Tootfinder

EECT: an Eccentricity Evolution Consistency Test to distinguish eccentric gravitational-wave signals from eccentricity mimickers
Sajad A. Bhat, Avinash Tiwari, Md Arif Shaikh, Shasvath J. Kapadia
https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.14850

EECT: an Eccentricity Evolution Consistency Test to distinguish eccentric gravitational-wave signals from eccentricity mimickers
Eccentric compact binary coalescences (CBCs) are expected to be observed in current and future gravitational-wave (GW) detector networks. However, it has been recently pointed out that a number of other physical and beyond-GR effects, could imitate, or be mimicked by, eccentric CBCs. In this work, we propose a conceptually simple but powerful method to directly confirm or reject the eccentric hypothesis, without needing to compare the hypothesis with the plethora of other possible hypotheses. T…

🇺🇦 #NowPlaying on KEXP's #SundaySoul
Universal Togetherness Band:
🎵 Dreamality (long version)
#UniversalTogethernessBand
https://eccentricsoul.bandcamp.com/track/universal-togetherness-band-dreamality
https://open.spotify.com/track/3zUFgcZJ8jXNcyqZcT5uKb

Embeddings of the line graphs associated with the essential graphs of commutative rings
Sakshi Jain, Mohd Nazim, Y. M. Borse
https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.13885 https://

Embeddings of the line graphs associated with the essential graphs of commutative rings
Let $A$ be a finite commutative ring with unity $1 \neq 0.$ An ideal of $A$ is said to be essential if it has a non-zero intersection with every non-zero ideal of $A.$ The essential graph of $A$ is a simple undirected graph whose vertex set consists of all non-zero zero-divisors of $A.$ Two different vertices $u$ and $v$ are connected by an edge precisely when the ideal formed by the annihilator of their product $uv$ is essential in $A.$ This paper examines the minimal embeddings of the line gr…

🇺🇦 #NowPlaying on BBCRadio3's #EssentialClassics
Giovanni Benedetto Platti, Abel Selaocoe, Elizabeth Kenny, Fred Thomas & Kadialy Kouyate:
🎵 Cello Sonata No. 7 in D Major (2nd mvt)
#GiovanniBenedettoPlatti
https://open.spotify.com/track/0npVurqxahwlcakJKTAXt9

Eigentlich müsste ich mich über den Zuwachs in der Dresdner Medienlanschaft freuen, aber wenn ich die Begründung für die Expansion lese, dann vergeht das ganz schnell! 😬
https://www.flurfunk-dresden.de/2025/09/21/projekt-halle-…

„Projekt Halle“: Berliner Verlag expandiert in ostdeutsche Hauptstädte

Essential 2025 fantasy football player projections for every position https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6565039/2025/08/21/fantasy-football-2025-player-projections-by-position/

Overly academic/distanced ethical discussions
Had a weird interaction with @/brainwane@social.coop just now. I misinterpreted one of their posts quoting someone else and I think the combination of that plus an interaction pattern where I'd assume their stance on something and respond critically to that ended up with me getting blocked. I don't have hard feelings exactly, and this post is only partly about this particular person, but I noticed something interesting by the end of the conversation that had been bothering me. They repeatedly criticized me for assuming what their position was, but never actually stated their position. They didn't say: "I'm bothered you assumed my position was X, it's actually Y." They just said "I'm bothered you assumed my position was X, please don't assume my position!" I get that it's annoying to have people respond to a straw man version of your argument, but when I in response asked some direct questions about what their position was, they gave some non-answers and then blocked me. It's entirely possible it's a coincidence, and they just happened to run out of patience on that iteration, but it makes me take their critique of my interactions a bit less seriously. I suspect that they just didn't want to hear what I was saying, while at the same time they wanted to feel as if they were someone who values public critique and open discussion of tricky issues (if anyone reading this post also followed our interaction and has a different opinion of my behavior, I'd be glad to hear it; it's possible In effectively being an asshole here and it would be useful to hear that if so).
In any case, the fact that at the end of the entire discussion, I'm realizing I still don't actually know their position on whether they think the AI use case in question is worthwhile feels odd. They praised the system on several occasions, albeit noting some drawbacks while doing so. They said that the system was possibly changing their anti-AI stance, but then got mad at me for assuming this meant that they thought this use-case was justified. Maybe they just haven't made up their mind yet but didn't want to say that?
Interestingly, in one of their own blog posts that got linked in the discussion, they discuss a different AI system, and despite listing a bunch of concrete harms, conclude that it's okay to use it. That's fine; I don't think *every* use of AI is wrong on balance, but what bothered me was that their post dismissed a number of real ethical issues by saying essentially "I haven't seen calls for a boycott over this issue, so it's not a reason to stop use." That's an extremely socially conformist version of ethics that doesn't sit well with me. The discussion also ended up linking this post: https://chelseatroy.com/2024/08/28/does-ai-benefit-the-world/ which bothered me in a related way. In it, Troy describes classroom teaching techniques for introducing and helping students explore the ethics of AI, and they seem mostly great. They avoid prescribing any particular correct stance, which is important when teaching given the power relationship, and they help students understand the limitations of their perspectives regarding global impacts, which is great. But the overall conclusion of the post is that "nobody is qualified to really judge global impacts, so we should focus on ways to improve outcomes instead of trying to judge them." This bothers me because we actually do have a responsibility to make decisive ethical judgments despite limitations of our perspectives. If we never commit to any ethical judgment against a technology because we think our perspective is too limited to know the true impacts (which I'll concede it invariably is) then we'll have to accept every technology without objection, limiting ourselves to trying to improve their impacts without opposing them. Given who currently controls most of the resources that go into exploration for new technologies, this stance is too permissive. Perhaps if our objection to a technology was absolute and instantly effective, I'd buy the argument that objecting without a deep global view of the long-term risks is dangerous. As things stand, I think that objecting to the development/use of certain technologies in certain contexts is necessary, and although there's a lot of uncertainly, I expect strongly enough that the overall outcomes of objection will be positive that I think it's a good thing to do.
The deeper point here I guess is that this kind of "things are too complicated, let's have a nuanced discussion where we don't come to any conclusions because we see a lot of unknowns along with definite harms" really bothers me.

How Usable is Automated Feature Engineering for Tabular Data?
Bastian Sch\"afer, Lennart Purucker, Maciej Janowski, Frank Hutter
https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.13932 https://…

How Usable is Automated Feature Engineering for Tabular Data?
Tabular data, consisting of rows and columns, is omnipresent across various machine learning applications. Each column represents a feature, and features can be combined or transformed to create new, more informative features. Such feature engineering is essential to achieve peak performance in machine learning. Since manual feature engineering is expensive and time-consuming, a substantial effort has been put into automating it. Yet, existing automated feature engineering (AutoFE) methods have…

Enhancing Targeted Adversarial Attacks on Large Vision-Language Models through Intermediate Projector Guidance
Yiming Cao, Yanjie Li, Kaisheng Liang, Yuni Lai, Bin Xiao
https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.13739

Enhancing Targeted Adversarial Attacks on Large Vision-Language Models through Intermediate Projector Guidance
Targeted adversarial attacks are essential for proactively identifying security flaws in Vision-Language Models before real-world deployment. However, current methods perturb images to maximize global similarity with the target text or reference image at the encoder level, collapsing rich visual semantics into a single global vector. This limits attack granularity, hindering fine-grained manipulations such as modifying a car while preserving its background. Furthermore, these methods largely ov…

🇺🇦 #NowPlaying on BBCRadio3's #EssentialClassics
George Frideric Handel, Chœur de Chambre de Namur, Cappella Mediterranea & Leonardo García Alarcón:
🎵 Dixit Dominus; 1. Dixit Dominus
#GeorgeFridericHandel
https://open.spotify.com/track/2m8EwexHkPVQCNpSTidgPf