Embeddings

10 posts

toss5 min readCurated summary

Getting AI to Provide Investment Information

LLMs make it easy to generate financial content, but producing trustworthy investment information requires much more than fluent summaries. Toss Securities argues that AI must pass three gates before reaching users: selecting reliable evidence, controlling how responses are generated, and making outputs measurable and improvable. The central principle is to constrain AI autonomy where reproducibility and traceability matter, while preserving it for open-ended exploration. ## Why Investment Information Is Different - **Timeliness:** Market interpretations can change within hours due to earnings, geopolitical events, or policy news. - **Accuracy:** A company mentioned in an article may not be the company whose stock moved; it could be a subsidiary, a similarly named firm, or merely a promotional mention. - **Traceability:** Every generated claim needs supporting evidence, evaluation records, and reproducible processing. - **Non-stationarity:** Market behavior changes across earnings seasons, interest-rate events, elections, and geopolitical crises. Prompts and models tuned to one period may degrade later. LLMs and autonomous agents amplify these challenges: - LLMs can produce fluent but incorrect answers when evidence is incomplete or ambiguous. - Agents add more failure points through search, tool calls, planning, and state transitions. - Errors can propagate through different execution paths, increasing operational cost and making debugging difficult. ## Gate One: Selecting What the AI Should Say The first gate is a context-engineering process that filters and organizes evidence before it reaches the LLM. ### Classify Data at Ingestion - News, disclosures, and financial data are classified as they arrive using internally developed BERT-based models. - Metadata includes: - Taxonomy tags - Related companies and entities - Embeddings for vector search - Pre-classifying data avoids waiting until retrieval to determine whether it is relevant. ### Retrieve Broadly, Then Narrow the Candidates A hybrid retriever first prioritizes recall, after which candidates are reduced through: - **Deduplication:** Semantically similar articles are clustered so one event is not treated as many independent events. - **Reranking and filtering:** Evidence is evaluated for direct relevance to the company’s price movement. - **Taxonomy labels:** Items are categorized by explanation type, such as earnings, guidance, or corporate actions. - **Failure labels:** Promotional content, insufficient evidence, and other unsuitable sources are explicitly marked and filtered out. - **Rubrics:** Evidence is ranked according to predefined relevance criteria. ### Build Reasoning-Friendly Context The final context is arranged so the model checks: - What happened - How the event connects to the target company - Whether the evidence’s polarity matches the stock’s price direction - Whether the evidence is sufficient and current This ordering combines the filtered evidence with metadata such as the company, price direction, and time window. ## Gate Two: Controlling How Responses Are Generated The second gate limits the action space of LLMs and agents to satisfy product requirements such as cost, latency, reproducibility, and observability. ### Use Task Graphs for Clearly Defined Work Instead of leaving the entire process to an autonomous agent, Toss Securities separates it into explicit stages: - Candidate retrieval - Relevance assessment - Deduplication - Evidence construction - Final response generation Each stage has defined input and output schemas, making it a debugging and evaluation point while simplifying fallbacks and operational monitoring. ### Choose Autonomy Based on Requirement Clarity - **Autonomous agents** are useful for open-ended tasks such as discovering investment ideas or exploring possible market scenarios. - **Procedural orchestration** is better for fixed tasks, such as explaining why a specific stock moved. - Long ReAct loops increase tool calls, token usage, latency, and trace-management costs. - For structured products, deterministic pipelines let LLMs focus on summarization, rewriting, and evidence-based explanation rather than tool selection. Procedural graphs are not merely a replacement for agents. Once defined, they can become reusable tools or sub-agents that other agents call through structured interfaces, such as: ```text input: ticker, direction, time_window output: explanation, evidences, reasoning_type ``` ## Gate Three: Making the System Evaluatable Subjective judgments such as “the answer feels weak” do not provide a reliable improvement loop. The system therefore generates structured classifications alongside natural-language responses. ### Generate Rubric Categories with Each Answer - Outputs include event or reasoning types and failure categories. - Structured fields make it possible to measure: - Relevance false positives - Directional mismatches - Irrelevant evidence passing the filter - Precision, recall, and F1 score - The taxonomy must evolve as new market regimes and failure patterns appear. - Operational failures, evaluation sets, prompt versions, and model versions should be linked so improvements can be reproduced and quantified. ### Retrieve Context-Specific Few-Shot Examples Fixed few-shot examples are insufficient because event and failure types vary widely across market conditions. Instead: - Store operational samples with their decisions, failure labels, and embeddings. - Embed each new classification or verification task. - Retrieve similar positive and negative examples. - Include both successful and failed examples to show the model the decision boundary. This approach reuses production failures as future evaluation guidance and significantly improves precision and accuracy while preserving recall. Since false positives are especially damaging in investment services, filtering out unsupported explanations is more important than producing fluent text alone. ## Work Beyond Prompts and Model Training Building an investment-information AI service also requires substantial infrastructure outside the model itself: - Retrieval strategies and embedding models for finding relevant evidence - Separately trained classifiers for categorization - Evidence filtering, validation, and metadata management - Structured orchestration, monitoring, evaluation, and feedback loops The practical recommendation is to treat the LLM as one component in a controlled evidence pipeline—not as the sole decision-maker. Use autonomous agents for exploratory tasks, but rely on traceable procedural graphs, evolving taxonomies, and retrieval-based examples when the product must deliver repeatable, defensible financial information.

Read original(opens in new tab)
cloudflare3 min readCurated summary

Cloudflare AI Search: give your agents a search engine for your data

Cloudflare AI Search now automates the components previously needed to build a search system, including crawling, ingestion, embeddings, vector storage, and retrieval. The update adds sitemap-free website discovery, public and custom-domain endpoints, MCP support, and integrations such as EmDash. Cloudflare is also previewing predictable pricing by including embedding and reranking costs when using select default Workers AI models. ## Easier Data Indexing - AI Search can index structured and unstructured data, including files and websites. - Website sources currently must be owned or verified through a Cloudflare zone. - The new **Discover** parsing mode crawls sites without requiring a sitemap by following links, powered by Browser Run’s `/crawl`. - A single AI Search instance can ingest, embed, and retrieve content from a website or collection of sites. ## Unified Search Across Multiple Sources - Multiple AI Search instances can be grouped into a namespace and queried together. - Users can enable public URLs to receive: - `/search` for search requests - `/mcp` for Model Context Protocol integrations - These endpoints can search across multiple websites or instances without requiring authentication. - A Worker can also bind to a namespace and perform a single multi-instance search, with results tagged and cited by source. ## Custom Domains and Access Control - Public endpoints can use custom domains such as `search.example.com/mcp`. - Cloudflare Access can be placed in front of these domains to make search private. - This supports both easily shareable public search and authenticated search for authorized users or agents. ## Pricing Model - Cloudflare is previewing a predictable, scalable pricing model for AI Search. - Embedding and reranking are included at no additional cost when using select default models from the Workers AI catalog. - Customers therefore do not need to estimate token usage for those operations. ## Cloudflare Dev Stack MCP Cloudflare uses AI Search to power its Dev Stack MCP server, which provides coding agents with current, cited documentation. - Separate instances index Cloudflare Docs, Blog, API Docs, Community, Astro, Vite, Vitest, Hono, Replicate, and OpenNext. - These sources can be combined because Cloudflare owns the underlying website data. - A Worker-based MCP server searches all relevant instances in one call. - Search results include citations and identify the originating instance. - Users can alternatively enable public namespace endpoints without writing or deploying a Worker. - The MCP server can be added to an agent with a configuration such as: ```json { "mcpServers": { "dev-stack": { "url": "https://stack.mcp.cloudflare.com/mcp" } } } ``` ## Additional Integrations - Cloudflare’s Blog, Developer Docs, and Cloudflare.com use AI Search internally. - The open-source EmDash CMS has an AI Search plugin that adds semantic search to site content. - AI Search is also used in Cloudflare’s own MCP and documentation experiences. For an existing application or MCP server, the Worker binding offers the most flexibility. For a quick, shareable search service, public `/search` and `/mcp` endpoints provide a simpler deployment path, with custom domains and Cloudflare Access available for branding and security.

Read original(opens in new tab)
meta3 min readCurated summary

Exploring Hierarchical Interest Representation For Meta Ads Deep Funnel Optimization

Hierarchical Interest Representation is an upstream embedding layer for Meta Ads that connects users’ inferred interests with advertisers, products, and services. It combines engagement data, multimodal content, graph learning, and hierarchical abstractions to address sparse deep-funnel signals and rare or unseen entities. The resulting universal embeddings and “Bag-of-Meaning” interest tokens could support retrieval, personalization, supervision, and ranking across Meta’s advertising systems. ## Purpose and Role in Deep-Funnel Optimization - The system aims to identify people with genuine latent interest in an advertiser’s offerings. - It is intended to complement systems such as Meta’s Generative Ads Model (GEM), Andromeda, and the Adaptive Ranking Model. - It uses user behavior—including scrolling, engagement, and explicit “Interested/Not interested” feedback—to infer preferences. - The broader goal is to improve discovery-oriented ad experiences and downstream conversion performance. ## Technical Challenges ### Sparse Engagement and Large-Scale Graphs - Users, advertisers, products, services, and campaigns are modeled as graph nodes. - Interactions and activities form edges in a graph spanning millions of advertisers, millions of ads, and billions of users. - Deep-funnel feedback is relatively scarce, leaving many entities with limited direct evidence. ### Long-Range Relationships - Useful signals may come from indirectly connected users and entities rather than direct interactions. - Capturing these relationships at Meta’s scale requires memory-efficient sparse attention and high-performance graph-learning algorithms. ### Dynamic and Unseen Entities - The ads ecosystem changes rapidly, while individual entities may have little historical engagement. - Representations must generalize to rare and previously unseen businesses and products. ## Core Design Properties ### Dimension Reduction - The raw graph is projected into a configurable “super-graph.” - Learned latent interest primitives act as super-nodes. - Sparse user-ad relationships become denser connections at the interest level. - The primitive graph is more stable and stationary than the constantly changing ads vocabulary. ### Knowledge Enrichment - Advertiser and product representations incorporate text, images, video, metadata, and catalog attributes. - Vision and language models process this multimodal content. - Content helps the system understand what a product or business is, not merely how users interacted with it. - This enables better generalization to new or sparsely observed entities. ### Unified Relational Representation - Users, advertisers, products, and latent interest primitives are embedded in a shared metric space. - The system can estimate: - Relationships between interest primitives - Similarity between users, ads, and products - A user’s proximity to particular interests - Which interests an advertiser or product serves - Embedding operations support both primitive-to-primitive and cluster-to-cluster relationship modeling. ### Multiple Hierarchical Granularities - Coarse representations capture dense, stable, high-level interests. - Finer representations capture sparse and specific deep-funnel intent. - Cascading hierarchical layers allow the embeddings to serve different needs across retrieval, personalization, ranking, and supervision. ## Architecture and Training - The architecture combines: - An in-house transformer-based graph learner - Bias-aware attention - Self-supervised cross-view distillation - Sparse attention for long-range graph relationships - It combines real-world semantic knowledge with users’ temporal engagement histories. - The model learns multi-hierarchical interest representations across a large graph. - Training is performed end-to-end on real Meta Ads data involving billions of interactions. ## Outputs and Potential Applications - Universal embeddings for users and ads entities. - “Bag-of-Meaning” interest tokens representing latent interests at different granularities. - Potential uses include: - Ad retrieval - Personalization - Ranking - Specialized ranking architectures - Training supervision - Cross-entity similarity and discovery Hierarchical Interest Representation is best understood as shared infrastructure for Meta’s ads recommendation stack. By combining sparse behavioral evidence with multimodal world knowledge and hierarchical graph abstractions, it could make deep-funnel optimization more robust, especially for specialized, rare, or newly introduced products and advertisers.

Read original(opens in new tab)
google3 min readCurated summary

How AI trained on birds is surfacing underwater mysteries

Perch 2.0, Google DeepMind’s bioacoustics foundation model, was trained mainly on birds and terrestrial animals yet performs strongly on underwater audio. The study shows that its learned audio embeddings can support accurate whale, dolphin, reef-sound, and killer-whale classification with only a few labeled examples. This suggests that large, broadly trained bioacoustics models can transfer across environments and accelerate marine research without requiring extensive underwater training data. ## Underwater Mysteries and Bioacoustics - Ocean recordings reveal animal behavior, species distributions, and unexplained sounds. - The “biotwang,” recently attributed by NOAA to Bryde’s whales, illustrates how new calls and species identifications continue to emerge. - Google has previously developed models for humpback whales and multi-species whale detection. - Perch 2.0 extends this work despite having no underwater audio in its training data. ## Transfer Learning for Custom Classifiers - Researchers can use an existing model directly when its labels match their data. - For new sounds or datasets, transfer learning avoids training a deep neural network from scratch. - Perch 2.0 converts audio windows into compact numerical embeddings. - A logistic regression classifier is then trained on those embeddings using labeled examples. - This requires far less computation, experimentation, and training data than full neural-network training. ## Evaluation on Marine Datasets - The researchers tested Perch 2.0 with few-shot linear probes using 4, 8, 16, or 32 examples per class. - Performance was measured using ROC-AUC, where values closer to 1 indicate better class separation. - Evaluation datasets included: - **NOAA PIPAN:** Baleen-whale recordings, including minke, humpback, sei, blue, fin, and Bryde’s whales. - **ReefSet:** Reef biological sounds, fish, dolphins, anthropogenic noise, and waves. - **DCLDE:** Killer whales, humpbacks, abiotic sounds, unknown sounds, and killer-whale ecotypes. - More examples generally improved results. - ReefSet performance was already high with four examples per class for most models. - Perch 2.0 was consistently among the best-performing models across datasets and sample sizes. ## Comparisons with Other Models - Perch 2.0 was compared with Perch 1.0, SurfPerch, and Google’s multi-species whale model. - It also outperformed AVES-bird and AVES-bio on most underwater tasks. - The results show that strong underwater transfer is not limited to models trained on marine audio. ## Why Bird-Based Training Transfers to Whales - The authors suggest that large models trained on extensive datasets can generalize effectively to unfamiliar downstream tasks. - Shared acoustic patterns across animal vocalizations may allow representations learned from birds and other terrestrial species to remain useful underwater. - The findings challenge the assumption that a model must be trained directly on underwater recordings to perform well on marine classification tasks. ## Practical Tools for Researchers - Google provides a paper and a Google Colab tutorial. - The tutorial demonstrates an end-to-end workflow for building a whale-vocalization classifier. - It uses NOAA’s NCEI Passive Acoustic Data Archive and Google Cloud. - Researchers can create agile, task-specific models with relatively small labeled datasets. Perch 2.0 demonstrates that broad bioacoustic pretraining can substantially reduce the effort required to study marine sounds. Researchers can begin with general-purpose embeddings and adapt them to new whale species, calls, or underwater sound categories using only modest labeled data.

Read original(opens in new tab)
pinterest3 min readCurated summary

Ads Candidate Generation using Behavioral Sequence Modeling

Pinterest’s Ads team uses behavioral sequence modeling to improve ad candidate generation by predicting what users are likely to convert on next. Transformer-based two-tower models first predict relevant advertisers and then specific products, using offsite activity such as views, purchases, and add-to-cart events. The advertiser model is already in production, while item-level modeling addresses Pinterest’s rapidly growing catalog and enables more precise, scalable personalization. ## Predicting Advertiser Interaction - A bidirectional Transformer encodes each user’s behavioral event sequence. - An MLP-based advertiser tower represents candidate advertisers. - Training uses: - In-batch negative samples - Sampled softmax loss - Positive events consisting of checkout, add-to-cart, or signup conversions within a future K-day window - Log-Q bias correction to avoid excessively penalizing popular advertisers - The model is evaluated with Recall@K by comparing user and advertiser embedding similarity against an indexed set of roughly 2 million advertisers. - An offline batch job generates each user’s top 100 advertisers and publishes them to the online feature store. - During ad serving, eligible ads from those advertisers are passed to the L1 ranker, blended with other candidate sources, and scored by heavier downstream models and the marketplace auction. - Online experiments produced higher conversion volume and lower cost per action. - The advertiser-level model has served production traffic for Standard ads since Spring 2024. ## Moving from Advertisers to Products - Pinterest next sought to predict the specific products a user would interact with, rather than only the likely advertiser. - Item-level prediction better matches the item-based ad delivery funnel and avoids forcing downstream models to score an impractically large set of products from selected advertisers. - The approach aims to capture both immediate intent and longer-term interests. ## Item-Level Model Architecture - The model retains the two-tower design: - A user tower encodes behavioral sequences. - An item tower represents individual shopping product Pins. - Item representations combine: - Internal Pin embeddings learned from Pinterest’s engagement graph - Product metadata from the merchant catalog - Because the catalog exceeds 1 billion items, training uses both in-batch negatives and a randomly sampled negative set of 20 million Pins. - The model uses the same conversion labels as the advertiser model. - Label weights and log-Q parameters are tuned to balance retrieval quality with diversity across both products and advertisers. - Daily inference updates user embeddings only for users with new activity, appending them to a previous feature-store snapshot to reduce computation. - The trained item tower indexes hundreds of millions of ad items. ## Evaluation and Diversity - Item retrieval is evaluated using cosine similarity and hit rates at different K values. - Final model selection considers both: - Item-level Recall@K - Advertiser-level Recall@K - Qualitative review is also important because offsite activity is sparse and noisy. - The model is compared with max-pooling and mean-pooling baselines that use aggregated embeddings without Transformer-based sequence modeling. - The evaluation emphasizes that strong retrieval must also produce semantically relevant and sufficiently diverse recommendations. Pinterest’s progression from advertiser prediction to item prediction shows how behavioral sequence models can make ad retrieval more personalized while remaining scalable. A practical system should combine sequence-aware user representations, large-scale approximate retrieval, and explicit controls for popularity, diversity, and computational efficiency.

Read original(opens in new tab)
googleOriginal article

A differentially private framework for gaining insights into AI chatbot use (opens in new tab)

Google Research has introduced Urania, a novel framework designed to extract high-level usage insights from AI chatbot conversations while maintaining rigorous differential privacy (DP) guarantees. Unlike previous heuristic methods that rely on simple redaction or LLM-based PII stripping, this pipeline ensures that no individual user's data can be reconstructed from the resulting summaries. By combining DP clustering and keyword extraction with LLM-based summarization, the system provides a formal, auditable approach to understanding platform trends without compromising sensitive information. ## Limitations of Heuristic Privacy * Existing frameworks often rely on large language models to manually strip personally identifiable information (PII) from text before analysis. * These heuristic protections are difficult to formalize or audit, and their effectiveness may diminish as models evolve or face sophisticated prompt injection attacks. * The Urania framework addresses these weaknesses by using mathematical privacy budgets (the epsilon parameter) to measure and limit the influence of any single user's data on the final output. ## The Differentially Private Pipeline * **DP Clustering**: The framework first converts conversation data into numerical embeddings. These are grouped using a DP clustering algorithm, ensuring that cluster centers reflect broad trends rather than specific individual inputs. * **DP Keyword Extraction**: The system identifies keywords for each cluster and generates a histogram of their frequency. By adding mathematical noise to these counts, the framework masks individual contributions and ensures that only keywords common to many users are retained. * **Keyword Generation Methods**: The researchers explored three methods for extraction: LLM-guided selection of relevant terms, a differentially private version of TF-IDF, and an LLM-guided approach that selects terms from a pre-defined list of public keywords. * **LLM Summarization**: In the final stage, an LLM generates a high-level summary of the cluster using only the noisy, anonymized keywords. Because the LLM never sees the raw conversation text, the "post-processing" property of DP guarantees that the final summary remains private. ## Privacy and Utility Trade-offs * The framework was tested against a non-private baseline (Simple-CLIO) to evaluate how privacy constraints affect the quality of the insights generated. * Stronger privacy settings (lower epsilon values) inherently result in a utility trade-off, as the added noise can obscure some niche usage patterns. * Despite these trade-offs, the framework provides a robust defense against data leakage, as the summarization model is structurally prevented from seeing sensitive original text, making it resilient to prompt injection. This framework offers a scalable way for platform providers to analyze chatbot usage patterns and enforce safety policies while providing mathematical certainty regarding user privacy. For organizations handling sensitive conversation data, moving from heuristic redaction to formal DP pipelines like Urania provides a more robust and auditable path for service improvement.

pinterest3 min readCurated summary

Improving Quality of Recommended Content through Pinner Surveys

Pinterest uses Pinner surveys to measure visual quality and incorporate user preferences into recommendation systems, rather than optimizing solely for engagement. The company surveyed 5,000 Pins, trained a lightweight neural network to predict average perceived quality, and applied the resulting model across Homefeed, Related Pins, and Search. This approach aims to reduce clickbait and promote content that supports positive, long-term user experiences. ## Why Engagement Alone Is Insufficient - High engagement does not necessarily indicate high-quality content; optimizing for clicks can promote clickbait or harmful material. - Pinterest defines quality as content that feels good, inspires further exploration, and encourages fulfilling long-term engagement. - Direct user feedback helps recommendation systems prioritize content that Pinners actually value. - The work supports Pinterest’s Inspired Internet Pledge principles, especially listening to users and tuning the platform for wellbeing. ## Collecting Pinner Quality Ratings - Pinners rated images from 1 to 5 in response to: “How visually pleasing or displeasing is this Pin?” - Pinterest collected ratings for 5,000 Pins, sampling 1,000 from each of five major interest categories: - Art - Beauty - DIY & Crafts - Home Decor - Women’s Fashion - Pins were sampled based on impressions and were generally mid-to-high quality rather than deliberately exposing users to poor content. - Each image received at least 10 ratings, allowing Pinterest to average responses and reduce noise from subjectivity or accidental misclicks. - Surveys were considered appropriate for visual appeal, which is subjective but still measurable across many users. More objective issues should be evaluated by trained reviewers, while highly contextual judgments such as personal relevance are harder to capture with a single Pin-level score. - Highly rated content included makeup, grooming styles, maximalist interiors, landscapes, sunsets, and baby animals. - Home Decor images tended to receive higher ratings overall, while Art showed the greatest variation, reflecting its subjective nature. ## Training a Visual-Quality Model - Pinterest trained a model to estimate the average Pinner’s perception of visual quality from image embeddings. - Embeddings encode visual, textual, and behavioral information, including relationships between images and the boards where they are saved. - The model produces a score from 0 to 1, with higher values representing greater perceived quality. - Pinterest chose a small fully connected neural network with approximately 92,000 parameters: - The limited size helps prevent overfitting to the 5,000-image dataset. - It also makes large-scale inference faster and less expensive. - Instead of predicting an exact rating, the model uses pairwise ranking: - It learns which of two images Pinners would consider better. - The comparison is based on each image’s mean survey rating. - Training comparisons are restricted to images within the same top-level interest category, encouraging the model to learn visual quality rather than simply recognizing that one topic is more popular than another. Pinterest’s approach demonstrates how survey-based quality signals can complement engagement metrics. Training recommendation systems on what users perceive as appealing can help the platform promote more satisfying content while reducing incentives to favor attention-grabbing but low-quality material.

Read original(opens in new tab)
googleOriginal article

Google Earth AI: Unlocking geospatial insights with foundation models and cross-modal reasoning (opens in new tab)

Google Earth AI introduces a framework of geospatial foundation models and reasoning agents designed to solve complex, planetary-scale challenges through cross-modal reasoning. By integrating Gemini-powered orchestrators with specialized imagery, population, and environmental models, the system deconstructs multifaceted queries into actionable multi-step plans. This approach enables a holistic understanding of real-world events, such as disaster response and disease forecasting, by grounding AI insights in diverse, grounded geospatial data. ## Geospatial Reasoning Agents * Utilizes Gemini models as intelligent orchestrators to manage complex queries that require data from multiple domains. * The agent deconstructs a high-level question—such as predicting hurricane landfalls and community vulnerability—into a sequence of smaller, executable tasks. * It executes these plans by autonomously calling specialized foundation models, querying vast datastores, and utilizing geospatial tools to fuse disparate data points into a single, cohesive answer. ## Remote Sensing and Imagery Foundations * Employs vision-language models and open-vocabulary object detection trained on a large corpus of high-resolution overhead imagery paired with text descriptions. * Enables "zero-shot" capabilities, allowing users to find specific objects like "flooded roads" or "building damage" using natural language without needing to retrain the model for specific classes. * Technical evaluations show a 16% average improvement on text-based image search tasks and more than double the baseline accuracy for detecting novel objects in a zero-shot setting. ## Population Dynamics and Mobility * Focuses on the interplay between people and places using globally-consistent embeddings across 17 countries. * Includes monthly updated embeddings that capture shifting human activity patterns, which are essential for time-sensitive forecasting. * Research conducted with the University of Oxford showed that incorporating these population embeddings into a Dengue fever forecasting model in Brazil improved the R² metric from 0.456 to 0.656 for long-range 12-month predictions. ## Environmental and Disaster Forecasting * Integrates established Google research into weather nowcasting, flood forecasting, and wildfire boundary mapping. * Provides the reasoning agent with the data necessary to evaluate environmental risks alongside population density and infrastructure imagery. * Aims to provide Search and Maps users with real-time, accurate alerts regarding natural disasters grounded in planetary-scale environmental data. Developers and enterprises looking to solve high-level geospatial problems can now express interest in accessing these capabilities through Google Earth and Google Cloud. By leveraging these foundation models, organizations can automate the analysis of satellite imagery and human mobility data to better prepare for environmental and social challenges.

googleOriginal article

Geospatial Reasoning: Unlocking insights with generative AI and multiple foundation models (opens in new tab)

Google Research is introducing Geospatial Reasoning, a new framework that integrates generative AI with specialized foundation models to streamline complex geographical problem-solving. By combining large language models like Gemini with domain-specific data, the initiative seeks to make large-scale spatial analysis accessible to sectors like public health, urban development, and climate resilience. This research effort moves beyond traditional data silos, enabling agentic workflows that can interpret diverse data types—from satellite imagery to population dynamics—through natural language. ### Specialized Foundation Models for Human Activity * The Population Dynamics Foundation Model (PDFM) captures the complex interplay between human behaviors and their local environments. * A dedicated trajectory-based mobility foundation model has been developed to process and analyze movement patterns. * While initially tested in the US, experimental datasets are expanding to include the UK, Australia, Japan, Canada, and Malawi for selected partners. ### Remote Sensing and Vision Architectures * New models utilize advanced architectures including masked autoencoders, SigLIP, MaMMUT, and OWL-ViT, specifically adapted for the remote sensing domain. * Training involves high-resolution satellite and aerial imagery paired with text descriptions and bounding box annotations to enable precise object detection. * The models support zero-shot classification and retrieval, allowing users to locate specific features—such as "residential buildings with solar panels"—using flexible natural language queries. * Internal evaluations show state-of-the-art performance across multiple benchmarks, including image segmentation and post-disaster damage assessment. ### Agentic Workflows and Industry Collaboration * The Geospatial Reasoning framework utilizes LLMs like Gemini to manage complex datasets and orchestrate "agentic" workflows. * These workflows are grounded in geospatial data to ensure that the insights generated are both useful and contextually accurate. * Google is collaborating with inaugural industry partners, including Airbus, Maxar, Planet Labs, and WPP, to test these capabilities in real-world scenarios. Organizations interested in accelerating their geospatial analysis should consider applying for the trusted tester program to explore how these foundation models can be fine-tuned for specific proprietary data and use cases.

figma2 min readCurated summary

The Infrastructure Behind AI Search in Figma | Figma Blog

Figma’s AI search lets users find designs and components through text, screenshots, or layer selections. It relies on multimodal embeddings, vector nearest-neighbor search, and large-scale indexing of frames and components. The main infrastructure challenge was generating and indexing billions of embeddings efficiently while controlling costs. ## AI-Powered Search Flows - **Search for designs** indexes frames across users’ files, including unlabeled frames buried in complex files. - Users can search designs: - Lexically with a text description - Visually with a screenshot - By selecting similar Figma layers - **Search for components** enhances the Assets panel with semantic matching. - A component representing 😀 can be found with terms such as “smiley,” “happy,” “face,” or “grin.” - Designers no longer need to manually add every possible keyword to component descriptions. - Components can also be found using visual queries. ## Multimodal Embeddings - An embedding model converts text or images into numerical vectors that represent their meaning. - Figma uses the open-source **CLIP** model, which places text and images in the same embedding space. - The embedding for the word “cat” should be numerically close to an embedding generated from an image of a cat. - Figma’s models were not trained on private customer files or data. - Fine-tuning used interface images from public, free Community files. - Search works by: - Generating embeddings for indexed content - Creating an embedding for the user’s query - Finding indexed vectors that are nearest to the query vector - Figma tested embeddings based on textual representations such as JSON, but image-based embeddings produced better results and supported the same workflow as screenshot search. - Layer selections are converted into screenshots before being passed to the embedding model. ## Populating the Vector Search Index - Each searchable item requires: - A thumbnail or rendered screenshot - An embedding - Metadata stored in the search index - Figma uses DynamoDB for metadata and embeddings because the workload primarily requires high-throughput key-value reads and writes. - Identifying searchable frames is difficult because unpublished frames are not directly enumerable. - Figma runs a headless, server-side version of its C++ editor in asynchronous jobs to discover frames within files. - These jobs use server-side sandboxing techniques to safely run the editor. Figma’s approach combines CLIP-based multimodal representations, server-side rendering, asynchronous processing, and scalable vector storage to make visual and semantic search practical across large design systems.

Read original(opens in new tab)