The Information Bottleneck

Ravid Shwartz-Ziv & Allen Roush

Two AI Researchers - Ravid Shwartz Ziv, and Allen Roush, discuss the latest trends, news, and research within Generative AI, LLMs, GPUs, and Cloud Systems.

  1. 19h ago

    How to Turn Research Into Billion-Dollar Companies, with Ion Stoica

    Ion Stoica has done what almost no academic ever does — repeatedly turned university research into billion-dollar companies. He co-founded Databricks (now valued at over $100 billion), Anyscale, Arena AI and Conviva, while his Berkeley lab produced the open source projects the entire AI industry runs on: Ray, vLLM, and SGLang. In this episode, we ask him how it's actually done. His answer is surprisingly unromantic: solve a problem people already care about, build an artifact good enough that they adopt it, and pay attention to the moment users start asking "who maintains this after the students graduate?" - that's when a project becomes a company. He's also insistent that the credit belongs to his students. From there, the conversation goes deep into what he's watching now: why the AI stack has become an order of magnitude more complex than the Hadoop/Spark era, why maximizing GPU utilization is "the name of the game" for any enterprise, and why coding agents will struggle with distributed systems long after they've mastered web apps. He shares a memorable reward-hacking story — a load balancer that maximized throughput by dropping requests — explains why the gap between open and closed models sits at about six months, and closes with his case for regulating AI by outcomes, not capabilities. Timeline 00:00 — Introduction: welcoming Ion Stoica01:21 — The playbook: how research projects become companies05:22 — Will vLLM and SGLang stay open source?07:47 — The real bottleneck in the AI stack: complexity, not just hardware14:31 — Should algorithms follow infrastructure, or the other way around?16:13 — Can AI coding tools write distributed systems and GPU kernels?21:09 — Verifiers, harnesses, and the limits of outsourcing understanding25:41 — Reward hacking: the load balancer that dropped requests25:58 — How should enterprises consume GPUs? Utilization as the name of the game30:23 — GPU scarcity: will the compute crunch ever end?35:27 — Hyper-optimization and the risk of locking in today's architectures37:17 — Open vs. closed models: why every company wants to own the stack40:35 — The six-month gap, and the rising cost of training frontier models43:58 — Kimi, Qwen, and who's incentivized to keep open models alive45:39 — Regulation: outcomes, not capabilities47:41 — Self-regulation, concentration of power, and auditing open models48:32 — Wrap-upMusic "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0.About The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.

    How to Turn Research Into Billion-Dollar Companies, with Ion Stoica
  2. 4d ago

    Kaggle Grandmasters, Agent Skills, and Why Everyone Is Overfitting with Jean-Francois Puget (NVIDIA)

    Jean-Francois Puget is a Director and Distinguished Engineer at NVIDIA, where he leads the Kaggle Grandmasters team, and he's ranked third on Kaggle's all-time list. We caught him on the day NVIDIA announced Nemotron Ultra and its new agent skills repo. We talk about what skills actually are, why they beat MCP tools on context cost, and how NVIDIA built an evaluation pipeline to separate skills that help from skills that don't. From there we talk about the thing JFP cares about most: evaluation. He explains why most LLM benchmarks reward overfitting, how his team discovered O3 could pick the right files to fix SWE-bench issues without reading them, and why the only benchmarks he trusts are the ones where you commit before you see the score, which is exactly how Kaggle works. He predicts a "bloodbath" for the wave of competitors letting coding agents chase leaderboard scores with no notion of validation. We also get into what coding agents are actually good for ("a mix of a genius and a dumb person"), the multi-agent system at NVIDIA that built a working PyTorch clone that runs 10x slower than the real thing, his unfiltered take on frontier lab PR and the Mythos release, whether AI is a bubble, and the story of how his team won ARC-AGI with a 4-billion-parameter model at 20 cents a task, including jumping from third to first in the final hours of a seven-month competition. Timeline 00:00 — Intro01:05 — NVIDIA's announcements: Nemotron Ultra and the agent skills repo07:21 — Skills vs MCP tools, and progressive disclosure10:24 — Agents that write their own skills: a new form of learning13:33 — When overfitting is fine (and when it isn't)15:47 — Why most LLM benchmarks reward overfitting17:06 — The SWE-bench contamination story: O3 picks files without reading them19:45 — How LLMs changed Kaggle, and the coming "bloodbath"25:40 — What makes a good data scientist: evaluation and one-bit experiments28:56 — Running Codex at scale: the top token consumers at NVIDIA29:37 — Did coding agents kill AutoML?30:16 — Genius and dumb at once: the limits of coding agents35:21 — Humans in the loop, sandboxing, and the teenage hacker who never wrote code37:42 — Mythos, frontier lab PR, and open source40:08 — Why NVIDIA builds open models, and where it's already frontier43:48 — World models, robots, and the coffee test49:20 — Why agents still can't play Dota50:24 — Is AI a bubble?53:14 — Winning ARC-AGI with a 4B model at 20 cents a task57:39 — Kaggle is a legal drugMusic: "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0.About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.

    Kaggle Grandmasters, Agent Skills, and Why Everyone Is Overfitting with Jean-Francois Puget (NVIDIA)
  3. Jul 9

    AI Agents and The Golden Age of Asking Questions with Dimitris Papailiopoulos (MSR/UW-Madison)

    In this episode, we talked with Dimitris Papailiopoulos, researcher at Microsoft Research's AI Frontiers lab and professor at the University of Wisconsin, about doing research in the age of agents. Dimitris told us about the Sunday morning that changed how he works: he handed Claude Code and Codex a question he'd been sitting on for years, went about his day, and came back to an answer. After a few days of dread about what's left for humans, he landed somewhere more optimistic, calling this the golden age of asking questions. We talked about his "smallest transformer that can add" leaderboard, a symbolic GSM8K solver built from if-else statements, and what happened when he put two Claude Code instances in the same file system and told them to do something cool (one pair invented a communication protocol, the other played Battleship). We also got into diversity and slop in agent-generated ideas, why agents get stubborn after a million tokens, harness overfitting on Terminal-Bench, continual learning and world models, whether agents need vision, and where information theory actually helps in AI and where it's a katana used to make coffee. Timeline 00:00 Intro 01:45 How agents changed the way Dimitris does research 04:30 A Sunday morning with Claude Code, Codex, and GSM8K 07:15 The dread, then the golden age of asking questions 08:20 Taste and verification, and how we train students now 09:53 Will models make human verification obsolete? 11:30 The smallest transformer that can add 10-digit numbers 13:40 Humans as initializers for gradient descent in idea space 15:32 Allen on diversity, slop profiles, and high temperature research 21:44 When Claudes meet: Battleship, invented protocols, and a grokking paper 25:53 Single agent vs multi-agent under fixed compute 30:28 Auto-research benchmarks and what agents actually accelerate 35:14 Inside the symbolic GSM8K solver (with a live progress check) 40:04 Idea overfitting and why agents refuse to change course 44:00 Learning from failure traces and harness overfitting 48:04 Continual learning, memory files, and world models 51:30 Why don't labs personalize models on your own history? 57:52 Agent-to-agent communication: is Jira the right tool? 1:01:25 Multimodality: vision as a tool vs one unified model 1:05:40 Information theory and AI, or making coffee with a katana 1:11:23 Closing thoughts: ask bigger questions Music: "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0.About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.

    AI Agents and The Golden Age of Asking Questions with Dimitris Papailiopoulos (MSR/UW-Madison)
  4. Jul 2

    Why All Models Learn the Same Thing with Phillip Isola (MIT)

    Phillip Isola, professor at MIT, joins us to talk about representation learning: what makes a representation good, why different models seem to converge on similar representations, and whether pre-training is really over. We discuss the platonic representation hypothesis and its limits, why clustering structure matters more than global geometry, and Phillip's new neural thickets paper arguing that post-training is easier than people think because pre-trained weights already sit near solutions to downstream tasks. Phillip also explains why he thinks LLMs are already world models, why he's betting on RNNs making a comeback, and why his most exciting current direction is artificial life: putting LLM agents in open environments with no fixed task and studying them like new organisms. Timeline: 00:00 Intro song 00:13 Intro 01:05 What is representation learning and why it matters 04:09 What makes a representation good: minimality and sufficiency 10:03 How cross entropy and contrastive learning shape representations 14:35 Dimensionality reduction and why dimension isn't the right complexity measure 16:35 Compression and geometric clustering during training 19:27 The platonic representation hypothesis and what actually converges 22:53 Local neighborhoods vs global structure: the Aristotelian follow-up 24:33 When convergence is strong: truth vs the space of possibility 28:09 Is there true similarity in the world? The Bouba-Kiki effect 30:56 World models vs autoregressive LLMs 32:14 Diffusion LLMs as a special case of autoregressive models 33:42 What architectures win in five years: the case for RNNs 36:11 Grad student descent, or do we actually have principles? 40:51 Feathers and wings: what to take from biology 43:17 How close are we to brain-like models? Marr's three levels 47:01 Are better models becoming less human-like? 49:38 Is pre-training all you need? The neural thickets paper 54:18 LoRA, low rank fine-tuning, and why post-training is easier than we thought 56:01 RL environments and what our benchmarks actually test 1:01:11 Artificial life: LLM agents as new organisms 1:07:20 What's overlooked in AI research right now 1:08:36 Why stay in academia, and doing science in the age of Opus Music: "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0. About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.

    Why All Models Learn the Same Thing with Phillip Isola (MIT)
  5. Jun 29

    AI for Science with Qichao Hu (Molecular Universe / SES AI)

    Most AI-for-science companies are selling shovels. Qichao Hu wants the gold. In this episode, we talk with Qichao, the founder and CEO of Molecular Universe, the AI-for-science platform that grew out of SES AI, a high-energy-density battery developer he's run for fourteen years. His core distinction is that companies from the AI world build tools, such as foundation models that predict properties, while companies from the science world care about the final product, such as the new battery or material that actually ships. Molecular Universe sits firmly on the science side, and the difference shows up everywhere from what they publish to what they refuse to. We get into the actual workflow of materials discovery and where AI compresses it. A single trial in a traditional lab can take a year with maybe a 40% success rate; the goal is to run a thousand candidates in parallel and turn that year into a week. Qichao walks through improving low-temperature fast-charging for EV batteries:  from hypothesis generation through molecule-, material-, and device-level property prediction, down to autonomous labs that synthesize and test the top candidates without a human touching a pipette. The hardest problem, it turns out, isn't predicting molecular properties or measuring device performance, but it's the black box connecting the two. In batteries, that's the solid-electrolyte interface, which the field has been hand-waving about since the seventies. And the thing standing in the way of cracking it isn't a clever training trick but data: companies sitting on twenty years of records are finding it too messy, incomplete, and poorly labeled to train on, and are having to start collecting from scratch with new protocols and robots. Timeline 00:13 — Intro and welcome;01:19 — Shovel vs. gold05:18 — Why the world's smartest scientist doesn't automatically give you a better battery07:25 — The discovery workflow09:37 — Exploration vs. exploitation11:54 — Safety and filtering: screening novel molecules against banned and toxic-substance lists17:55 — How hypotheses get generated, and where frontier LLMs help20:29 — From hypothesis to ~400 formulations: property prediction, ranking, and handing off to autonomous labs26:37 — "A foundation model for everything" — and the black box between molecular properties and device performance30:01 — World models and physics33:09 — The great unknown in batteries37:08 — Simulation vs. reality: calibrating massive simulated datasets with a sliver of experimental data41:47 — Lab robotics: how fast the hardware has caught up, and what a floor of autonomous labs looks like43:50 — The real bottlenecks50:21 — Pre-training from scratch vs. post-training LLMs, and why training tricks haven't reduced the need for good data52:42 — Evaluation55:42 — Publish the B+ model, keep the A model58:05 — Five years out1:00:37 — Closing thoughts and wrapMusic: "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0.About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.

    AI for Science with Qichao Hu (Molecular Universe / SES AI)
  6. Jun 24

    Infrastructure for AI at Scale - With Benny Chen (Fireworks AI)

    We talk a lot on this show about RL, agents, and the move between pre-training and post-training, but not enough about the layer everything actually runs on. Benny Chen, co-founder of Fireworks AI, one of the largest inference platforms around, walks us through what it takes to serve models at scale: sourcing GPUs, writing the kernels, the runtime, and the routing layer that lets a customer hit one endpoint and forget the rest. We talk why the real bottleneck is power, not chips, and why that favors Nvidia and Google. Why MoE keeps winning even when dense models look better on paper and why he'd rather run fungible capacity at 95% than specialized chips at 60%. We also talk about quantization limits, where RL efficiency has to go next, and his case that AI is still under-hyped. We also get into cross-region training, sparse autoencoders and why interpretability hasn't taken off in open source, whether open models can close the gap, and a frank read on Anthropic's go-to-market. Timeline 00:00 — Intro: the part of AI nobody talks about01:20 — What "infrastructure for AI" actually means: the layers, from GPUs up to routing02:59 — Why not just buy your own GPUs and do it yourself?05:17 — The scale Fireworks runs at06:35 — Hardware inflation, GPU costs, and the real risk hiding in commit duration10:14 — Nvidia vs AMD vs TPUs, and why power is the bottleneck11:57 — Mixing GPU types and generations; fungibility vs. specialization14:22 — Once you have the GPUs, what's the next layer to build?17:04 — Dense vs. MoE, and why the hardware picks the winner21:07 — Quantization: is FP4 the floor? TurboQuant and INT vs. FP24:28 — How tied are the algorithms to the hardware?25:12 — DeepSeek, DeepGEMM, and next-token prediction as reconstruction loss28:50 — Why RL is still wildly inefficient compared to pre-training30:08 — Speculative decoding, AI-generated kernels, and auto-research34:00 — The AGI question: why text gets automated but vision may stay expensive37:07 — Hype check: why Benny thinks AI is still under-hyped41:28 — Training vs. inference at the infrastructure level44:12 — Scaling across data centers: cross-region training with Cursor45:40 — Sparse autoencoders, interpretability, and why open source is human-constrained49:04 — Will open models catch up — on quality and on compute?51:41 — Are we plateauing? Opus 4.7 vs. 4.6 and the coming data wars54:41 — Physical limits, HBM, and whether chips keep getting faster58:17 — The belief about inference everyone gets wrong59:31 — Anthropic, mythos, and a frank take on go-to-market1:04:41 — Wrap-up Music: "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0. About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.

    Infrastructure for AI at Scale - With Benny Chen (Fireworks AI)
  7. Jun 21

    Broken Peer Review, AI, and Worms — with Oded Rechavi

    Oded Rechavi is a biologist at Tel Aviv University and the co-founder of QED, a company building AI to review scientific work. He's also spent years studying worms. We start with what's wrong with peer review and grant funding: why it takes years to publish, why reviewers are often your own competitors, and why the whole thing is locked to an economic model that rewards publishing more papers, not better ones. Oded explains why he doesn't call QED "peer review" at all, and what it would take to actually validate science instead of just stamping it. Then we get into the biology. C. elegans has exactly 959 cells, every one of them named, and a fully mapped brain. Oded's lab studies how a worm's experiences get passed to its offspring through RNA rather than DNA — meaning what happens to a worm in its lifetime can change its descendants. We also talk about using ancient DNA to reassemble the Dead Sea Scrolls, what AI can and can't do for biology, and why he wants to build an "Ironman suit" for researchers rather than replace them. 00:00 Intro 01:35 Why scientific publishing is broken 04:02 Years to publish, and what it costs science 07:20 Bad reviewers, conflicts of interest, and the money 10:47 Why preprints don't fix it 15:37 How AI conferences handle review 22:07 Conferences vs. journals — does slow review help? 25:22 Building QED: review, not peer review 30:02 Tracking a paper from idea to submission 33:11 What writing a grant actually involves 35:00 The ERC reviewer crisis 37:06 Tailoring feedback to your field 41:48 Switching to biology 44:30 Every cell has a name: inside C. elegans 46:28 Inheritance without DNA 48:16 What the worm "thinks" changes its offspring 51:58 Reassembling the Dead Sea Scrolls with ancient DNA 56:07 Psychedelics and worms 58:36 Can AI run the research itself? 1:04:49 Automation vs. validation 1:07:12 The origin of life 1:08:49 Why people reject AI-written work 1:16:18 Will humans still have a role? 1:17:39 Wrap-up Music: "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0. About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.

    Broken Peer Review, AI, and Worms — with Oded Rechavi
  8. Jun 16

    Will AI Take Our Jobs? With Alex Imas (Google/University of Chicago)

    Will AI take our jobs? We put the question to Alex Imas, the new Director of AGI Economics at Google DeepMind and a professor at Chicago Booth, whose entire job now is studying how frontier AI reshapes the economy. His short answer: probably some of them, but the popular story is mostly wrong about which jobs and how fast. Alex makes the case that a job is a bundle of tasks, not a single thing AI either does or doesn't do, and that the number of people who should actually care about is how much consumer demand responds to falling prices. Get that wrong and you predict mass layoffs. Get it right and you sometimes predict more hiring. We get into why the automation panic is two centuries old, why he thinks blue-collar work is in more danger than white-collar, and why the people already winning are the ones adopting AI fastest. We also cover the AGI versus ASI distinction and why it changes everything for the economy, what happens when there's no moat and open models stay six to eight months behind, the three-tier pricing future he sees coming after the 2026 compute crunch, and what any of this means if you're deciding whether to send your kids to college. The episode was recorded before Alex joined GoogleTimestamps 00:00 Meeting Alex Imas 00:44 Will AI take our jobs? 03:35 Is this an AI question or an economics question? 06:18 The economy is already behind the AI we have 07:43 Why AI adoption is K-shaped 12:51 Was Andrew Yang right? 13:45 The automation panic is 200 years old 16:46 Dario's six-month claim, and why we don't see it yet 17:22 A job is not a task 22:38 The three numbers that actually predict the labor market 22:42 The chess engine analogy and the centaur phase 25:45 Recursive self-improvement and the hamburger problem 30:06 Should AI labs be the ones answering alignment questions? 31:17 The "invisible hand wave" and why nobody wants fully autonomous AI 33:27 AGI vs ASI, and why the difference is everything 35:28 Commodities vs relational goods 41:14 Star Trek, replicators, and predicting with sci-fi 45:20 Inequality and the Upper West Side VCs 46:21 Your money manager was automated in the 1960s 50:47 Are OpenAI and Anthropic overvalued? The moat problem 54:29 What has to be true for the losses to make sense 55:43 Cognitive atrophy and monopoly fears 57:00 The 2026 compute crunch and the three-tier pricing future 1:01:52 The Apple vs Android analogy 1:03:54 A rich-country perspective 1:04:16 Protecting the skills that actually matter 1:07:02 Will not using AI become a status symbol? 1:08:53 Does capitalism even survive? 1:13:44 Redistribution becomes the political battleground 1:18:16 Blue collar vs white collar: who's really at risk 1:21:18 Advice for parents in an AI world 1:22:43 Saving for retirement when the Valley says don't 1:25:06 Will non-elite colleges survive? Music: "Kid Kodi" - Blue Dot Sessions - via Free Music Archive - CC BY-NC 4.0. About: The Information Bottleneck is hosted by Ravid Shwartz-Ziv and Allen Roush, featuring in-depth conversations with leading AI researchers about the ideas shaping the future of machine learning.

    Will AI Take Our Jobs? With Alex Imas (Google/University of Chicago)

Ratings & Reviews

5
out of 5
6 Ratings

About

Two AI Researchers - Ravid Shwartz Ziv, and Allen Roush, discuss the latest trends, news, and research within Generative AI, LLMs, GPUs, and Cloud Systems.

You Might Also Like