







Introducing SYNTHETIC-1, a collaborative effort to create the largest open-source dataset of verified reasoning traces for math, coding and science, leveraging DeepSeek-R1.
OpenThoughts: Data Recipes for Reasoning Models — Ryan Marten, Bespoke Labs
Designing synthetic datasets for the real world: Mechanism design and reasoning from first principles
Tim R. Davidson, Student Researcher, and Hamza Harkous, Senior Staff Research Scientist, Google

DeepSeek_V4.pdf · deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Pro at main
We’re on a journey to advance and democratize artificial intelligence through open source and open science.
Run DeepSeek-R1 Dynamic 1.58-bit
DeepSeek R-1 is the most powerful open-source reasoning model that performs on par with OpenAI's o1 model. Run the 1.58-bit Dynamic GGUF version by Unsloth.

Propose, Solve, Verify: Self-Play Through Formal Verification
Training models through self-play alone (without any human data) has been a longstanding goal in AI, but its effectiveness for training large language models remains unclear, particularly in code generation where rewards based on unit tests are brittle and prone to error propagation. We study self-play in the verified code generation setting, where formal verification provides reliable correctness signals. We introduce Propose, Solve, Verify (PSV) a simple self-play framework where formal verification signals are used to create a proposer capable of generating challenging synthetic problems and a solver trained via expert iteration. We use PSV to train PSV-Verus, which across three benchmarks improves pass@1 by up to 9.6x over inference-only and expert-iteration baselines. We show that performance scales with the number of generated questions and training iterations, and through ablations identify formal verification and difficulty-aware proposal as essential ingredients for successful self-play.

Fully Sharded Data Parallel
We’re on a journey to advance and democratize artificial intelligence through open source and open science.
ZKPROV: A Zero-Knowledge Approach to Dataset Provenance for Large Language Models
As large language models (LLMs) are used in sensitive fields, accurately verifying their computational provenance without disclosing their training datasets poses a significant challenge, particularly in regulated sectors such as healthcare, which have strict requirements for dataset use. Traditional approaches either incur substantial computational cost to fully verify the entire training process or leak unauthorized information to the verifier. Therefore, we introduce ZKPROV, a novel cryptographic framework allowing users to verify that the LLM's responses to their prompts are trained on datasets certified by the authorities that own them. Additionally, it ensures that the dataset's content is relevant to the users' queries without revealing sensitive information about the datasets or the model parameters. ZKPROV offers a unique balance between privacy and efficiency by binding training datasets, model parameters, and responses, while also attaching zero-knowledge proofs to the responses generated by the LLM to validate these claims. Our experimental results demonstrate sublinear scaling for generating and verifying these proofs, with end-to-end overhead under 3.3 seconds for models up to 8B parameters, presenting a practical solution for real-world applications. We also provide formal security guarantees, proving that our approach preserves dataset confidentiality while ensuring trustworthy dataset provenance.

Datacurve | The data engine for frontier AI
Custom data for long-horizon reasoning, software engineering, and data science.

Accelerating Scientific Research with Gemini: Case Studies and Common Techniques
Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have opened new avenues for accelerating scientific research. While models are increasingly capable of assisting with routine tasks, their ability to contribute to novel, expert-level mathematical discovery is less understood. We present a collection of case studies demonstrating how researchers have successfully collaborated with advanced AI models, specifically Google's Gemini-based models (in particular Gemini Deep Think and its advanced variants), to solve open problems, refute conjectures, and generate new proofs across diverse areas in theoretical computer science, as well as other areas such as economics, optimization, and physics. Based on these experiences, we extract common techniques for effective human-AI collaboration in theoretical research, such as iterative refinement, problem decomposition, and cross-disciplinary knowledge transfer. While the majority of our results stem from this interactive, conversational methodology, we also highlight specific instances that push beyond standard chat interfaces. These include deploying the model as a rigorous adversarial reviewer to detect subtle flaws in existing proofs, and embedding it within a "neuro-symbolic" loop that autonomously writes and executes code to verify complex derivations. Together, these examples highlight the potential of AI not just as a tool for automation, but as a versatile, genuine partner in the creative process of scientific discovery.

Can AI Agents Synthesize Scientific Conclusions?
Scientific AI agents increasingly retrieve evidence, reason across sources, and synthesize conclusions used in consequential decisions. Yet, their ability to do so in high-stakes domains such as health remains unclear. We introduce SciConBench, a large-scale live benchmark of 9.11K questions and expert-written conclusions from systematic reviews to evaluate open-domain scientific conclusion synthesis. The benchmark draws on an expert-validated automated evaluation pipeline that decomposes conclusions into atomic facts and measures correctness and comprehensiveness via factual precision and recall. To mitigate data leakage, we further introduce SciConHarness, a clean-room evaluation harness that equips agents with controlled web interaction to ensure valid measurement. Evaluating 8 frontier models and deep research agents, we find that factual quality remains low: under clean-room settings, the best agent achieves only a factual F1 of 0.337. Our clean-room setting consistently reduces performance relative to unconstrained evaluation, suggesting that leakage inflates estimates of models' true synthesis capabilities. Finally, we audit consumer-facing agents (e.g., Google AI Overview, OpenEvidence) and find they frequently generate incomplete and sometimes contradictory conclusions, even when the ground-truth answer is available. Overall, our results show that reliable synthesis of scientific conclusions remains an open challenge, and that clean-room evaluation is essential for assessing open-domain AI agents.

Eliciting Reasoning in Language Models with Cognitive Tools
The recent advent of reasoning models like OpenAI's o1 was met with excited speculation by the AI community about the mechanisms underlying these capabilities in closed models, followed by a rush of replication efforts, particularly from the open source community. These speculations were largely settled by the demonstration from DeepSeek-R1 that chains-of-thought and reinforcement learning (RL) can effectively replicate reasoning on top of base LLMs. However, it remains valuable to explore alternative methods for theoretically eliciting reasoning that could help elucidate the underlying mechanisms, as well as providing additional methods that may offer complementary benefits. Here, we build on the long-standing literature in cognitive psychology and cognitive architectures, which postulates that reasoning arises from the orchestrated, sequential execution of a set of modular, predetermined cognitive operations. Crucially, we implement this key idea within a modern agentic tool-calling framework. In particular, we endow an LLM with a small set of "cognitive tools" encapsulating specific reasoning operations, each executed by the LLM itself. Surprisingly, this simple strategy results in considerable gains in performance on standard mathematical reasoning benchmarks compared to base LLMs, for both closed and open-weight models. For instance, providing our "cognitive tools" to GPT-4.1 increases its pass@1 performance on AIME2024 from 32% to 53%, even surpassing the performance of o1-preview. In addition to its practical implications, this demonstration contributes to the debate regarding the role of post-training methods in eliciting reasoning in LLMs versus the role of inherent capabilities acquired during pre-training, and whether post-training merely uncovers these latent abilities.

manjunathshiva/gpt-oss-20b-tq3 · Hugging Face
We’re on a journey to advance and democratize artificial intelligence through open source and open science.
deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 at 9e165c30e2704aec5d9d593cce3eebd58bbef1cb
We’re on a journey to advance and democratize artificial intelligence through open source and open science.
Keynote: Reproducibility and replicability of computer simulations | Canal U
Since the early days of the reproducibility crisis, much progress has been made in understanding and improving computational reproducibility and replicability (R and R)...

Muse Glimmer: Meta’s 30B Model Built for Efficient Inference
Inside Meta’s 30B local reasoning model and its tiny KV cache
