A new working research from Perplexity and Harvard offers field evidence on what AI agents do to knowledge work. It draws on production data from two Perplexity products: Search and Computer. The setup is a natural comparison. Search is a conversational answer engine. Computer is an agent that plans and executes tasks end to end. The same users touch both products, so the team can hold the task roughly constant. What the Study Actually Measures The research study covers a 90-day window
The lesson for this story is being written.
Published breakthroughs pushing the state of the art.

Benchmarks and Analysis of GLM-5.2

As AI becomes part of HPC workflows, validation, data quality, and trust are emerging as key factors in technology and buying decisions.

Long-context large language models (LLMs) face a memory bottleneck that has nothing to do with model weights. During decoding, transformers cache the key and value (KV) vectors for every token at every layer so they don’t have to recompute attention. This cache grows linearly with sequence length and batch size, and at long context with high concurrency it can dwarf the model’s own footprint. Consider Llama-3.1-70B in BF16. Its KV cache costs about 0.31 MB per token (80 layers ×
Want to go deeper than the news? Explore live, cohort-based AI courses taught by practitioners.
Browse AI courses on Maven