u/callmeteji

Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.25741

Claude Mythos hardly needs an introduction at this point, since so many people already know about it. What is less familiar is the idea of a Looped Language Model, a concept proposed by the ByteDance team in a paper published in late 2025. That paper argues that graph search is one of the areas where looping offers a very large theoretical advantage over standard RLVR.

Interestingly, Mythos’s benchmark result in this area (Graphwalks BFS) is 80%, far ahead of Claude Opus (38%) and GPT-5.4 (21.4%). This also seems to be the first time many people in ML have even heard of Graphwalks BFS.

Main points:

Ouro is a Looped Language Model (LoopLM), a new architecture for LLMs

Instead of stacking many different layers, Ouro reuses the same group of layers multiple times in a loop

It has an exit gate to decide when to stop (adaptive computation)

It is trained with an entropy-regularized objective

With only 1.4B and 2.6B parameters, it matches the performance of 4B–12B models

The reason is not that it memorizes more, but that it manipulates knowledge more effectively

You should know that using paper cups does not actually help protect the environment more than plastic cups.

The idea that “paper cups are always better for the environment than plastic cups” is one of the most common misconceptions. In reality, when you compare their full life cycles—from production to disposal—paper cups have environmental downsides that many people overlook.

Here is the truth behind these two types of cups:

1. The hidden plastic lining

Paper cups are not made of paper alone. In order to hold liquids without falling apart, the inside of a paper cup is usually coated with a layer of polyethylene (PE) plastic or wax.

The consequence: this plastic lining makes paper cups extremely difficult to recycle. Ordinary paper recycling facilities cannot easily separate the plastic layer from the paper fibers, so most paper cups end up in landfills or incinerators instead of being recycled.

2. The environmental impact of production

If we look at carbon footprint and resource consumption, paper cups can sometimes be worse than plastic cups:

Resource extraction: Producing paper cups requires cutting down trees. Making one ton of paper also requires far more water than producing plastic.

Energy use and emissions: Manufacturing a paper cup consumes about twice as much energy and generates more greenhouse gas emissions than producing an equivalent plastic cup.

3. Degradability

Plastic cups: They can take hundreds of years to break down and eventually turn into microplastics.

Paper cups: Although the paper portion may decompose faster, the PE lining still remains as microplastic. If paper cups are discarded in oxygen-poor landfills, the paper decomposes anaerobically and releases methane—a greenhouse gas about 25 times more potent than CO2.

So what is the real solution?

Replacing “plastic with paper” is often more of a psychological comfort—or even greenwashing—than a truly effective environmental solution. The best option, in order of priority, is:

Use your own reusable cup. A ceramic mug or insulated stainless steel tumbler typically needs to be reused around 20–100 times to offset the energy used to produce it. After that point, every additional use is a real environmental benefit.

There are some fully compostable paper cups. These use a PLA lining (a bioplastic made from cornstarch), but they usually require industrial composting conditions.

Avoid lids and straws when possible. If you must use a disposable cup, minimize any extra accessories that come with it.

Do not be too hard on yourself if you sometimes have to use a disposable cup. But understand that reuse always beats simply switching materials.

Why YSK:

Because many people choose paper cups believing they are automatically the eco-friendly option, without realizing that the reality is much more complicated. Understanding the hidden environmental costs of paper cups helps consumers make better choices, avoid being misled by greenwashing, and focus on what truly matters: reducing waste through reuse rather than simply switching from one disposable material to another.

Interim analysis (n=16) showed larger PANSS reductions with tazbentetol than placebo (−11.1 vs −5.5), suggesting activity across positive and negative symptom domains.

Tazbentetol is a first-in-class investigational synaptic regenerative therapy. The drug is designed to trigger neurons to produce new synapses, restoring cognitive, motor, and other functions. This medication promotes formation of dendritic spines which have glutamatergic synapses, intending to reduce symptoms of schizophrenia. Other studies are also testing the use of tazbentetol for Alzheimer disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.