M. Jamnik
Publications
Shaping the Future of Mathematics in the Age of AI
Artificial intelligence is transforming mathematics at a speed and scale that demand active engagement from the mathematical community. We examine five areas where this transformation is particularly pressing: values, practice, teaching, technology, and ethics. We offer recommendations on safeguarding our intellectual autonomy, rethinking our practice, broadening curricula, building academically oriented infrastructure, and developing shared ethical principles - with the aim of ensuring that the future of mathematics is shaped by the community itself.
Hierarchical Concept-based Interpretable Models
Modern deep neural networks remain challenging to interpret due to the opacity of their latent representations, impeding model understanding, debugging, and debiasing. Concept Embedding Models (CEMs) address this by mapping inputs to human-interpretable concept representations from which tasks can be predicted. Yet, CEMs fail to represent inter-concept relationships and require concept annotations at different granularities during training, limiting their applicability. In this paper, we introduce Hierarchical Concept Embedding Models (HiCEMs), a new family of CEMs that explicitly model concept relationships through hierarchical structures. To enable HiCEMs in real-world settings, we propose Concept Splitting, a method for automatically discovering finer-grained sub-concepts from a pretrained CEM's embedding space without requiring additional annotations. This allows HiCEMs to generate fine-grained explanations from limited concept labels, reducing annotation burdens. Our evaluation across multiple datasets, including a user study and experiments on PseudoKitchens, a newly proposed concept-based dataset of 3D kitchen renders, demonstrates that (1) Concept Splitting discovers human-interpretable sub-concepts absent during training that can be used to train highly accurate HiCEMs, and (2) HiCEMs enable powerful test-time concept interventions at different granularities, leading to improved task accuracy.
Towards Spatial Transcriptomics-driven Pathology Foundation Models
Spatial transcriptomics (ST) provides spatially resolved measurements of gene expression, enabling characterization of the molecular landscape of human tissue beyond histological assessment as well as localized readouts that can be aligned with morphology. Concurrently, the success of multimodal foundation models that integrate vision with complementary modalities suggests that morphomolecular coupling between local expression and morphology can be systematically used to improve histological representations themselves. We introduce Spatial Expression-Aligned Learning (SEAL), a vision-omics self-supervised learning framework that infuses localized molecular information into pathology vision encoders. Rather than training new encoders from scratch, SEAL is designed as a parameter-efficient vision-omics finetuning method that can be flexibly applied to widely used pathology foundation models. We instantiate SEAL by training on over 700,000 paired gene expression spot-tissue region examples spanning tumor and normal samples from 14 organs. Tested across 38 slide-level and 15 patch-level downstream tasks, SEAL provides a drop-in replacement for pathology foundation models that consistently improves performance over widely used vision-only and ST prediction baselines on slide-level molecular status, pathway activity, and treatment response prediction, as well as patch-level gene expression prediction tasks. Additionally, SEAL encoders exhibit robust domain generalization on out-of-distribution evaluations and enable new cross-modal capabilities such as gene-to-image retrieval. Our work proposes a general framework for ST-guided finetuning of pathology foundation models, showing that augmenting existing models with localized molecular supervision is an effective and practical step for improving visual representations and expanding their cross-modal utility.
Actionable Interpretability Must Be Defined in Terms of Symmetries
This paper argues that interpretability research in Artificial Intelligence is fundamentally ill-posed as existing definitions of interpretability are not *actionable*: they fail to provide formal principles from which concrete modelling and inferential rules can be derived. We posit that for a definition of interpretability to be actionable, it must be given in terms of *symmetries*. We hypothesise that four symmetries suffice to (i) motivate core interpretability properties, (ii) characterize the class of interpretable models, and (iii) derive a unified formulation of interpretable inference (e.g., alignment, interventions, and counterfactuals) as a form of Bayesian inversion.
Actionable Interpretability Must Be Defined in Terms of Symmetries
This paper argues that interpretability research in Artificial Intelligence (AI) is fundamentally ill-posed as existing definitions of interpretability fail to describe how interpretability can be formally tested or designed for. We posit that actionable definitions of interpretability must be formulated in terms of *symmetries* that inform model design and lead to testable conditions. Under a probabilistic view, we hypothesise that four symmetries (inference equivariance, information invariance, concept-closure invariance, and structural invariance) suffice to (i) formalise interpretable models as a subclass of probabilistic models, (ii) yield a unified formulation of interpretable inference (e.g., alignment, interventions, and counterfactuals) as a form of Bayesian inversion, and (iii) provide a formal framework to verify compliance with safety standards and regulations.
An AI Monkey Gets Grapes for Sure -- Sphere Neural Networks for Reliable Decision-Making
This paper compares three methodological categories of neural reasoning: LLM reasoning, supervised learning-based reasoning, and explicit model-based reasoning. LLMs remain unreliable and struggle with simple decision-making that animals can master without extensive corpora training. Through disjunctive syllogistic reasoning testing, we show that reasoning via supervised learning is less appealing than reasoning via explicit model construction. Concretely, we show that an Euler Net trained to achieve 100.00% in classic syllogistic reasoning can be trained to reach 100.00% accuracy in disjunctive syllogistic reasoning. However, the retrained Euler Net suffers severely from catastrophic forgetting (its performance drops to 6.25% on already-learned classic syllogistic reasoning), and its reasoning competence is limited to the pattern level. We propose a new version of Sphere Neural Networks that embeds concepts as circles on the surface of an n-dimensional sphere. These Sphere Neural Networks enable the representation of the negation operator via complement circles and achieve reliable decision-making by filtering out illogical statements that form unsatisfiable circular configurations. We demonstrate that the Sphere Neural Network can master 16 syllogistic reasoning tasks, including rigorous disjunctive syllogistic reasoning, while preserving the rigour of classical syllogistic reasoning. We conclude that neural reasoning with explicit model construction is the most reliable among the three methodological categories of neural reasoning.