Over 10 years we help companies reach their financial and branding goals. Engitech is a values-driven technology agency dedicated.

Gallery

Contacts

411 University St, Seattle, USA

engitech@oceanthemes.net

+1 -800-456-478-23

AI Training
Safe AI Usage, AI Training, Safe AI

Safe AI Usage: The 10 Commandments to benefit from Generative AI | Playbook

Author: Derrick D. JacksonTitle: Founder & Senior Director of Cloud Security Architecture & RiskCredentials: CISSP, CRISC, CCSPLast updated: July 28th, 2025 Safe AI Usage: The Complete Workplace Guide Scope: This Safe AI Usage guide covers AI usage for typical business applications (content creation, analysis, customer support) used by knowledge workers. For organizations developing high-risk AI systems or […]

Insights News
AI News & Insights Featured Image

Model Tampering Attacks Enable More Rigorous Evaluations of LLM Capabilitiescs.AI updates on arXiv.orgon July 28, 2025 at 4:00 am

Model Tampering Attacks Enable More Rigorous Evaluations of LLM Capabilitiescs.AI updates on arXiv.orgon July 28, 2025 at 4:00 am arXiv:2502.05209v4 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Evaluations of large language model (LLM) risks and capabilities are increasingly being incorporated into AI risk management and governance frameworks. Currently, most risk evaluations are conducted by designing inputs that elicit harmful behaviors from the system. However, this approach suffers from two limitations. First, input-output evaluations cannot fully evaluate realistic risks from open-weight models. Second, the behaviors identified during any particular input-output evaluation can only lower-bound the model’s worst-possible-case input-output behavior. As a complementary method for eliciting harmful behaviors, we propose evaluating LLMs with model tampering attacks which allow for modifications to latent activations or weights. We pit state-of-the-art techniques for removing harmful LLM capabilities against a suite of 5 input-space and 6 model tampering attacks. In addition to benchmarking these methods against each other, we show that (1) model resilience to capability elicitation attacks lies on a low-dimensional robustness subspace; (2) the success rate of model tampering attacks can empirically predict and offer conservative estimates for the success of held-out input-space attacks; and (3) state-of-the-art unlearning methods can easily be undone within 16 steps of fine-tuning. Together, these results highlight the difficulty of suppressing harmful LLM capabilities and show that model tampering attacks enable substantially more rigorous evaluations than input-space attacks alone.

 arXiv:2502.05209v4 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Evaluations of large language model (LLM) risks and capabilities are increasingly being incorporated into AI risk management and governance frameworks. Currently, most risk evaluations are conducted by designing inputs that elicit harmful behaviors from the system. However, this approach suffers from two limitations. First, input-output evaluations cannot fully evaluate realistic risks from open-weight models. Second, the behaviors identified during any particular input-output evaluation can only lower-bound the model’s worst-possible-case input-output behavior. As a complementary method for eliciting harmful behaviors, we propose evaluating LLMs with model tampering attacks which allow for modifications to latent activations or weights. We pit state-of-the-art techniques for removing harmful LLM capabilities against a suite of 5 input-space and 6 model tampering attacks. In addition to benchmarking these methods against each other, we show that (1) model resilience to capability elicitation attacks lies on a low-dimensional robustness subspace; (2) the success rate of model tampering attacks can empirically predict and offer conservative estimates for the success of held-out input-space attacks; and (3) state-of-the-art unlearning methods can easily be undone within 16 steps of fine-tuning. Together, these results highlight the difficulty of suppressing harmful LLM capabilities and show that model tampering attacks enable substantially more rigorous evaluations than input-space attacks alone. Read More 

Insights News
AI News & Insights Featured Image

Chinese universities want students to use more AI, not less MIT Technology Review on July 28, 2025 at 9:00 am

Chinese universities want students to use more AI, not lessMIT Technology Reviewon July 28, 2025 at 9:00 am Just two years ago, Lorraine He, now a 24-year-old law student,  was told to avoid using AI for her assignments. At the time, to get around a national block on ChatGPT, students had to buy a mirror-site version from a secondhand marketplace. Its use was common, but it was at best tolerated and more often…

 Just two years ago, Lorraine He, now a 24-year-old law student,  was told to avoid using AI for her assignments. At the time, to get around a national block on ChatGPT, students had to buy a mirror-site version from a secondhand marketplace. Its use was common, but it was at best tolerated and more often… Read More 

News
AI News & Insights Featured Image

Distilling a Small Utility-Based Passage Selector to Enhance Retrieval-Augmented Generationcs.AI updates on arXiv.orgon July 28, 2025 at 4:00 am

Distilling a Small Utility-Based Passage Selector to Enhance Retrieval-Augmented Generationcs.AI updates on arXiv.orgon July 28, 2025 at 4:00 am arXiv:2507.19102v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) enhances large language models (LLMs) by incorporating retrieved information. Standard retrieval process prioritized relevance, focusing on topical alignment between queries and passages. In contrast, in RAG, the emphasis has shifted to utility, which considers the usefulness of passages for generating accurate answers. Despite empirical evidence showing the benefits of utility-based retrieval in RAG, the high computational cost of using LLMs for utility judgments limits the number of passages evaluated. This restriction is problematic for complex queries requiring extensive information. To address this, we propose a method to distill the utility judgment capabilities of LLMs into smaller, more efficient models. Our approach focuses on utility-based selection rather than ranking, enabling dynamic passage selection tailored to specific queries without the need for fixed thresholds. We train student models to learn pseudo-answer generation and utility judgments from teacher LLMs, using a sliding window method that dynamically selects useful passages. Our experiments demonstrate that utility-based selection provides a flexible and cost-effective solution for RAG, significantly reducing computational costs while improving answer quality. We present the distillation results using Qwen3-32B as the teacher model for both relevance ranking and utility-based selection, distilled into RankQwen1.7B and UtilityQwen1.7B. Our findings indicate that for complex questions, utility-based selection is more effective than relevance ranking in enhancing answer generation performance. We will release the relevance ranking and utility-based selection annotations for the MS MARCO dataset, supporting further research in this area.

 arXiv:2507.19102v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) enhances large language models (LLMs) by incorporating retrieved information. Standard retrieval process prioritized relevance, focusing on topical alignment between queries and passages. In contrast, in RAG, the emphasis has shifted to utility, which considers the usefulness of passages for generating accurate answers. Despite empirical evidence showing the benefits of utility-based retrieval in RAG, the high computational cost of using LLMs for utility judgments limits the number of passages evaluated. This restriction is problematic for complex queries requiring extensive information. To address this, we propose a method to distill the utility judgment capabilities of LLMs into smaller, more efficient models. Our approach focuses on utility-based selection rather than ranking, enabling dynamic passage selection tailored to specific queries without the need for fixed thresholds. We train student models to learn pseudo-answer generation and utility judgments from teacher LLMs, using a sliding window method that dynamically selects useful passages. Our experiments demonstrate that utility-based selection provides a flexible and cost-effective solution for RAG, significantly reducing computational costs while improving answer quality. We present the distillation results using Qwen3-32B as the teacher model for both relevance ranking and utility-based selection, distilled into RankQwen1.7B and UtilityQwen1.7B. Our findings indicate that for complex questions, utility-based selection is more effective than relevance ranking in enhancing answer generation performance. We will release the relevance ranking and utility-based selection annotations for the MS MARCO dataset, supporting further research in this area. Read More 

Career Certification
CCSP Overview, CCSP Certification, ISC2

CCSP Certification Overview 2025: Benefits, Costs & Guidance 2025

Authored by Derrick Jackson & Co-Author Lisa Yu CCSP Certification Overview for 2025: Why This Certification Commands $171,524 Average Salary Cloud breaches cost companies an average of $5.17 million per incident, according to IBM’s 2024 Cost of a Data Breach Report¹. Most organizations rushing to the cloud don’t realize they’re fundamentally changing their security responsibilities. The old perimeter-based […]

Career Certification Job
Network+, CompTIA Network+

CompTIA Network+ Certification Overview: Benefits, Costs & Guidance 2025

Authored by Derrick Jackson & Co-Author Lisa Yu Why Network+ Still Matters When Everything’s Going Cloud-Native Cloud computing didn’t eliminate networking. It made it exponentially more complex. Organizations thought they’d move everything to the cloud and networking would become someone else’s problem. Instead, they discovered hybrid environments require deeper networking knowledge than ever before. You’re not just managing […]

Insights News
AI News & Insights Featured Image

Multimodal Behavioral Patterns Analysis with Eye-Tracking and LLM-Based Reasoningcs.AI updates on arXiv.orgon July 25, 2025 at 4:00 am

Multimodal Behavioral Patterns Analysis with Eye-Tracking and LLM-Based Reasoningcs.AI updates on arXiv.orgon July 25, 2025 at 4:00 am arXiv:2507.18252v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Eye-tracking data reveals valuable insights into users’ cognitive states but is difficult to analyze due to its structured, non-linguistic nature. While large language models (LLMs) excel at reasoning over text, they struggle with temporal and numerical data. This paper presents a multimodal human-AI collaborative framework designed to enhance cognitive pattern extraction from eye-tracking signals. The framework includes: (1) a multi-stage pipeline using horizontal and vertical segmentation alongside LLM reasoning to uncover latent gaze patterns; (2) an Expert-Model Co-Scoring Module that integrates expert judgment with LLM output to generate trust scores for behavioral interpretations; and (3) a hybrid anomaly detection module combining LSTM-based temporal modeling with LLM-driven semantic analysis. Our results across several LLMs and prompt strategies show improvements in consistency, interpretability, and performance, with up to 50% accuracy in difficulty prediction tasks. This approach offers a scalable, interpretable solution for cognitive modeling and has broad potential in adaptive learning, human-computer interaction, and educational analytics.

 arXiv:2507.18252v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Eye-tracking data reveals valuable insights into users’ cognitive states but is difficult to analyze due to its structured, non-linguistic nature. While large language models (LLMs) excel at reasoning over text, they struggle with temporal and numerical data. This paper presents a multimodal human-AI collaborative framework designed to enhance cognitive pattern extraction from eye-tracking signals. The framework includes: (1) a multi-stage pipeline using horizontal and vertical segmentation alongside LLM reasoning to uncover latent gaze patterns; (2) an Expert-Model Co-Scoring Module that integrates expert judgment with LLM output to generate trust scores for behavioral interpretations; and (3) a hybrid anomaly detection module combining LSTM-based temporal modeling with LLM-driven semantic analysis. Our results across several LLMs and prompt strategies show improvements in consistency, interpretability, and performance, with up to 50% accuracy in difficulty prediction tasks. This approach offers a scalable, interpretable solution for cognitive modeling and has broad potential in adaptive learning, human-computer interaction, and educational analytics. Read More 

Insights News
AI News & Insights Featured Image

Automated Code Review Using Large Language Models with Symbolic Reasoningcs.AI updates on arXiv.orgon July 25, 2025 at 4:00 am

Automated Code Review Using Large Language Models with Symbolic Reasoningcs.AI updates on arXiv.orgon July 25, 2025 at 4:00 am arXiv:2507.18476v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Code review is one of the key processes in the software development lifecycle and is essential to maintain code quality. However, manual code review is subjective and time consuming. Given its rule-based nature, code review is well suited for automation. In recent years, significant efforts have been made to automate this process with the help of artificial intelligence. Recent developments in Large Language Models (LLMs) have also emerged as a promising tool in this area, but these models often lack the logical reasoning capabilities needed to fully understand and evaluate code. To overcome this limitation, this study proposes a hybrid approach that integrates symbolic reasoning techniques with LLMs to automate the code review process. We tested our approach using the CodexGlue dataset, comparing several models, including CodeT5, CodeBERT, and GraphCodeBERT, to assess the effectiveness of combining symbolic reasoning and prompting techniques with LLMs. Our results show that this approach improves the accuracy and efficiency of automated code review.

 arXiv:2507.18476v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Code review is one of the key processes in the software development lifecycle and is essential to maintain code quality. However, manual code review is subjective and time consuming. Given its rule-based nature, code review is well suited for automation. In recent years, significant efforts have been made to automate this process with the help of artificial intelligence. Recent developments in Large Language Models (LLMs) have also emerged as a promising tool in this area, but these models often lack the logical reasoning capabilities needed to fully understand and evaluate code. To overcome this limitation, this study proposes a hybrid approach that integrates symbolic reasoning techniques with LLMs to automate the code review process. We tested our approach using the CodexGlue dataset, comparing several models, including CodeT5, CodeBERT, and GraphCodeBERT, to assess the effectiveness of combining symbolic reasoning and prompting techniques with LLMs. Our results show that this approach improves the accuracy and efficiency of automated code review. Read More 

Insights News
AI News & Insights Featured Image

How Do Grayscale Images Affect Visual Anomaly Detection?Towards Data Scienceon July 24, 2025 at 7:53 pm

How Do Grayscale Images Affect Visual Anomaly Detection?Towards Data Scienceon July 24, 2025 at 7:53 pm A practical exploration focusing on performance and speed
The post How Do Grayscale Images Affect Visual Anomaly Detection? appeared first on Towards Data Science.

 A practical exploration focusing on performance and speed
The post How Do Grayscale Images Affect Visual Anomaly Detection? appeared first on Towards Data Science. Read More 

Insights News
Your paragraph text RgpbAz

America’s AI watchdog is losing its biteMIT Technology Review on July 24, 2025 at 6:59 pm

America’s AI watchdog is losing its biteMIT Technology Reviewon July 24, 2025 at 6:59 pm Most Americans encounter the Federal Trade Commission only if they’ve been scammed: It handles identity theft, fraud, and stolen data. During the Biden administration, the agency went after AI companies for scamming customers with deceptive advertising or harming people by selling irresponsible technologies. With yesterday’s announcement of President Trump’s AI Action Plan, that era may…

 Most Americans encounter the Federal Trade Commission only if they’ve been scammed: It handles identity theft, fraud, and stolen data. During the Biden administration, the agency went after AI companies for scamming customers with deceptive advertising or harming people by selling irresponsible technologies. With yesterday’s announcement of President Trump’s AI Action Plan, that era may… Read More