary context-window usage. - A snapshot image of the design referenced by `designURL`, generated through Airbnb’s internal design-document API.

Read original(opens in new tab)
googleOriginal article

Toward provably private insights into AI use (opens in new tab)

Google Research has introduced Provably Private Insights (PPI), a framework designed to analyze generative AI usage patterns while providing mathematical guarantees of user privacy. By integrating Large Language Models (LLMs) with differential privacy and trusted execution environments (TEEs), the system enables developers to derive aggregate trends from unstructured data without exposing individual user content. This approach ensures that server-side processing remains limited to privacy-preserving computations that are fully auditable by external parties. ### The Role of LLMs in Structured Summarization The system employs "data expert" LLMs to transform unstructured generative AI data into actionable, structured insights. * The framework utilizes open-source Gemma 3 models to perform specific analysis tasks, such as classifying transcripts into topics or identifying user frustration levels. * This "structured summarization" occurs entirely within a TEE, ensuring that the model processes raw data in an environment inaccessible to human operators or external processes. * Developers can update LLM prompts frequently to answer new research questions without compromising the underlying privacy architecture. ### Confidential Federated Analytics (CFA) Infrastructure The PPI system is built upon Confidential Federated Analytics, a technique that isolates data through hardware-based security and cryptographic verification. * User devices encrypt data and define specific authorized processing steps before uploading it to the server. * A TEE-hosted key management service only releases decryption keys to processing steps that match public, open-source code signatures. * System integrity is verified using Rekor, a public, tamper-resistant transparency log that allows external parties to confirm that the code running in the TEE is exactly what was published. ### Anonymization via Differential Privacy Once the LLM extracts features from the data, the system applies differential privacy (DP) to ensure that the final output does not reveal information about any specific individual. * The extracted categories are aggregated into histograms, with DP noise added to the final counts to prevent the identification of single users. * Because the privacy guarantee is applied at the aggregation stage, the system remains secure even if a developer uses a prompt specifically designed to isolate a single user's data. * All aggregation algorithms are open-source and reproducibly buildable, allowing for end-to-end verifiability of the privacy claims. By open-sourcing the PPI stack through the Google Parfait project and deploying it in applications like Pixel Recorder, this framework establishes a new standard for transparent data analysis. Developers should look to integrate similar TEE-based federated analytics to balance the need for product insights with the necessity of provable, hardware-backed user privacy.