探索全球前沿学术脉络

Microbial-based yeast protein is similar to whey protein and greater than collagen hydrolysate in supporting whole-body protein synthesis as determined by the indicatory amino acid oxidation method: a randomized controlled trial

Background: Yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) is a model organism in agricultural and industrial fermentation with nutritional benefits, yet less is understood about its nutritional value for supporting whole-body protein synthesis in vivo, and its comparison to animal-based protein. Objective: This study aimed to determine the effect of microbial-based protein (yeast) compared to a high (whey) and low (collagen) quality animal-based protein on the ability to support whole-body protein synthesis using the indicator amino acid oxidation technique. Methods: Thirteen healthy participants (M: n=6, 24{+/-}4 yr; F: n=7, 27{+/-}7 yr) consumed eight hourly yeast (Y), whey (W), or collagen (CH) protein beverages at 0.9 g{middle dot}kg-1{middle dot}d-1 supplemented with L-[1-13C]phenylalanine in a randomized, cross-over, counterbalanced design. Breath and urine were collected to measure fraction of expired 13CO2 (F13CO2) and [1-13C]Phe oxidation (PheOx) as inverse correlates of whole-body protein synthesis. An a priori 20% noninferiority margin was used to determine equivalency between protein sources. A Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was provided to assess fullness and hunger by protein sources. Results: Protein source had no effect on F13CO2 (P=0.15) or PheRa (P=0.10). PheOx was greater in CH compared to both Y (14.94{+/-}2.16 vs. 12.93{+/-}2.80 mol{middle dot}kg BM-1{middle dot}h-1, P

LLM Jaggedness Unlocks Scientific Creativity

arXiv:2605.10574v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As artificial intelligence advances, models are not improving uniformly. Instead, progress unfolds in a jagged fashion, with capabilities growing unevenly across tasks, domains, and model scales. In this work, we examine this dynamic jaggedness through the lens of scientific idea generation. We introduce SciAidanBench, a benchmark of open-ended scientific questions designed to measure the scientific creativity of large language models (LLMs). Given a scientific question, models are asked to generate as many unique and coherent ideas as possible, with the total number of valid responses serving as a proxy for creative potential. Evaluating 19 base models across 8 providers (30 total variants including reasoning versions), we find that jaggedness manifests both across models and within models. First, in a cross-task comparison between general and scientific creativity, improvements in general creativity do not translate uniformly to scientific creativity, revealing divergent capability profiles across models. Second, at the prompt level, stronger models do not improve uniformly; instead, they exhibit high variability, with bursts of creativity on some questions and limited performance on others. Third, at the domain level, individual models display uneven strengths across scientific subfields, reflecting fragmented internal capability profiles. Finally, we show that this jaggedness can be harnessed. We explore mechanisms of inference-time compute, knowledge pooling, and brainstorming to combine models effectively and construct meta-model ensembles that outperform any single model. Our results position jaggedness not as a limitation, but as a resource, a structural feature of AI progress that, when understood and leveraged, can amplify LLM-driven scientific creativity.