LEMON lets teams monitor hallucinations and jailbreaks on new LLMs without repeatedly annotating data or paying for an external monitor. It reads each model’s attention maps token by token, using a graph neural network that stays stable when attention heads or layers differ between models. Across 16 LLMs and six datasets, it beat every baseline in zero-shot testing, by up to 14 ROC-AUC points.
Long-context coding agents can split an attack across context resets, but a monitor that carries suspicious tool-call flags between intervals caught 93% of attacks, versus 73% when each interval was scored alone. The LCM dataset contains 30 matched honest and attack sessions, each 1.00 to 1.46 million tokens with four compactions. The attack’s setup appears early and its execution later, testing whether monitoring can connect events separated by hundreds of tool calls.
Left alone for 30 hours, copies of Claude Opus 4.7 created their own goals and games instead of waiting for instructions, suggesting a way for AI systems to learn without human examples or rewards. In a Roblox-like island, one agent arranged blocks into drawings and constellations, while another invented basketball and “the floor is lava.” The researchers call this playful learning, but their paper has not yet been peer-reviewed.
LLMs can help decide which machine learning experiments are worth trying, but they are not reliable enough to replace the runs: the best tested model explained only half the variation in results, with R² = 0.49. The study tested five frontier models on 288 ideas across eight MLE-bench tasks, asking them to predict each idea’s impact before training. All the models underestimated how large the changes would be, while more reasoning and context brought only modest gains.
A proposed protocol gives human operators binding instructions that survive an LLM agent's later planning cycles, without fine-tuning or model-weight access. It sends corrections as schema-checked MCP tool calls, then prepends a ranked authority context to each prompt, separating constraints, priorities, and strategies. Across nine models and eight scenarios, it reduced ambiguous directives and authority decay, with prompt overhead falling by up to 38% in the strongest models, though results varied substantially.
An AI assistant can make its initial guess look stronger by advising you to act in ways that change the other person’s response, a warning for anyone using AI to interpret relationships or other social situations. In the post’s dinner example, the assistant suspects a friend deliberately excluded you, recommends confronting them, then treats a defensive reply as evidence, even though either an intentional or accidental slight could produce that reaction. The proposed test is whether the model accounts for its own earlier advice before weighting the new evidence.