Junior Professor @CNRS (previously @EPFL, @TUDarmstadt) -- AI Interpretability, causality, and interaction flows between LLM, humans, and tools

Joined February 2016
New paper: The Dead Salmons of XAI Standard fMRI pipelines once detected predictive brain regions in a dead salmon! A striking warning about poor statistical methodology Now, XAI faces similar issues: many methods can yield plausible explanations even for randomized networks
1
2
1
15
1,298
Very happy that "The Dead Salmons of AI Interpretability" has been selected as one of the few oral position papers at @NeurIPSConf The preprint sparked interesting discussions, so it’s great to see the argument getting a prominent slot at #NeurIPS2026. See you there!
New paper: The Dead Salmons of XAI Standard fMRI pipelines once detected predictive brain regions in a dead salmon! A striking warning about poor statistical methodology Now, XAI faces similar issues: many methods can yield plausible explanations even for randomized networks
2
2
33
1,014
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
On Friday morning, I'll be at SPIGM (Fri 10th, 11:30-2:30, Hall A), I'll be presenting MIST, a meta-learning approach to estimating mutual information that achieves ~10X lower loss than existing methods, gives reliable uncertainty estimates, and is 4-80X faster than the main methods we have now. We had a lot of fun thinking about meta-learning, the role of MI in machine learning, and uncertainty estimation, and we wrote a ~43 page paper about it (now published in TMLR, link below). Come get the TLDR! w/ German Gritsai, Maxime Mèloux, @kchonyc, and @peyrardMax. openreview.net/forum?id=Qi4J…
1
2
3
238
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
it was fun giving a talk at MLSS 2026 in NYC. i talked about my recent efforts in "computatinalizaing" statistical and causal estimation, from learning to estimate pop. std. dev, mutual info., bayes ppd and causal effect to causal identification. links to the slide deck and the papers below.
4
25
2
186
18,045
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
Artificial thinking, the way that Generative AI thinks, fails in many ways. Our work investigated one such failure: AI models struggle to think through time. This is a popular topic (the so-called temporal reasoning in NLP), but it is unclear what causes this difficulty. Our recent study found two sources across multiple languages that are held accountable: *tokenisation of time* and *representation of time*. Read our paper for details, for instance, what they are, how we measure their quality, and when their quality matters for "artificial thinking through time". This joint work was done by Gagan Bhatia, Ahmad M. Isa, @peyrardMax, and myself 👉 arxiv.org/abs/2603.19017 @guifav said that if you're building multilingual apps that handle dates, you shall be careful :P
3
1
16
649
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
Tue 10 Feb: join us at #AMLD2026 for the AI Safety & Alignment track—principles for building AI that does what humans want. 2026.appliedmldays.org/media… Two sessions (AM/PM): field overview + talks on post-training, mech interp, AI psych, and core challenges. 👇Schedule
1
6
2
24
1,870
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
This is a very thoughtful paper. The criticisms of causal interp are systematically different from the others, though: overdetermination here is a fact about the models we want to explain, not a problem with the methods. We shouldn't deny overdetermination simply because it disappoints us. We can also differentiate methods by how they characterize overdetermination. For example, gradient-based attribution methods spread the credit out, whereas analyses of direct causal effects can give too much credit to specific components.
Today I learnt that in 2009, neuroscientists placed a dead Atlantic salmon into an fMRI scanner, scanned it, and that this has apparently implications for AI interpretability. 🐟 They showed the dead fish pictures of humans in social situations and "asked" the fish to determine the emotions of the people. When they ran their standard statistical software, the results showed "brain activity" in the fish that correlated with the emotions. Obviously, the fish was not thinking; the "activity" was just random noise. The point of the study was to show that if you don't correct for statistical noise and use rigorous controls, your tools will find patterns where none exist. This paper claims that the same lesson should be applied in interpretability work: many researchers use various tools to explain what is happening inside a neural network (e.g. probes, SAEs etc). But some of these convincing-looking explanations can also be extracted when applied to randomly initialized and untrained AI models (the dead salmon equivalent): saliency maps remain plausible after weight randomization, sparse autoencoders find interpretable components in random transformers etc. The authors propose that we stop treating interpretability as "storytelling" and start treating it as statistical inference: doing null hypothesis testing, quantifying uncertainty more systematically, interpreting explanations as a simplified surrogate model etc. Although they also acknowledge that finding some signal in random networks doesn't automatically invalidate finding stronger signals in trained ones. I'm not interpretability researcher myself but would be curious to hear takes! arxiv.org/abs/2512.18792
4
15
207
29,492
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
New paper: The Dead Salmons of XAI Standard fMRI pipelines once detected predictive brain regions in a dead salmon! A striking warning about poor statistical methodology Now, XAI faces similar issues: many methods can yield plausible explanations even for randomized networks
1
2
1
15
1,298
Psychology, econometrics, or neuroscience, have faced similar difficulties and reacted by adopting methodological reforms and rigorous statistical (causal) frameworks. It is now our turn to build the methodological guardrails turning XAI into a pragmatic science.
2
1
1
182
To take a step in this direction, we propose a statistical perspective of XAI, focusing on inference, uncertainty quantification and hypothesis testing. But it is only a start! 📄 arxiv.org/abs/2512.18792 (With Maxime Méloux, @GiadaDirupo and François Portet)
1
179
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
🚨 Postdoc available in my lab @EPFL on safe AI, alignment, LLMs, NLP, mech interp 🎯 Safe AI that truly cares about humans! No “lipstick-on-a-pig alignment” 🐖💄 after pretraining—let’s “raise” models aligned from token 1 onward 🍼 👉 Info & app: go.epfl.ch/safe-ai-postdoc
4
42
11
191
39,926
I'm recruiting multiple PhD students for Fall 2026 in Computer Science at @JHUCompSci 🍂 Apply to work on AI for social sciences/human behavior, social NLP, and LLMs for real-world applied domains you're passionate about! Learn more kristinagligoric.com/ & help spread the word!
15
154
3
641
46,935
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
🚀 RELAI is live — a platform for building reliable AI agents 🔁 We complete the learning loop for agents: simulate → evaluate → optimize - Simulate with LLM personas, mocked MCP servers/tools and grounded synthetic data - Evaluate with code + LLM evaluators; turn human reviews into optimization-ready benchmarks - Optimize with Maestro; tune prompts, configs and even agent graph for improved quality, cost and latency Works with OpenAI Agents SDK, Google ADK, LangGraph, and all other agent frameworks 🌐 Get started (free): relai.ai ⭐ Open-source SDK: github.com/relai-ai/relai-sd…
18
29
7
67
12,352
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
Breaking news! 🚨Our paper, "Date Fragments: A Hidden Bottleneck of Tokenization for Temporal Reasoning," has been accepted to the #EMNLP2025 main conference! Problem: LLMs struggle with time because tokenizers break dates into junk pieces (e.g., “20250312” → “202”, “503”, “12”)
2
1
17
1,194
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
It's fascinating to see how LLMs learn to stitch the fragments back together! Pre-print: arxiv.org/pdf/2505.16088 Thanks to my co-authors @peyrardMax & @andyweizhao ! See you at EMNLP!
1
4
241
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
🚀 Excited to share our latest work at ICML 2025 — zip2zip: Inference-Time Adaptive Vocabularies for Language Models via Token Compression! Sessions: 📅 Fri 18 Jul  - Tokenization Workshop 📅 Sat 19 Jul  - Workshop on Efficient Systems for Foundation Models (Oral 5/145)
1
6
4
25
2,614
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
Causal Abstraction, the theory behind DAS, tests if a network realizes a given algorithm. We show (w/ @DenisSutte9310, T. Hofmann, @tpimentelms) that the theory collapses without the linear representation hypothesis—a problem we call the non-linear representation dilemma.
1
4
1
26
1,367
Maxime Peyrard retweeted
Great case of underspecification: many solutions exist to the ERM learning objective. Key question: what's formally a "good model" (low MDL?) & how to make this the objective. Short of that, we could learn a variety of solutions to examine/select post-hoc: arxiv.org/abs/2207.02598
Can an AI model predict perfectly and still have a terrible world model? What would that even mean? Our new ICML paper formalizes these questions One result tells the story: A transformer trained on 10M solar systems nails planetary orbits. But it botches gravitational laws 🧵
2
5
2
33
3,069
Scaling AI research agents is key to tackling some of the toughest challenges in the field. But what's required to scale effectively? It turns out that simply throwing more compute at the problem isn't enough. We break down an agent into four fundamental components that shape its behavior, regardless of specific design or implementation choices: - Environment: The context (infrastructure) in which the agent operates - Search Policy: How the agent allocates resources - Operator Set and Policy: The available actions the agent can take and how it chooses among them - Evaluation Mechanism: How the agent determines whether a particular direction is promising We specifically focus on ML research agents tasked with real-world machine learning challenges from Kaggle competitions (MLE-bench). What we found is that factors like the environment, the agents’ core capabilities (the operator set), and overfitting emerge as critical bottlenecks long before computational limitations come into play. Here are our key insights: 🔹Environment: Agents can't scale without a robust environment that offers flexible and efficient access to computational resources. For instance, simply running the baseline agents in the (open-sourced) AIRA-dojo environment boosts performance by 10% absolute (30% relative)—highlighting just how crucial the environment is. 🔹Agent design and core capabilities: Resource allocation optimization only matters if agents can actually make good use of those resources. Our analysis shows that the agents’ operator set—the core actions they perform—can limit performance gains from more advanced search methods like evolutionary search and MCTS. We achieve SoTA performance by designing an improved operator set that better manages context and encourages exploration, and coupling it with the search policies. 🔹Evaluation: Accurate evaluation of the solution space is critical and reveals a significant challenge: overfitting. Ironically, agents that are highly effective at optimizing perceived values tend to be more vulnerable to overfitting—a problem that intensifies with increased compute resources. We observe up to 13% performance loss due to suboptimal selection of final solutions caused by this issue. 🔹Compute: Providing agents with sufficient compute resources is essential to avoid introducing an additional limitation and bias into evaluations. We demonstrate this through experiments in which we scale the runtime from 24 to 120 hours. In summary, successfully scaling AI research agents requires careful attention to these foundational aspects. Ignoring them risks turning scaling efforts into, at best, exercises in overfitting. These insights set the stage for exciting developments ahead!
4
34
7
154
19,020