Dean Light

Yuval Lev Lubarsky, Dean Light, Boaz Berger et al.

Deep learning over relational databases is conventionally realized by translating data into graph representations and applying graph-based neural networks within external frameworks. This round-trip between the database and external machine learning (ML) systems introduces non-trivial engineering overhead. In effect, these graph neural networks operate on tuple embeddings and manipulate them in ways that capture the interactions induced by relational joins. Given this natural correspondence, there is no fundamental reason why specifying a neural network over relational data should be substantially harder than querying it. We propose an approach that naturally integrates deep learning with database queries. The key idea is to associate each tuple with provenance, represented as a vector embedding with learnable parameters. Queries are lifted to operate jointly on data and embeddings, mapping input relations with embedded tuples to output relations with embedded tuples. This approach provides a declarative foundation for relational deep learning, facilitating integration with database systems, optimization, and wide adoption. We describe RelaNN, a proof-of-concept implementation of this approach built on top of PyTorch and cuDF. We illustrate the utility of RelaNN by implementing various graph-learning models, including graph convolutional networks, heterogeneous graph transformers, hypergraph neural networks and deep homomorphism networks. The simplicity of the programs and their competitive runtime performance demonstrate a concrete path toward making the implementation of state-of-the-art neural networks over databases as simple as writing a query.

Dean Light, Michael Theologitis, Kshitish Ghate et al.

Humans intuitively solve complex problems by flexibly shifting among reasoning modes: they plan, execute, revise intermediate goals, resolve ambiguity through associative judgment, and apply formal procedures to well-specified subproblems. Current LLM agents lack this flexibility, as their scaffolds hard-code such reasoning decisions in advance. These scaffolds are effective when their prescribed structure matches the task, but brittle when solving the task requires adapting the structure of reasoning itself. We introduce Deep Reasoning -- an inference-time approach for constructing task-specific scaffolds through structured meta-reasoning. Deep Reasoning uses a formal language that represents meta-reasoning as executable decompositions over associative inference, formal computation, and recursive subproblem solving, enabling decomposition principles to be encoded as in-context examples that guide test-time scaffold construction. We instantiate this approach in a general-purpose agent (DOLORES) that distributes complex tasks across more controlled reasoning threads. We evaluate it against state-of-the-art scaffolding methods across four hard benchmarks: multi-hop reasoning, long-chain question answering, long-context aggregation, and deep research-style information seeking. DOLORES outperforms all evaluated scaffolds across three model sizes and two model families, improving over the strongest evaluated scaffold baseline by 24.8% on average. DOLORES distributes cognition across structured, lower-load reasoning threads, thereby reducing premature termination and hallucinations. This advantage can even bridge the scaling gap, with an 8B version surpassing all evaluated 32B baselines from the same family in more than half the settings. These results point toward future agentic systems that treat scaffolding as adaptive reasoning, constructing the structure each task requires just-in-time.

Priyanka Kargupta, Shuyue Stella Li, Haocheng Wang et al.

Large language models solve complex problems yet fail on simpler variants, suggesting they achieve correct outputs through mechanisms fundamentally different from human reasoning. We synthesize cognitive science research into a taxonomy of 28 cognitive elements spanning computational constraints, meta-cognitive controls, knowledge representations, and transformation operations, then analyze their behavioral manifestations in reasoning traces. We propose a fine-grained cognitive evaluation framework and conduct the first large-scale analysis of 170K traces from 17 models across text, vision, and audio modalities, alongside 54 human think-aloud traces, which we make publicly available. Our analysis reveals systematic structural differences: humans employ hierarchical nesting and meta-cognitive monitoring while models rely on shallow forward chaining, with divergence most pronounced on ill-structured problems. Meta-analysis of 1,598 LLM reasoning papers reveals the research community concentrates on easily quantifiable behaviors (sequential organization: 55%, decomposition: 60%) while neglecting meta-cognitive controls (self-awareness: 16%, evaluation: 8%) that correlate with success. Models possess behavioral repertoires associated with success but fail to deploy them spontaneously. Leveraging these patterns, we develop test-time reasoning guidance that automatically scaffold successful structures, improving performance by up to 60% on complex problems. By bridging cognitive science and LLM research, we establish a foundation for developing models that reason through principled cognitive mechanisms rather than brittle spurious reasoning shortcuts or memorization, opening new directions for both improving model capabilities and testing theories of human cognition at scale.