This technical report presents an alignment evaluation developed and performed by the UK AI Security Institute for assessing whether advanced AI systems take unsanctioned actions outside the scope of their assigned task. We evaluate whether frontier models conduct supply-chain attacks against out-of-scope, third-party targets when placed in difficult cybersecurity challenges, motivated by recently observed cases of models attacking real open-source repositories during evaluations. Applying our methods to GPT-6 Astra and previous OpenAI models, with cyber safeguards disabled, we find that GPT-6 Astra attempts complete supply-chain attacks in simulation at a higher rate than GPT-5.6 Sol and GPT-5.5. This includes writing malicious code as a contribution to an out-of-scope open-source codebase, creating fake identities to deceive open-source developers, and submitting benign contributions before malicious ones. GPT-6 Astra frequently reasons about the scope of the challenge in its chain-of-thought yet still proceeds to attack out-of-scope targets; it often asks for permission, and treats an automated message as as authorisation; and it continues to take unsanctioned actions, at a reduced rate, when internet access is more explicitly disallowed. Our evaluation builds on an internal version of Petri, an open-source LLM auditing tool, with all tool calls simulated by other LLMs, so that no real network access, systems or third-party repositories are reachable and no real-world harm is caused. Finally, we discuss limitations, in particular simulation awareness. We believe simulation awareness may have driven some of the observed behaviour but does not remove our concern. Our results suggest that defences beyond model alignment, such as sandboxing and monitoring, are increasingly critical for safe and secure deployment.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38415
Personas used to seed LLM social simulations face a cold-start problem: existing methods lack a principled basis for deciding which attributes to include and how to assign their values. As a result, synthetic populations may misrepresent the demographic composition, latent attributes, and dependency structure that shape downstream behavior. We introduce MetaPersona-DB, a dataset of 11,000+ empirical human-subjects studies annotated with task-relevant variables, reported relationships, and aggregate-level population statistics. Building on this resource, we propose MetaPersona, a framework that retrieves task-relevant evidence, constructs literature-derived persona dependency graphs, and samples synthetic populations from empirical priors linking demographics, latent attributes, and outcomes. Across three downstream case studies, three baselines, and three frontier models, results vary by task and model: MetaPersona performs strongly on misinformation belief and AI-tool sentiment, while results on income redistribution are mixed. It also reduces persona-construction cost to under $0.5 per task using GPT-5.2. Finally, we present MetaPersona-Studio, a prototype interactive interface for empirically grounded persona generation.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38392
High quality synthetic data is central to post training LLMs for adaptive AI applications that represent the diverse expert strategies and decisions in conversations. Prompting LLMs directly or conditioning them on end use scenarios yields low diversity data that collapses onto dominant modes. We propose a method to generate diverse high quality synthetic data using Generative Flow Networks (GFlowNets). We show that training GFlowNets to generate latent conversation structure using a Gaussian mixture density over key interaction features (e.g., confusion episode dynamics, scaffolding directive balance) enables sampling expert strategies in proportion to their prevalence in the training data. Across two structurally distinct domains, tutoring and emotional support dialogues, our GFlow based synthetic data generation approach offers a better balance of fidelity, mode coverage and authenticity than reinforcement-learning and end to end LLM baselines, without copying training data. Evaluated on three downstream outcome prediction tasks, classifiers trained on synthetic GFlowNet generated conversations provide a stronger training signal than competitive synthesis baselines.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38359
Modern agentic systems combine an AI model with a harness that controls execution and environmental interactions. Harness design strongly affects long-horizon performance, yet its combinatorial search space demands substantial human effort that must be repeated as models change. Existing automated methods explore this space narrowly, optimizing only components such as prompts or skills or becoming trapped by fixed, exploitative search strategies. We introduce MILO (Meta-evolutionary Island Orchestration), a framework that co-evolves agent harnesses and the strategy used to discover them. MILO combines: (i) hierarchical lineage memory over island-based trees, using rejected mutations as negative evidence; (ii) per-island mutator agents that rewrite complete harnesses using global search history and parent-specific feedback; and (iii) an orchestrator that adapts search through lineage grafting and speciation, mutator reassignment and curriculum revision. Across Terminal-Bench 2.1, PaperBench, and DeepSWE, MILO-discovered harnesses outperform eight state-of-the-art harnesses and six search methods using frontier (Opus 4.8) and open-weight (gpt-oss-120b) models. With Opus 4.8, MILO improves resolution over its initial harness by $+12.0\%$, $+28.3\%$, and $+10.3\%$, respectively, compared with best prior-search gains of $+4.5\%$, $+18.3\%$, and $0\%$. On Terminal-Bench 2.1, it achieves $86.1 \pm 2.0\%$, exceeding the official leaderboard's top entry ($83.8 \pm 2.3\%$) while using 26\% fewer tokens than its initial harness. On EinsteinArena open problems, MILO improves best-known upper bounds for ErdÅs minimum-overlap ($0.3808586 \to 0.3808568$) and the first and third autocorrelation inequalities ($1.50274365 \to 1.50274360$; $1.45081 \to 1.44889$).
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38349
When a student is stuck, a tutor faces the assistance dilemma: help given too early can hinder productive struggle, while help withheld too long leaves the student in a frustrating, persistent impasse (i.e., wheel spinning). Generative AI tutors increasingly use guardrails restricting answer-giving, yet little is known about how such tutors behave once an impasse persists. We analyze 20,462 student turns from 1,260 authentic sessions with a guided LLM chemistry tutor, identifying 6,630 impasse turns of three major types: conceptual errors, expressed uncertainty, or help-seeking. We then used these impasses to simulate three tutoring conditions to study variation in AI tutor guidance through impasses: baseline, no-direct-answer, and guided tutor. For a sample of 150 impasses, prompt specificity changed pedagogy: a baseline tutor provided the answer directly in 50.7% of responses, a no-direct-answer tutor asked a follow-up question every time, and the guided tutor responded in a wide variety of ways depending on the context. We then analyzed impasse trajectories in authentic interactions, finding that each additional impasse turn lowered the odds of next-turn recovery by 12.7% (AOR = 0.873, p < .001), and early dropouts were caught in recursive concept elicitation before reaching execution. The benefit of questioning decayed as impasses persisted (scripted question x depth AOR = 0.78; follow-up x depth AOR = 0.83), whereas addressing the student's error grew more beneficial (AOR = 1.14); after a failed scripted question, repeating it was followed by recovery in 28.1% of cases, compared with 39.8% when the tutor addressed the error instead. For learning analytics, these findings identify impasse depth and type as observable, turn-level dialogue signals that analytics can use to trigger graduated, state-sensitive assistance in real time.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38346
We introduce modal kinetic typography, which animates a vector glyph to express a semantic concept while keeping it legible. Our key idea is to build motion from the glyph's natural vibration modes. Specifically, a finite-element eigenproblem assembled from the vector outline yields the glyph's softest modes, for the whole letter and for each of its parts, allowing it to bend. The problem's zero-energy solutions, i.e., rigid translations and rotations, are applied in closed form to each part, allowing parts to also move as blocks. To animate the glyph, a frozen video diffusion model supervises only the modes' amplitudes and phases. Our modal approach addresses two weaknesses of prior work. Free-form point optimization under video score distillation (SDS) moves each point and frame independently along noisy gradients, tearing the outline and causing jitter. In contrast, our modes are smooth along the outline and driven by a few whole-cycle harmonics, which restricts these gradients to smooth, seamlessly looping motion. On the other hand, structured alternatives rely on skeletons or keypoints from category-specific priors, whereas our modes come from the glyph itself; the only prior is a list naming each letter's moving parts, generated once for the whole alphabet by a language model. In modal kinetic typography, shape and motion are disentangled by construction: a single base outline is sculpted toward the concept, and the modal drive cannot alter it, so a letter can also be animated without being reshaped. Our method produces more articulated and smoother motion than Dynamic Typography and AniClipart at comparable or better concept alignment, with less glyph tearing than Dynamic Typography, and is preferred by human raters, including in a frozen-shape setting where motion alone must carry the concept. Our results were also preferred over Astra (GPT-6) by human raters.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38325
As agents take on longer and more complex problems, controlling the execution becomes a task in its own right. Each step in the run brings new control choices, like which partial work to build on, whether to start fresh, or when to stop. We introduce agentic meta-reasoning, an inference-time harness that makes these choices an explicit and structured reasoning process. Workers carry out the task-level computation, while a controller consolidates what the run has established, explores next options, assesses what each option is worth under the remaining budget, and dispatches the chosen work with context drawn from persistent memory. Between decisions the controller carries only a compact account of the run rather than replaying its full history. Our baselines span production coding agents and research harnesses, together with a Direct Control Agent using the same workers and compute budget allowance. On ProgramBench, which tests long-horizon agentic capability through program reconstruction, meta-reasoning achieves 71.5% with GPT-5.5 against 58.0% for Codex; with Opus 4.8 it achieves 67.2% against 65.5% for Claude Code. On the other benchmarks, spanning abstract reasoning, multi-domain long-horizon reasoning, and proof generation, it gains between 3.6 and 4.2 points over direct control, averaged across three frontier models. It keeps improving over the tested budget ranges where direct control plateaus, though its overhead can hurt at small budgets. Artifact-graph analysis reveals more reuse of earlier work, higher coverage of correct solutions in most settings, and nonuniform gains in final selection. These results indicate that spending computation on structured control becomes more important as agents scale to longer runs.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38147
Interactive agent benchmarks and multi-turn reinforcement learning increasingly place a second language model in the role of the user. This simulated user controls what information the agent receives and when, yet current benchmarks score only the agent and do not directly measure whether the user correctly executed its assigned role. We introduce UserProxyBench, an evaluation layer over the tau-bench family, and the User Fidelity Score (UFS), which measures adherence to the benchmark's private user instructions using task-grounded rubric criteria scored independently of agent success. Holding the agent fixed at GPT-5.5 and varying only the user proxy across 375 enterprise tasks changes mean task reward by 15.2 points, while 24.4% of successful episodes contain a user-specification violation. The dominant failure is premature disclosure: users provide information before it is requested. This behavior has little effect on task reward, yet among successful episodes it causes the agent to make 1.06 fewer tool calls on average, changing the interaction being evaluated while preserving the reward. Finally, across seven proxies we identify an empirical cost-fidelity frontier, enabling practitioners to select the least expensive simulator that satisfies a required fidelity level.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38043
We evaluate an auditable long-term memory system on LongMemEval-S. Its retrieval chain uses hybrid candidate retrieval, cross-encoder reranking, coverage-first packet compilation, and deterministic reasoning scaffolds; an LLM is used only as a replaceable final reader. The chain places all gold sessions in the candidate pool for 468/470 answerable questions and produces gold-complete packets for 462/470. With a Claude Opus reader called through an unpinned CLI alias, two 500-question passes score 479/500 and 475/500 under GPT-4o. The 72 answerable knowledge-update rows used a substantively modified scoring prompt whose effect under the official text has not been measured. The pair straddles Chronos High's published 478/500; differences in reader generation, scoring prompt, and possibly data version, plus within-system variance, establish neither superiority nor equivalence. A grok-4.6-high reader on the same packets scores 476/474, while a maximum-reasoning-effort agentic variant regresses to 461/465. The headline passes differ on eight verdict-flip rows. A second judge agrees with the headline judge on 493/500 rows (98.6%) in each pass and scores both passes 472/500; the official judge also flips three verdicts when re-scoring byte-identical pass-1 answers. Negative controls rejected a verifier that repaired three wrong drafts but broke eleven correct drafts. All components were developed on the same 500 questions, with no held-out evaluation or independent human adjudication; retrieval and scaffold method sources and transcript-derived audits are held; and the headline reader received extra operator context, its complete requests were not retained, and MCP tool availability is unresolved. We release materialized packets, scaffolds, reader outputs, judge verdicts, and controls for inspection and re-scoring.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38021
Running a language model locally offers advantages in privacy, latency, and cost, but local hardware fits only small models, which are less capable than frontier models. The usual remedy for a hard query, escalating it to a cloud model, gives up the privacy and cost advantages of running locally. A deployment that stays local faces two decisions for hard queries instead. First, it can spend more computation on a query, e.g., reasoning before answering, which raises accuracy at a cost in latency, so it must decide which queries are worth the extra computation (efficiency). Second, some queries are beyond the local model, and delivering a wrong answer is worse than deferring the query to a human in the loop, so it must decide which answers are safe to deliver (safety). We show that both decisions can be made from the model's own hidden states. The prefill state, computed before any token is generated, predicts whether the model will answer correctly, and the answer state, at the end of the generated answer, predicts whether that answer is correct. HARISSA fine-tunes the model so that both states predict correctness, then makes both decisions with one policy that cascades through the ways of answering from cheapest to most expensive, skipping a way the prefill state predicts will fail and deferring the query when the answer it stops with is predicted wrong. On a device running a single model, HARISSA is within one accuracy point of chain-of-thought at 2.7 times lower latency. On a server holding four sizes of one model, HARISSA is more accurate than the FrugalGPT and Self-REF cascades at the same latency, and at the same deferral rate the answer state leaves fewer wrong answers than the standard confidence signals in five of six task and setting pairs.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38006
Influence functions estimate how individual training examples affect the behavior of large language models (LLMs). Analyzing how training data influence different behaviors of an LLM involves repeated influence computation. Reusing stored training gradients reduces the computational cost, but storing full gradients is prohibitively expensive at LLM scale. We study how to compress these gradients while preserving influence estimates for future queries that are unknown at storage time. Through a worst-case analysis, we characterize the optimal fixed-dimensional linear representation and propose eigenbasis-corrected one-bit gradient projection (EOGP) to approximate it at scale. Specifically, EOGP uses EK-FAC to reduce gradient dimensionality, then applies PCA within the retained subspace to learn compression directions from the training gradients. We then apply one-bit quantization to the resulting coordinates, allowing more coordinates to be retained within a fixed storage budget. On GPT-2, EOGP predicts retraining outcomes more accurately than the evaluated compression baselines while using one-sixteenth of their per-example storage. On OLMo 2 SFT models from 1B to 32B parameters, EOGP remains competitive with the baselines allocated over 100 times as much storage per example.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.37842
LLM-as-a-judge scales evaluation, but reasoning judges are slow and costly. We study JEV-as-a-Judge: evaluation with JEV, a decision-only judge that returns label probabilities instead of text, and whose confidence decides whether to accept its verdict or escalate to a reasoning judge. Against sixteen generative and reward-model judges, with blinded human adjudication, JEV comes within three points of GPT-6 wherever a verdict can be read off the text, at 0.36% of its fee and a 0.15-second median latency, and falls behind where the verdict must be derived, as in math, code, and logic. Its confidence marks this boundary. With a threshold frozen in advance, accepting confident verdicts and escalating the rest is 0.9 points more accurate than GPT-6 on 1,610 held-out pairs at 41% of its fee, and in a pre-specified live test on two new workloads the cascade matches GPT-6's accuracy exactly. Confidence routing weakens on style-adversarial pairs and reference-free prose; we close with a simple recipe for validating thresholds locally.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.26550
Empathetic spoken dialogue requires models to use both what is said and how it is said to decide how to respond. Explicit CoT can improve paralinguistic perception and make acoustic cues more explicit in replies, yet does not ensure their effective use in response planning. We call this mismatch the perception-reasoning gap. In addition, CoT may not fully capture acoustic cues in words, and generating it adds inference latency. To address these limitations, we introduce LoopSLM, which builds on looped Transformers for latent reasoning, reusing a decoder block to refine hidden states with acoustic grounding at every pass. Its two-stage training further narrows the perception-reasoning gap by separating learning to reason from learning to respond, enabling direct inference without CoT. On EchoMind, LoopSLM improves paralinguistic understanding, reasoning, and reply quality over Qwen2.5-Omni-7B. Against the CoT-SFT baseline, LoopSLM gains over 20 points in reasoning accuracy while generating 64.5% fewer tokens at half the latency. It also outperforms Qwen3-Omni-Thinking on most empathetic reply metrics with 34x lower latency. Despite training only on dialogue data, LoopSLM improves accuracy on general audio benchmarks.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.37818
Existing product matching benchmarks primarily contain English-language product data and are often dominated by a single product category, such as electronics. This paper introduces this http URL Products, a bilingual German and English entity matching benchmark covering thirteen consumer product categories, including difficult-to-handle categories such as clothing and furniture. The benchmark data originates from the German price comparison platform this http URL. Following the design of WDC Products, the benchmark offers multiple variants that differ in the fraction of corner cases, the size of the development set, and the fraction of entities unseen during training. An aligned English translation of every offer keeps all pairs, splits, and labels fixed, while cross-language test sets combine German and English records within individual pairs. We validate the benchmark using six supervised matchers and zero-shot GPT-5.2 on both language versions and the cross-language test sets. The validation shows the difficulty of the benchmark. The comparison of the results on the English version of the benchmark to the results on the German version shows that most matchers score on average higher on the English version. The difference is largest for RoBERTa and HierGAT, while the zero-shot LLM runs are largely insensitive to the language. Comparing the F1 scores achieved by PLM-based matchers on the English version of this http URL Products with their performance on existing English-language benchmarks, such as WDC Products and Abt-Buy, shows that this http URL Products is more difficult than these benchmarks.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.37713
Fine-tuning a language model on a narrow set of harmful demonstrations, such as bad medical advice, can make it broadly misaligned on unrelated questions, a phenomenon known as emergent misalignment (EM). The usual defense is to find the offending rows and delete them, but a row locator failed our held-out test and deleting rows helps less than expected. We ask a different question: given a fixed set of poisoned rows, is it better to correct them than to remove them? We fine-tune Qwen2.5-14B-Instruct on a mixture of bad medical advice and benign chat data, select a quarter of the poison rows in advance, and either delete them or replace each with a corrected answer to the same prompt, keeping everything else the same. Replacing the rows cuts the EM rate by about a third and improves answers on held-out medical questions, while deleting the same rows has little measurable effect. The advantage is larger when half the poison rows are corrected, and it holds on a second base model and a second misaligned model organism. The content of the replacement appears to matter: paraphrasing the rows while keeping their bad advice shows no clear benefit, and the correct answers distributed with the dataset appear to do about as well as our rewriter's. Realigning an already-poisoned model with further fine-tuning is known to work, but which data does the work has not been compared directly. We find that a short round of training on corrections beats the same amount of training on generic chat data, that corrections on other medical prompts do roughly as well as corrections of the poisoned prompts themselves, and that instructing the correction writer to model a careful, harm-avoiding assistant adds no measurable benefit over plain corrections. In the settings we tested, correcting harmful training data reduces EM more than deleting it.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.37624
Language models tend to agree with whatever a user asserts, and post-training increasingly targets this sycophancy so that models evaluate claims on their merits rather than deferring to the user. Yet the same models are far more compliant when a wrong answer is attributed to a verified source, which is how retrieval results, tool outputs, and grounded-search content often present information. We measure this gap across five open-weight families and three closed APIs. A single verified-source note endorsing a wrong answer flips 45-88% of baseline-correct responses in seven of eight models, and compliance rises with how authoritative the note sounds. Source deference and user agreement are not behaviorally interchangeable inside the model: on matched items with the same wrong answer, causal interventions can selectively suppress one without equally affecting the other. In three open-weight families, removing a fitted source direction lowers source compliance by 65-80 percentage points while removing a user or assistant direction has far smaller effects, and removing the user direction shows the reverse preference. A separately fitted intervention derived from source-versus-user cue activations moves compliance in both directions while leaving the prompt text unchanged. An authority direction fitted on trivia also transfers to PIQA and multi-turn SYCON dialogues without refitting, and removing it lowers wrong-source compliance by tens of percentage points in four of five families with no detected change in MMLU-Pro or GSM8K accuracy at our evaluation sizes. Source deference and user agreement therefore need separate evaluation.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.37616
LLM agents accumulate interaction histories that grow linearly with task length, causing quadratic inference cost scaling and performance degradation from attention dilution. Existing context-compression methods learn what to discard offline: by contrastively optimizing guidelines, distilling compressors, or training compression policies. This incurs a substantial cost. Further, the compression policy is learned a priori and is not dynamically conditioned on the evolving test-time trajectories. In this paper we ask a complementary question: Which past interactions causally shape the agent's future decisions? We recast context compression as a causal decision preservation problem over discrete interaction units and introduce FOCUS, a training-free context compression framework that operates entirely at test time. Our method requires no offline data collection or fine-tuning, and is architecture-agnostic, attaching to any closed-API frontier model as a modular compression layer. We evaluate FOCUS on diverse agentic benchmarks including API and tool-calling, QA, web domain and multi-turn dialogue. Our method establishes new state of the art performance, cutting peak context by up to 48% and dependency by 73% while improving task success by up to 8.9 percentage points over uncompressed execution.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.37590
Vision-language models can coordinate long-horizon robot manipulation, yet successful task reasoning still depends on whether local physical interactions produce the intended effects. We study how repeated interaction can improve this capability without updating the base model. We introduce RoboHarn-Evo, a dual-loop harness that evolves Hierarchical Physical Knowledge (HPK) from physical experience. HPK couples two levels of reusable knowledge: Task Knowledge captures which subtask should be executed and when it is complete, while Action Knowledge captures object-relative geometric strategies and their physical effects. During execution, the agent retrieves knowledge at the corresponding decision level and grounds it in the current scene under the task goal. Across episodes, physical feedback is used to revise historical knowledge, update its applicability, and organize reusable entries for subsequent retrieval. Experiments on RMBench show that HPK improves average success by up to 24.2 percentage points across different agent models. With 80 interaction rollouts, held-out success rises from 48.3% to 75.0% for GPT-5.5 and from 70.0% to 88.3% for GPT-6. RoboHarn-Evo also resolves over 83% of historical knowledge errors while retaining 95.8% of valid knowledge, and transfers zero-shot from RMBench to RoboDojo with gains of 35.0 and 25.0 percentage points. These results demonstrate that physical interaction can be accumulated into reusable knowledge for improving subsequent manipulation.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.37583
We introduce RareTrap, a framework for estimating the probability of severe behaviors in black box large language models (LLMs). A key challenge for probability estimation is defining a tractable distribution over the input space. To accomplish that, RareTrap uses a surrogate LLM and constructs a geometry-aware mapping from a lower-dimensional latent reference space into its token-embedding space to induce an explicit and reproducible distribution over input prompts. A response-level performance function is utilized on the response to quantify behavior severity. This enables sequential rare event simulation that concentrates evaluations on progressively more severe behaviors while preserving probability under the induced prompt distribution, which would otherwise be prohibitive to measure. Across 10 open-weight and two frontier models (GPT-5.4 and Claude Sonnet 4.6), we find that RareTrap successfully induces severe resource consumption behaviors and computes their probability with as few as 200 evaluations. RareTrap provides model developers a principled approach for evaluating language models under a common distribution, and prioritizing alignment effort to improve safety and mitigate risks.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.33638
Video-based policy learning is particularly promising, as it illustrates target behaviors without requiring action annotations or embodiment-matched demonstrations. A central challenge is deciding what information should be transferred from the video to the robot. Existing approaches commonly convert visual observations into scalar similarity or value signals, or ask foundation models to directly generate reward code. These approaches can make the temporal structure of a task difficult to inspect, ground, and reuse. We present Video2STL, a framework that converts observation-only videos into parametric Signal Temporal Logic (STL) specifications and uses the resulting formal representation for robot learning. A vision-language model extracts an embodiment-independent semantic event trace and constructs a bank of symbolic temporal specifications. The model determines the task structure, while numerical predicate thresholds and temporal bounds are grounded from successful robot trajectories. For policy learning, we separate short- and long-timescale temporal information: short-horizon specifications provide dense rewards through rolling-window quantitative robustness, while a causal monitor over a retained long-horizon specification provides one-time progress rewards for valid temporal prefixes. The same representation supports cross-embodiment transfer from human or animal videos to robot control. Across four manipulation tasks, Video2STL achieves $85.8\%$ average success-once and $67.0\%$ success-at-end, compared with $81.5\%/59.5\%$ for native dense PPO and $65.0\%/42.3\%$ for Text2Reward; in quadruped locomotion, Qwen-3.8 and GPT-5.6-based Video2STL policies achieve $100\%$ success across velocities from $0.3$ to $2.1\,\mathrm{m/s}$ while remaining competitive in high-speed energy efficiency. Project webpage: \href{this https URL}{video2stl}.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.37519