Le Fellowship Mila en politiques de l'IA transforme l'expertise approfondie en IA en politiques rigoureuses d'intérêt public. Découvrez la dernière publication Combler la disparité en matière d’expertise : mécanismes de transfert des connaissances pour la réglementation de l’IA par Moritz von Knebel.
Ce programme soutient les startups spécialisées en IA à tout moment de l'année. Bénéficiez de ressources de pointe et d'un accompagnement sur mesure pour accélérer le développement de votre technologie.
Offert par Mila et le Forum des politiques publiques, ce programme est conçu pour outiller les décideur·euse·s et les responsables des politiques publiques à naviguer efficacement à travers les opportunités et les risques liés à l'IA. La prochaine cohorte se tiendra en français les 1er et 2 septembre 2026 à Mila.
Nous utilisons des témoins pour analyser le trafic et l’utilisation de notre site web, afin de personnaliser votre expérience. Vous pouvez désactiver ces technologies à tout moment, mais cela peut restreindre certaines fonctionnalités du site. Consultez notre Politique de protection de la vie privée pour en savoir plus.
Paramètre des cookies
Vous pouvez activer et désactiver les types de cookies que vous souhaitez accepter. Cependant certains choix que vous ferez pourraient affecter les services proposés sur nos sites (ex : suggestions, annonces personnalisées, etc.).
Cookies essentiels
Ces cookies sont nécessaires au fonctionnement du site et ne peuvent être désactivés. (Toujours actif)
Cookies analyse
Acceptez-vous l'utilisation de cookies pour mesurer l'audience de nos sites ?
Lecteur Multimédia
Acceptez-vous l'utilisation de cookies pour afficher et vous permettre de regarder les contenus vidéo hébergés par nos partenaires (YouTube, etc.) ?
Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate impressive performance on a wide variety of tasks, but they often struggle with tasks that require … (voir plus)multi-step reasoning or goal-directed planning. To address this, we take inspiration from the human brain, in which planning is accomplished via component processes that are predominantly associated with specific brain regions. These processes include conflict monitoring, state prediction, state evaluation, task decomposition, and task coordination. We find that LLMs are often capable of carrying out these functions in isolation, but struggle to autonomously coordinate them in the service of a goal. Therefore, we propose a modular agentic architecture - the Modular Agentic Planner (MAP) - in which planning is performed via the interaction of specialized brain-inspired LLM modules. We evaluate MAP on three challenging planning tasks – graph traversal, Tower of Hanoi, and the PlanBench benchmark – as well as an NLP task requiring multi-step reasoning (strategyQA). We find that MAP yields significant improvements over both standard LLM methods and competitive agentic baselines, can be effectively combined with smaller and more cost-efficient LLMs, and displays superior transfer across tasks. These results demonstrate the benefit of utilizing knowledge from cognitive neuroscience to improve planning in LLMs. Multi-step planning is a challenge for LLMs. Here, the authors introduce a brain-inspired Modular Agentic Planner that decomposes planning into specialized LLM modules, improving performance across tasks and highlighting the value of cognitive neuroscience for LLM design.
Why do Vision Language Models (VLMs), despite success on standard benchmarks, often fail to match human performance on surprisingly simple v… (voir plus)isual reasoning tasks? While the underlying computational principles are still debated, we hypothesize that a crucial factor is a deficit in visually-grounded serial processing. To test this hypothesis, we compared human and VLM performance across tasks designed to vary serial processing demands in three distinct domains: geometric reasoning, perceptual enumeration, and mental rotation. Tasks within each domain varied serial processing load by manipulating factors such as geometric concept complexity, perceptual individuation load, and transformation difficulty. Across all domains, our results revealed a consistent pattern: decreased VLM accuracy was strongly correlated with increased human reaction time (used as a proxy for serial processing load). As tasks require more demanding serial processing -- whether composing concepts, enumerating items, or performing mental transformations -- the VLM-human performance gap widens reliably. These findings support our hypothesis, indicating that limitations in serial, visually grounded reasoning represent a fundamental bottleneck that distinguishes current VLMs from humans.
Some of the strongest evidence that human minds should be thought about in terms of symbolic systems has been the way they combine ideas, pr… (voir plus)oduce novelty, and learn quickly. We argue that modern neural networks -- and the artificial intelligence systems built upon them -- exhibit similar abilities. This undermines the argument that the cognitive processes and representations used by human minds are symbolic, although the fact that these neural networks are typically trained on data generated by symbolic systems illustrates that such systems play an important role in characterizing the abstract problems that human minds have to solve. This argument leads us to offer a new agenda for research on the symbolic basis of human thought.
To accurately process a visual scene, observers must bind features together to represent individual objects. This capacity is necessary, for… (voir plus) instance, to distinguish an image containing a red square and a blue circle from an image containing a blue square and a red circle. Recent work has found that language models solve this'binding problem'via a set of symbol-like, content-independent indices, but it is unclear whether similar mechanisms are employed by vision language models (VLMs). This question is especially relevant, given the persistent failures of VLMs on tasks that require binding. Here, we identify a set of emergent symbolic mechanisms that support binding in VLMs via a content-independent, spatial indexing scheme. Moreover, we find that binding errors can be traced directly to failures in these mechanisms. Taken together, these results shed light on the mechanisms that support symbol-like processing in VLMs, and suggest possible avenues for addressing the persistent binding failures exhibited by these models.