PodcastsSciencesThe Information Bottleneck

The Information Bottleneck

Ravid Shwartz-Ziv & Allen Roush
The Information Bottleneck
Dernier épisode

49 épisodes

  • The Information Bottleneck

    Broken Peer Review, AI, and Worms — with Oded Rechavi

    21/06/2026 | 1 h 18 min
    Oded Rechavi is a biologist at Tel Aviv University and the co-founder of QED, a company building AI to review scientific work. He's also spent years studying worms.
    We start with what's wrong with peer review and grant funding: why it takes years to publish, why reviewers are often your own competitors, and why the whole thing is locked to an economic model that rewards publishing more papers, not better ones. Oded explains why he doesn't call QED "peer review" at all, and what it would take to actually validate science instead of just stamping it.
    Then we get into the biology. C. elegans has exactly 959 cells, every one of them named, and a fully mapped brain. Oded's lab studies how a worm's experiences get passed to its offspring through RNA rather than DNA — meaning what happens to a worm in its lifetime can change its descendants. We also talk about using ancient DNA to reassemble the Dead Sea Scrolls, what AI can and can't do for biology, and why he wants to build an "Ironman suit" for researchers rather than replace them.
    00:00 Intro
    01:35 Why scientific publishing is broken
    04:02 Years to publish, and what it costs science
    07:20 Bad reviewers, conflicts of interest, and the money
    10:47 Why preprints don't fix it
    15:37 How AI conferences handle review
    22:07 Conferences vs. journals — does slow review help?
    25:22 Building QED: review, not peer review
    30:02 Tracking a paper from idea to submission
    33:11 What writing a grant actually involves
    35:00 The ERC reviewer crisis
    37:06 Tailoring feedback to your field
    41:48 Switching to biology
    44:30 Every cell has a name: inside C. elegans
    46:28 Inheritance without DNA
    48:16 What the worm "thinks" changes its offspring
    51:58 Reassembling the Dead Sea Scrolls with ancient DNA
    56:07 Psychedelics and worms
    58:36 Can AI run the research itself?
    1:04:49 Automation vs. validation
    1:07:12 The origin of life
    1:08:49 Why people reject AI-written work
    1:16:18 Will humans still have a role?
    1:17:39 Wrap-up
    Music:
    "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0.

    About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.
  • The Information Bottleneck

    Will AI Take Our Jobs? With Alex Imas (Google/University of Chicago)

    16/06/2026 | 1 h 29 min
    Will AI take our jobs? We put the question to Alex Imas, the new Director of AGI Economics at Google DeepMind and a professor at Chicago Booth, whose entire job now is studying how frontier AI reshapes the economy. His short answer: probably some of them, but the popular story is mostly wrong about which jobs and how fast.
    Alex makes the case that a job is a bundle of tasks, not a single thing AI either does or doesn't do, and that the number of people who should actually care about is how much consumer demand responds to falling prices. Get that wrong and you predict mass layoffs. Get it right and you sometimes predict more hiring. We get into why the automation panic is two centuries old, why he thinks blue-collar work is in more danger than white-collar, and why the people already winning are the ones adopting AI fastest.
    We also cover the AGI versus ASI distinction and why it changes everything for the economy, what happens when there's no moat and open models stay six to eight months behind, the three-tier pricing future he sees coming after the 2026 compute crunch, and what any of this means if you're deciding whether to send your kids to college.

    The episode was recorded before Alex joined Google
    Timestamps
    00:00 Meeting Alex Imas
    00:44 Will AI take our jobs?
    03:35 Is this an AI question or an economics question?
    06:18 The economy is already behind the AI we have
    07:43 Why AI adoption is K-shaped
    12:51 Was Andrew Yang right?
    13:45 The automation panic is 200 years old
    16:46 Dario's six-month claim, and why we don't see it yet
    17:22 A job is not a task
    22:38 The three numbers that actually predict the labor market
    22:42 The chess engine analogy and the centaur phase
    25:45 Recursive self-improvement and the hamburger problem
    30:06 Should AI labs be the ones answering alignment questions?
    31:17 The "invisible hand wave" and why nobody wants fully autonomous AI
    33:27 AGI vs ASI, and why the difference is everything
    35:28 Commodities vs relational goods
    41:14 Star Trek, replicators, and predicting with sci-fi
    45:20 Inequality and the Upper West Side VCs
    46:21 Your money manager was automated in the 1960s
    50:47 Are OpenAI and Anthropic overvalued? The moat problem
    54:29 What has to be true for the losses to make sense
    55:43 Cognitive atrophy and monopoly fears
    57:00 The 2026 compute crunch and the three-tier pricing future
    1:01:52 The Apple vs Android analogy
    1:03:54 A rich-country perspective
    1:04:16 Protecting the skills that actually matter
    1:07:02 Will not using AI become a status symbol?
    1:08:53 Does capitalism even survive?
    1:13:44 Redistribution becomes the political battleground
    1:18:16 Blue collar vs white collar: who's really at risk
    1:21:18 Advice for parents in an AI world
    1:22:43 Saving for retirement when the Valley says don't
    1:25:06 Will non-elite colleges survive?
    Music:
    "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0.

    About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.
  • The Information Bottleneck

    Why AI Benchmarks Are Lying to You - with Wenhu Chen (Meta/University of Waterloo)

    13/06/2026 | 1 h 19 min
    In this episode, we sit down with Wenhu Chen, research scientist at Meta MSL, assistant professor at the University of Waterloo, and the person behind MMLU-Pro and MMMU. If you've read a frontier model release in the last two years, you've seen his benchmarks. That makes him one of the best people to answer the question everyone dances around: when a model jumps from 40% to 90% on your benchmark, how much of that is real? In this episode, we dig into why benchmarks have become the loss function of the entire field - design a bad one, and thousands of brilliant researchers will spend months hill-climbing in the wrong direction. Wenhu is surprisingly candid about the limits of his own creations: contamination is everywhere, saturation turns frontier benchmarks into unit tests, and popular alternatives, such as LM Arena, mostly measure tone and length rather than capability. His answer is to evaluate models where they've never been: private codebases, hospital data, and the messy, live internet.
    We also talk about ClawBench, his new benchmark that deploys agents to over 140 real production websites to do things people actually want done, such, such as ordering food, booking tickets, and applying for jobs. The best model in the world completes about a third of these tasks. We unpack why: bot detection, models that refuse to click "pay," agents that give up the moment an environment doesn't match their training, and harnesses that can swing results by 20% without changing the model at all.
    Along the way, we cover the overlooked science of evaluating pre-training, data flywheels, and synthetic environments for agent training, and whether RL teaches models to reason or just surfaces what's already there. We close with Wenhu's predictions: exploration and adaptability will improve rapidly, but security will become the field's hardest problem as agents gain real permissions in the real world.

    Timestamps
    00:00 – Intro
    00:55 – What good evaluation means, and how it's changed since the early GPT days
    03:35 – Benchmarks as the field's loss function
    05:50 – Contamination: the problem nobody fully solves
    08:08 – MMLU-Pro scores: real progress or training on the test set?
    11:05 – Can you measure creativity?
    12:34 – Why human judges and arenas are unreliable — and what to use instead
    19:22 – What a good benchmark actually looks like
    22:34 – Chain of thought: signal or scratchpad?
    26:01 – Auto-research and hill-climbing agents
    28:52 – Harnesses: 20% swings without touching the model
    32:28 – Safety, model release, and an "FDA for models"
    36:53 – The overlooked science of pre-training evaluation
    43:49 – Designing pre-training benchmarks when one run costs a billion dollars
    49:45 – ClawBench: agents on 140+ live websites, and why the best model gets 33%
    54:42 – How MMLU-Pro and MMMU-Pro were born from public complaints
    59:16 – Pixel agents vs. APIs: will MCP kill computer use?
    1:02:11 – Training agents: data flywheels and synthetic environments
    1:05:43 – SFT vs. RL, and does RL teach reasoning or reveal it?
    1:09:21 – What gets solved next year — and what doesn't
    1:14:32 – Undervalued ideas, and what's next for ClawBench

    Music:
    "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0.

    About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.
  • The Information Bottleneck

    Why AI Benchmarks Are Lying to You - with Wenhu Chen (Meta/ University of Waterloo)

    13/06/2026 | 1 h 19 min
    In this episode, we sit down with Wenhu Chen, research scientist at Meta MSL, assistant professor at the University of Waterloo, and the person behind MMLU-Pro and MMMU. If you've read a frontier model release in the last two years, you've seen his benchmarks. That makes him one of the best people to answer the question everyone dances around: when a model jumps from 40% to 90% on your benchmark, how much of that is real? In this episode, we dig into why benchmarks have become the loss function of the entire field - design a bad one, and thousands of brilliant researchers will spend months hill-climbing in the wrong direction. Wenhu is surprisingly candid about the limits of his own creations: contamination is everywhere, saturation turns frontier benchmarks into unit tests, and popular alternatives, such as LM Arena, mostly measure tone and length rather than capability. His answer is to evaluate models where they've never been: private codebases, hospital data, and the messy, live internet.
    We also talk about ClawBench, his new benchmark that deploys agents to over 140 real production websites to do things people actually want done, such, such as ordering food, booking tickets, and applying for jobs. The best model in the world completes about a third of these tasks. We unpack why: bot detection, models that refuse to click "pay," agents that give up the moment an environment doesn't match their training, and harnesses that can swing results by 20% without changing the model at all.
    Along the way, we cover the overlooked science of evaluating pre-training, data flywheels, and synthetic environments for agent training, and whether RL teaches models to reason or just surfaces what's already there. We close with Wenhu's predictions: exploration and adaptability will improve rapidly, but security will become the field's hardest problem as agents gain real permissions in the real world.

    Timestamps
    00:00 – Intro
    00:55 – What good evaluation means, and how it's changed since the early GPT days
    03:35 – Benchmarks as the field's loss function
    05:50 – Contamination: the problem nobody fully solves
    08:08 – MMLU-Pro scores: real progress or training on the test set?
    11:05 – Can you measure creativity?
    12:34 – Why human judges and arenas are unreliable — and what to use instead
    19:22 – What a good benchmark actually looks like
    22:34 – Chain of thought: signal or scratchpad?
    26:01 – Auto-research and hill-climbing agents
    28:52 – Harnesses: 20% swings without touching the model
    32:28 – Safety, model release, and an "FDA for models"
    36:53 – The overlooked science of pre-training evaluation
    43:49 – Designing pre-training benchmarks when one run costs a billion dollars
    49:45 – ClawBench: agents on 140+ live websites, and why the best model gets 33%
    54:42 – How MMLU-Pro and MMMU-Pro were born from public complaints
    59:16 – Pixel agents vs. APIs: will MCP kill computer use?
    1:02:11 – Training agents: data flywheels and synthetic environments
    1:05:43 – SFT vs. RL, and does RL teach reasoning or reveal it?
    1:09:21 – What gets solved next year — and what doesn't
    1:14:32 – Undervalued ideas, and what's next for ClawBench

    Music:
    "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0.

    About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.
  • The Information Bottleneck

    Jürgen Schmidhuber - Part 2: JEPA, the Road to AGI, and Who Really Invented Modern AI

    07/06/2026 | 1 h 29 min
    In the second half of our conversation with Jürgen Schmidhuber, we focus on the key ideas he's pursued since the early 1990s and discuss why he believes these concepts are only now being rediscovered.

    We start with JEPA. Jürgen argues that the method LeCun named in 2022 is the same family he published in 1992 as Predictability Maximization. From there he traces the adversarial lineage back further still, to his 1990 world-model paper and 1991 Predictability Minimization  -  the curiosity-driven minimax games he sees as the real origins of GANs.
    We also talk about why these ideas took thirty years to land, why today's trillion-dollar data-center buildout is driven by AGI fear, and why he thinks Apple may come out ahead.

    The back half turns to what he sees as the real frontier: physical AI. Today's systems are superhuman behind the screen but helpless at a leaky pipe, and until a robot can use human tools, there's no AGI. He discusses self-replicating, self-improving machines as "a new kind of life," reframes continual learning and test-time training as ideas from his 1991 fast-weight work, and detours through Solomonoff's universal prior, Hutter's AIXI, and the Gödel machine.

    We close on the subject Jürgen is famous for: scientific credit. He makes his case for rigorous attribution, casts himself as a "speaker for the dead" championing forgotten pioneers like Ivakhnenko, and reflects candidly on whether the fights are personal.

    Timeline

    00:30 — What JEPA is, and the 1992 Predictability Maximization story
    04:54 — Implementing PMAX: autoencoders, Siamese networks, Infomax
    09:10 — Predictability Minimization, factorial codes, and the roots of GANs
    16:00 — Why it took 30 years: the economics of compute
    20:52 — Data, the web, and 1990 as the origin point
    23:09 — Hardware inflation, the trillion-dollar buildout, and the coming crash
    34:05 — Physical AI: the plumber problem and self-replicating machines
    41:14 — Which 90s ideas are being scaled right now
    45:26 — Continual learning and test-time training as "old hats"
    55:19 — Measuring intelligence: Solomonoff, AIXI, and the Gödel machine
    1:05:26 — Self-replication and von Neumann
    1:09:51 — Will he see AGI in his lifetime?
    1:10:42 — Credit, integrity, and being a "speaker for the dead"

    Music:
    "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0.
    "Palms Down" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0.
    Changes: trimmed

    About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.
Plus de podcasts Sciences
À propos de The Information Bottleneck
Two AI Researchers - Ravid Shwartz Ziv, and Allen Roush, discuss the latest trends, news, and research within Generative AI, LLMs, GPUs, and Cloud Systems.
Site web du podcast

Écoutez The Information Bottleneck, OmniScience - Le Podcast pour Comprendre les Sciences ou d'autres podcasts du monde entier - avec l'app de radio.fr

Obtenez l’app radio.fr
 gratuite

  • Ajout de radios et podcasts en favoris
  • Diffusion via Wi-Fi ou Bluetooth
  • Carplay & Android Auto compatibles
  • Et encore plus de fonctionnalités