Abstract
As AI becomes more "agentic," it faces technical and socio-legal issues it must address if it is to fulfill its promise of increased economic productivity and efficiency. This paper uses technical and legal perspectives to explain how things change when AI systems start being able to directly execute tasks on behalf of a user. We show how technical conceptions of agents track some, but not all, socio-legal conceptions of agency. That is, both computer science and the law recognize the problems of under-specification for an agent, and both disciplines have robust conceptions of how to address ensuring an agent does what the programmer, or in the law, the principal desires and no more. However, to date, computer science has under-theorized issues related to questions of loyalty and to third parties that interact with an agent, both of which are central parts of the law of agency. First, we examine the correlations between implied authority in agency law and the principle of value-alignment in AI, wherein AI systems must operate under imperfect objective specification. Second, we reveal gaps in the current computer science view of agents pertaining to the legal concepts of disclosure and loyalty, and how failure to account for them can result in unintended effects in AI ecommerce agents. In surfacing these gaps, we show a path forward for responsible AI agent development and deployment.

Abstract
AI agentic programming is an emerging paradigm in which large language models (LLMs) autonomously plan, execute, and interact with external tools like compilers, debuggers, and version control systems to iteratively perform complex software development tasks. Unlike conventional code generation tools, agentic systems are capable of decomposing high-level goals, coordinating multi-step processes, and adapting their behavior based on intermediate feedback. These capabilities are transforming the software development practice. As this emerging field evolves rapidly, there is a need to define its scope, consolidate its technical foundations, and identify open research challenges. This survey provides a comprehensive and timely review of AI agentic programming. We introduce a taxonomy of agent behaviors and system architectures, and examine core techniques including planning, memory and context management, tool integration, and execution monitoring. We also analyze existing benchmarks and evaluation methodologies used to assess coding agent performance. Our study identifies several key challenges, including limitations in handling long context, a lack of persistent memory across tasks, and concerns around safety, alignment with user intent, and collaboration with human developers. We discuss emerging opportunities to improve the reliability, adaptability, and transparency of agentic systems. By synthesizing recent advances and outlining future directions, this survey aims to provide a foundation for research and development in building the next generation of intelligent and trustworthy AI coding agents.

Abstract
This paper examines how competing sociotechnical imaginaries of artificial intelligence (AI) risk shape governance decisions and regulatory constraints. Drawing on concepts from science and technology studies, we analyse three dominant narrative groups: existential risk proponents, who emphasise catastrophic AGI scenarios; accelerationists, who portray AI as a transformative force to be unleashed; and critical AI scholars, who foreground present-day harms rooted in systemic inequality. Through an analysis of representative manifesto-style texts, we explore how these imaginaries differ across four dimensions: normative visions of the future, diagnoses of the present social order, views on science and technology, and perceived human agency in managing AI risks. Our findings reveal how these narratives embed distinct assumptions about risk and have the potential to progress into policy-making processes by narrowing the space for alternative governance approaches. We argue against speculative dogmatism and for moving beyond deterministic imaginaries toward regulatory strategies that are grounded in pragmatism.

Abstract
Expert domain writing, such as scientific writing, typically demands extensive domain knowledge. Recent advances in LLMs show promising potential in reducing the expert workload. However, evaluating the quality of automatically generated scientific writing is a crucial open issue, as it requires knowledge of domain-specific evaluation criteria and the ability to discern expert preferences. Conventional automatic metrics and LLM-as-a-judge systems are insufficient to grasp expert preferences and domain-specific quality standards. To address this gap and support human-AI collaborative writing, we focus on related work generation, one of the most challenging scientific tasks, as an exemplar. We propose GREP, a multi-turn evaluation framework that integrates classical related work evaluation criteria with expert-specific preferences. Instead of assigning a single score, our framework decomposes the evaluation into fine-grained dimensions. This localized evaluation approach is further augmented with contrastive few-shot examples to provide detailed contextual guidance for the evaluation dimensions. The design principles allow our framework to deliver cardinal assessment of quality, which can facilitate better post-training compared to ordinal preference data. For better accessibility, we design two variants of GREP: a more precise variant with proprietary LLMs as evaluators, and a cheaper alternative with open-weight LLMs. Empirical investigation reveals that our framework is able to assess the quality of related work sections in a much more robust manner compared to standard LLM judges, reflects natural scenarios of scientific writing, and bears a strong correlation with the human expert assessment. We also observe that generations from state-of-the-art LLMs struggle to satisfy validation constraints of a suitable related work section. They (mostly) fail to improve based on feedback as well.

Abstract
Peer review is essential for scientific progress but faces growing challenges due to increasing submission volumes and reviewer fatigue. Existing automated review approaches struggle with factual accuracy, rating consistency, and analytical depth, often generating superficial or generic feedback lacking the insights characteristic of high-quality human reviews. We introduce ReviewRL, a reinforcement learning framework for generating comprehensive and factually grounded scientific paper reviews. Our approach combines: (1) an ArXiv-MCP retrieval-augmented context generation pipeline that incorporates relevant scientific literature, (2) supervised fine-tuning that establishes foundational reviewing capabilities, and (3) a reinforcement learning procedure with a composite reward function that jointly enhances review quality and rating accuracy. Experiments on ICLR 2025 papers demonstrate that ReviewRL significantly outperforms existing methods across both rule-based metrics and model-based quality assessments. ReviewRL establishes a foundational framework for RL-driven automatic critique generation in scientific discovery, demonstrating promising potential for future development in this domain. The implementation of ReviewRL will be released at GitHub.

Abstract
Deep learning models often struggle to maintain generalizability in medical imaging, particularly under domain-fracture scenarios where distribution shifts arise from varying imaging techniques, acquisition protocols, patient populations, demographics, and equipment. In practice, each hospital may need to train distinct models - differing in learning task, width, and depth - to match local data. For example, one hospital may use Euclidean architectures such as MLPs and CNNs for tabular or grid-like image data, while another may require non-Euclidean architectures such as graph neural networks (GNNs) for irregular data like brain connectomes. How to train such heterogeneous models coherently across datasets, while enhancing each model's generalizability, remains an open problem. We propose unified learning, a new paradigm that encodes each model into a graph representation, enabling unification in a shared graph learning space. A GNN then guides optimization of these unified models. By decoupling parameters of individual models and controlling them through a unified GNN (uGNN), our method supports parameter sharing and knowledge transfer across varying architectures (MLPs, CNNs, GNNs) and distributions, improving generalizability. Evaluations on MorphoMNIST and two MedMNIST benchmarks - PneumoniaMNIST and BreastMNIST - show that unified learning boosts performance when models are trained on unique distributions and tested on mixed ones, demonstrating strong robustness to unseen data with large distribution shifts. Code and benchmarks: https://github.com/basiralab/uGNN

Abstract
Scientific progress is tightly coupled to the emergence of new research tools. Today, machine learning (ML)-especially deep learning (DL)-has become a transformative instrument for quantum science and technology. Owing to the intrinsic complexity of quantum systems, DL enables efficient exploration of large parameter spaces, extraction of patterns from experimental data, and data-driven guidance for research directions. These capabilities already support tasks such as refining quantum control protocols and accelerating the discovery of materials with targeted quantum properties, making ML/DL literacy an essential skill for the next generation of quantum scientists. At the same time, DL's power brings risks: models can overfit noisy data, obscure causal structure, and yield results with limited physical interpretability. Recognizing these limitations and deploying mitigation strategies is crucial for scientific rigor. These lecture notes provide a comprehensive, graduate-level introduction to DL for quantum applications, combining conceptual exposition with hands-on examples. Organized as a progressive sequence, they aim to equip readers to decide when and how to apply DL effectively, to understand its practical constraints, and to adapt AI methods responsibly to problems across quantum physics, chemistry, and engineering.