Electroencephalography records mixtures of brain-source activity and shows that unknown local mechanism changes can supply the missing information and direct reconstruction is also more reliable than a matched-information spectral estimator.
Abstract
Electroencephalography (EEG) records mixtures of brain-source activity. Even with a known anatomical forward model, experiments that excite only part of the source-state space leave the dynamics unidentified, and repetition cannot resolve the ambiguity. We show that unknown local mechanism changes can supply the missing information. We consider linear dynamics among fixed anatomical sources with known source-state initialization patterns. Changing one source's update rule for one transition leaves a rank-one, source-specific signature in subsequent EEG: subtracting matched baseline responses isolates it, and the forward model identifies the source and calibrates its response history. Combining these histories with initialization responses recovers source interactions without baseline reachability and without first identifying the intervention coefficients. We establish sufficient recovery conditions, a direct estimator, and a noise-sensitivity bound conditional on correct source labels. Simulated EEG on anatomy derived from magnetic resonance imaging confirms the information gain: with baseline excitation confined to four of twelve source coordinates, eight unknown changes recover all dynamics in 32/32 systems, whereas baseline realization, baseline regression through an invertible forward model, and changes that leave the tested states unexposed all fail, and explicitly constructed alternative dynamics reproduce every baseline mean. Where baseline information suffices, direct reconstruction is also more reliable than a matched-information spectral estimator. Nonlocal changes and forward-model error limit accuracy even when source labels are correct.
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The possibility of inferring high-dimensional data inference in a model that consists of a prior and an auxiliary differentiable constraint given some additional information is considered, thereby allowing a range of potential applications in adapting models to new domains and tasks.
Alexandros Graikos, Esmeralda S. Whitammer, N. Jojic et al.· Neural Information Processin...· 316 citations· ⚡15
It is proved that any global minimizer of the trajectory balance objective can define a policy that samples exactly from the target distribution, and empirically demonstrate the benefits of the trajectories balance objective for GFlowNet convergence, diversity of generated samples, and robustness to long action sequenc...
Esmeralda S. Whitammer, Moksh Jain, Emmanuel Bengio et al.· Neural Information Processin...· 302 citations· ⚡60
An algorithm is proposed which leverages disentangled semantic factors to generate adversarial perturbation by altering controlled semantic attributes to fool the learner towards various "adversarial" targets.
Haonan Qiu, Chaowei Xiao, Lei Yang et al.· arXiv.org· 208 citations· ⚡17
This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.
This state-of-practice investigation was performed using a literature review followed by a multiple-case study approach and presents how inconsistency between managerial strategies and execution can lead to failure by means of a behavioral framework.
Carmine Giardino, Xiaofeng Wang, P. Abrahamsson· International Conference on...· 175 citations· ⚡19
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 23, 2026
Assistant Professor Benjamin Lindquist studies how engineers deliberately injected randomness into early AI, giving rise to deep-learning models that sometimes hallucinate.