HW6 Problem 1 (15 pts) swaps the discrete HMM from lecture for a continuous state: the state drifts by Gaussian noise each step, each observation adds more noise, and you derive the mean and variance of the filtering distribution p(zₜ | x₀…xₜ). That is a one-dimensional Kalman filter. The solution is two moves, predict with the transition and then correct with the observation, and the problem hands you both Gaussian identities you need.
HW6 Problem 2 (15 pts) hands you a 4×5 Gridworld where moves can slip and rewards arrive only when you leave a cell. You write one step each of policy evaluation, policy iteration, and value iteration in the notebook, watch how the discount factor γ reshapes the policy, and finally ask whether this is a sensible model of the robot task at all. The rules of the world are fully known, so this is planning, not learning yet.
HW6 Problem 3 (20 pts) has you write a tabular Q-learning agent for Swingy Monkey, a Flappy Bird-like game. The minimum bar is scoring over 50 at least once within 100 epochs, plus one improvement of your choice. Problem 5 (10 pts) is a 250-word ethics question: assuming a social platform's users grow more politically extreme, use RL concepts to explain how the choice of reward function might have contributed.
The CS181 Spring 2026 midterm is in class on Mar 10, worth 15% of the grade, closed-book with one double-sided note sheet. The official midterm checklist has four blocks: regression, classification, neural networks and model selection, and SVMs. This post maps each block to HW0–HW3 problem numbers, flags what the 2026 homework never drilled, and explains how to use the 2025 practice exam, review session, and concept checks.
Obscura is a headless browser engine written from scratch in Rust. It embeds V8 and speaks the Chrome DevTools Protocol, so Puppeteer and Playwright scripts connect by changing one endpoint, and it ships an MCP server with 37 tools. The headline numbers (about 30 MB per process, about 85 ms per page load) come from the project's own benchmarks; it passes 83.3% of its core WPT subtests, and long-tail CSS and some Web APIs still differ from Chromium.
There is no 'never comment' school — only 'comment by exception' (Uncle Bob) versus 'comments are part of the design' (Ousterhout, antirez). In their 2024–2025 public debate, both agree on why-comments and against noise comments; the real fights are over interface comments for internal methods, long names as a substitute, and whether comments can be trusted. Controlled studies say quality decides: the same comments moved performance anywhere from -30% to +34% depending on the snippet.
Traditional chat only needs text bubbles, but AI Agent conversations must surface thinking, tool calls, citations, and progress — we solved this with 12 Vue components, three DisplayModes, and a unified chatBlocks rendering pipeline.
In H1 2026, OpenAI, Anthropic, Letta, and LangChain independently chose Markdown files + indexes over vector databases; write permissions shifted back to humans; forgetting mechanisms appeared but nobody implemented Ebbinghaus; Penfield Labs caught 6.4% wrong answers in LoCoMo; three vendors simultaneously adopted 'Dreaming' for offline memory consolidation. Five trends, one conclusion: memory is not a feature — it is an architecture decision.
Memory turns prompt injection from a one-shot nuisance into a persistent backdoor: MINJA shows conversation-only injection succeeds >95% of the time, and SpAIware demonstrated continuous data exfiltration via planted memories. The industry's two defensive lines — citation-based verification (Copilot) and human approval inboxes (Gemini CLI / Devin) — each have blind spots.
Agent memory is not one feature — it is at least four distinct engineering problems: working, episodic, semantic, and procedural. This ten-part series walks through the full design space, from taxonomy to coding agent implementations, platform APIs, open-source frameworks, security attack surfaces, and 2026 trend analysis.
CoALA splits agent memory into working, episodic, semantic, and procedural — but the four-cell taxonomy alone doesn't explain why Claude Code uses Markdown files while Mem0 uses vectors. This post adds six independent design axes (read mode, write timing, fidelity, write authority, forgetting, scope) and a file-to-graph spectrum to map the full design space of agent memory systems in 2026.
The previous articles covered evaluation. This one covers another dimension: how to dynamically allocate compute during reasoning. BrowseConf's core insight is that an agent's self-declared 'confidence' can predict answer accuracy. High confidence uses fewer resources; low confidence searches more rounds.
All five major cloud platforms shipped agent memory APIs in 2025–2026, but their design philosophies diverge sharply: OpenAI writes memory as files, Anthropic mounts memory as a directory, Google uses vectors with topic classification, AWS combines events with pluggable strategy pipelines, and Microsoft abstracts memory behind context providers. Pricing ranges from free to $0.75/1K records/month; tenant isolation spans from 'your app handles it' to IAM as a first-class citizen.
Nine coding agents have taken at least four different paths for long-term memory: Claude Code and Codex use Markdown files (agent-written, human-readable), Antigravity CLI inherits Gemini CLI's approval inbox (agent proposes, human decides), and Copilot uses citations with JIT verification (auto-deleted after 28 days unverified). Cursor removed its Memories feature and fell back to human-written Rules. Hermes Agent, OpenClaw, and Letta Code treat memory as a core harness component, not a plugin. Their choices on write timing, forgetting, and cross-team sharing are completely different — and none has published a controlled experiment on whether their memory system actually helps.
By 2026, the deep research commercial market has differentiated: OpenAI is comprehensive, Perplexity is fast, Gemini integrates ecosystems, Claude reasons deeply, Grok is real-time. This article compares each product's differences—not who is best, but who fits your scenario.
The entire Deep Research field has 80+ implementations, but the core structure is just three-stage roadmap × four components × three optimization methods. This article maps the full landscape: from Agentic Search to Full-stack AI Scientist, from query planning to answer generation, from workflow prompting to end-to-end RL.
DeepResearch Bench II uses 9,430 expert rubrics covering 132 tasks, and finds that even the strongest agents satisfy less than 50% of criteria. This article breaks down the benchmark architecture, scoring methodology, leaders, and the overall evaluation landscape.
An AI assistant platform running Opus 4.6 hit stream_stall (90s timeout) twice consecutively when generating docx. Root cause: skill instructions lacked one sentence — 'Write a script' — causing the model to output JS code inline instead of writing a file and executing with node. Claude.ai's official SKILL.md has that sentence, and the model consistently takes the safe path.
10+ community deep-research skills represent 10+ philosophies of 'how to do research.' From hyperresearch's persistent vault to jamoeight v2's Co-Scientist 6-agent, from adversarial verification to benchmark alignment. This article puts them all on one table.
A deep research agent produces a report—maybe thousands of words with dozens of citations. How do you score it? Using LLMs as judges is biased, asking humans is too expensive, and benchmarks can't keep up. STC and other recent approaches try to solve this from the 'confidence' angle—but there's no perfect answer yet.