CVDec 16, 2022
Biomedical image analysis competitions: The state of current participation practiceMatthias Eisenmann, Annika Reinke, Vivienn Weru et al. · utoronto
The number of international benchmarking competitions is steadily increasing in various fields of machine learning (ML) research and practice. So far, however, little is known about the common practice as well as bottlenecks faced by the community in tackling the research questions posed. To shed light on the status quo of algorithm development in the specific field of biomedical imaging analysis, we designed an international survey that was issued to all participants of challenges conducted in conjunction with the IEEE ISBI 2021 and MICCAI 2021 conferences (80 competitions in total). The survey covered participants' expertise and working environments, their chosen strategies, as well as algorithm characteristics. A median of 72% challenge participants took part in the survey. According to our results, knowledge exchange was the primary incentive (70%) for participation, while the reception of prize money played only a minor role (16%). While a median of 80 working hours was spent on method development, a large portion of participants stated that they did not have enough time for method development (32%). 25% perceived the infrastructure to be a bottleneck. Overall, 94% of all solutions were deep learning-based. Of these, 84% were based on standard architectures. 43% of the respondents reported that the data samples (e.g., images) were too large to be processed at once. This was most commonly addressed by patch-based training (69%), downsampling (37%), and solving 3D analysis tasks as a series of 2D tasks. K-fold cross-validation on the training set was performed by only 37% of the participants and only 50% of the participants performed ensembling based on multiple identical models (61%) or heterogeneous models (39%). 48% of the respondents applied postprocessing steps.
CYAug 10, 2024Code
Hierarchical Multi-Armed Bandits for the Concurrent Intelligent Tutoring of Concepts and Problems of Varying Difficulty LevelsBlake Castleman, Uzay Macar, Ansaf Salleb-Aouissi
Remote education has proliferated in the twenty-first century, yielding rise to intelligent tutoring systems. In particular, research has found multi-armed bandit (MAB) intelligent tutors to have notable abilities in traversing the exploration-exploitation trade-off landscape for student problem recommendations. Prior literature, however, contains a significant lack of open-sourced MAB intelligent tutors, which impedes potential applications of these educational MAB recommendation systems. In this paper, we combine recent literature on MAB intelligent tutoring techniques into an open-sourced and simply deployable hierarchical MAB algorithm, capable of progressing students concurrently through concepts and problems, determining ideal recommended problem difficulties, and assessing latent memory decay. We evaluate our algorithm using simulated groups of 500 students, utilizing Bayesian Knowledge Tracing to estimate students' content mastery. Results suggest that our algorithm, when turned difficulty-agnostic, significantly boosts student success, and that the further addition of problem-difficulty adaptation notably improves this metric.
LGMar 22Code
Mechanisms of Introspective AwarenessUzay Macar, Li Yang, Atticus Wang et al.
Recent work shows that LLMs can sometimes detect when steering vectors are injected into their residual stream and identify the injected concept, a phenomenon cited as evidence of "introspective awareness." But what mechanisms underlie this capability, and do they reflect genuine introspective circuitry or more shallow heuristics? We investigate these questions in open-source models and establish three main findings. First, introspection is behaviorally robust: detection achieves moderate true positive rates with 0% false positives across diverse prompts. We also find this capability emerges specifically from post-training rather than pretraining. Second, introspection is not reducible to a single linear confound: anomaly detection relies on distributed MLP computation across multiple directions, implemented by evidence carrier and gate features. Third, models possess greater introspective capability than is elicited by default: ablating refusal directions improves detection by 53pp and a trained steering vector by 75pp. Overall, our results suggest that introspective awareness is behaviorally robust, grounded in nontrivial internal anomaly detection, and likely could be substantially improved in future models. Code: https://github.com/safety-research/introspection-mechanisms.
LGJun 23, 2025Code
Thought Anchors: Which LLM Reasoning Steps Matter?Paul C. Bogdan, Uzay Macar, Neel Nanda et al.
Current frontier large-language models rely on reasoning to achieve state-of-the-art performance. Many existing interpretability are limited in this area, as standard methods have been designed to study single forward passes of a model rather than the multi-token computational steps that unfold during reasoning. We argue that analyzing reasoning traces at the sentence level is a promising approach to understanding reasoning processes. We introduce a black-box method that measures each sentence's counterfactual importance by repeatedly sampling replacement sentences from the model, filtering for semantically different ones, and continuing the chain of thought from that point onwards to quantify the sentence's impact on the distribution of final answers. We discover that certain sentences can have an outsized impact on the trajectory of the reasoning trace and final answer. We term these sentences \textit{thought anchors}. These are generally planning or uncertainty management sentences, and specialized attention heads consistently attend from subsequent sentences to thought anchors. We further show that examining sentence-sentence causal links within a reasoning trace gives insight into a model's behavior. Such information can be used to predict a problem's difficulty and the extent different question domains involve sequential or diffuse reasoning. As a proof-of-concept, we demonstrate that our techniques together provide a practical toolkit for analyzing reasoning models by conducting a detailed case study of how the model solves a difficult math problem, finding that our techniques yield a consistent picture of the reasoning trace's structure. We provide an open-source tool (thought-anchors.com) for visualizing the outputs of our methods on further problems. The convergence across our methods shows the potential of sentence-level analysis for a deeper understanding of reasoning models.
LGOct 31, 2025
Thought Branches: Interpreting LLM Reasoning Requires ResamplingUzay Macar, Paul C. Bogdan, Senthooran Rajamanoharan et al.
Most work interpreting reasoning models studies only a single chain-of-thought (CoT), yet these models define distributions over many possible CoTs. We argue that studying a single sample is inadequate for understanding causal influence and the underlying computation. Though fully specifying this distribution is intractable, it can be understood by sampling. We present case studies using resampling to investigate model decisions. First, when a model states a reason for its action, does that reason actually cause the action? In "agentic misalignment" scenarios, we resample specific sentences to measure their downstream effects. Self-preservation sentences have small causal impact, suggesting they do not meaningfully drive blackmail. Second, are artificial edits to CoT sufficient for steering reasoning? These are common in literature, yet take the model off-policy. Resampling and selecting a completion with the desired property is a principled on-policy alternative. We find off-policy interventions yield small and unstable effects compared to resampling in decision-making tasks. Third, how do we understand the effect of removing a reasoning step when the model may repeat it post-edit? We introduce a resilience metric that repeatedly resamples to prevent similar content from reappearing downstream. Critical planning statements resist removal but have large effects when eliminated. Fourth, since CoT is sometimes "unfaithful", can our methods teach us anything in these settings? Adapting causal mediation analysis, we find that hints that have a causal effect on the output without being explicitly mentioned exert a subtle and cumulative influence on the CoT that persists even if the hint is removed. Overall, studying distributions via resampling enables reliable causal analysis, clearer narratives of model reasoning, and principled CoT interventions.
IVSep 12, 2021Code
Team NeuroPoly: Description of the Pipelines for the MICCAI 2021 MS New Lesions Segmentation ChallengeUzay Macar, Enamundram Naga Karthik, Charley Gros et al.
This paper gives a detailed description of the pipelines used for the 2nd edition of the MICCAI 2021 Challenge on Multiple Sclerosis Lesion Segmentation. An overview of the data preprocessing steps applied is provided along with a brief description of the pipelines used, in terms of the architecture and the hyperparameters. Our code for this work can be found at: https://github.com/ivadomed/ms-challenge-2021.
CYDec 5, 2023
Teenagers and Artificial Intelligence: Bootcamp Experience and Lessons LearnedUzay Macar, Blake Castleman, Noah Mauchly et al.
Artificial intelligence (AI) stands out as a game-changer in today's technology landscape. However, the integration of AI education in classroom curricula currently lags behind, leaving teenagers inadequately prepared for an imminent AI-driven future. In this pilot study, we designed a three-day bootcamp offered in the summer of 2023 to a cohort of 60 high school students. The curriculum was delivered in person through animated video content, easy-to-follow slides, interactive playgrounds, and quizzes. These were packaged in the early version of an online learning platform we are developing. Results from the post-bootcamp survey conveyed a 91.4% overall satisfaction. Despite the short bootcamp duration, 88.5% and 71.4% of teenagers responded that they had an improved understanding of AI concepts and programming, respectively. Overall, we found that employing diverse modalities effectively engaged students, and building foundational modules proved beneficial for introducing more complex topics. Furthermore, using Google Colab notebooks for coding assignments proved challenging to most students. Students' activity on the platform and their answers to quizzes showed proficient engagement and a grasp of the material. Our results strongly highlight the need for compelling and accessible AI education methods for the next generation and the potential for informal learning to fill the gap of providing early AI education to teenagers.
DMMar 25, 2025
LogicLearner: A Tool for the Guided Practice of Propositional Logic ProofsAmogh Inamdar, Uzay Macar, Michel Vazirani et al.
The study of propositional logic -- fundamental to the theory of computing -- is a cornerstone of the undergraduate computer science curriculum. Learning to solve logical proofs requires repeated guided practice, but undergraduate students often lack access to on-demand tutoring in a judgment-free environment. In this work, we highlight the need for guided practice tools in undergraduate mathematics education and outline the desiderata of an effective practice tool. We accordingly develop LogicLearner, a web application for guided logic proof practice. LogicLearner consists of an interface to attempt logic proofs step-by-step and an automated proof solver to generate solutions on the fly, allowing users to request guidance as needed. We pilot LogicLearner as a practice tool in two semesters of an undergraduate discrete mathematics course and receive strongly positive feedback for usability and pedagogical value in student surveys. To the best of our knowledge, LogicLearner is the only learning tool that provides an end-to-end practice environment for logic proofs with immediate, judgment-free feedback.