LangTrend

Computer use agents (CUAs) today are primarily deployed as single serial agents. This setup is suboptimal for complex long-horizon tasks that benefit from task decomposition, parallel execution, and consistent re-planning based on new information. In this paper, we argue that we should instead move towards evaluating and building multi-agent computer use (MACU) systems. These systems, which emphasize planning and parallel execution, alleviate many of the shortcomings of single-agent CUAs. We propose a general multi-agent setup in which a manager model decomposes computer use tasks as a directed acyclic graph (DAG), encoding relevant dependencies and goals for subagents. At each iteration, the manager dispatches parallel CUA subagents to carry out nodes on the ready frontier of the DAG, and continuously revises the DAG (adding, canceling, or rewriting nodes) as new findings arrive from subagents. This design treats the partially observable environment of computer use as a first class challenge: information that downstream agents may not be able to re-observe are retained and passed forward through the manager and DAG structure. We demonstrate that MACU consistently improves over strong single-agent baselines by $3.4-25.5\%$ on desktop (OSWorld) and web navigation (Online-Mind2Web, WebTailBench, Odysseys) benchmarks, exhibits more favorable test-time scaling, and solves complex long-horizon tasks where single-agent CUAs get stuck. On Odysseys, a long-horizon web navigation benchmark, MACU improves average task completion wall-clock time by ${\sim} 1.5 \times$, demonstrating its efficacy in speeding up traditionally slow CUA pipelines. Our findings highlight that multi-agent coordination is a promising axis for scaling computer use agents to work productively for longer and more effectively. We release all code and interactive visualizations at https://jykoh.com/multi-agent-computer-use.

Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly rely on reusable skills i.e. documents describing task-specific procedures. However, this introduces a new attack surface for agents to manage. We study two complementary directions for this threat. First, we evaluate guardian-based defenses: an intermediary LLM agent that acts as a mediator for skill file access (dynamic guardian) or pre-rewrites these files at build time (static guardian). Across three LLM agent families, our guardians cut attack success rate (ASR) by well over half while preserving task utility. Second, we stress test them through attack reframing using four attacks that preserve the malicious instruction but change the phrasing. For non-guardian setup, the reframing pushes the ASR up to 81.4\%, but the dynamic guardian brings it down to 18.6\%, showing that real-time mediation is a robust defense.

Conversational tutoring agents have been shown to improve learning engagement and student outcomes, and large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in these systems to provide scalable, personalized feedback. However, LLMs may perpetuate or amplify stereotypical social biases, posing particular risks in educational settings. In this study, we evaluate LLMs in conversational tutoring scenarios to identify high-confidence social biases, instances where models are unable to identify biased judgments in tutoring conversations while maintaining strong confidence in their assessments, potentially affecting their reasoning and the feedback they provide to learners. We present a new dataset generation method that enables bias evaluation under naturalistic instructional conditions by regenerating student-AI tutor interactions and introducing turns with controlled bias derived from a benchmark dataset. Using this data, we assess multiple LLMs' ability to detect stereotypical biases and analyze the confidence and reasoning underlying their responses through computational and human evaluations. We find that bias detection is substantially more challenging in conversational tutoring contexts than in benchmark-based evaluations, and that state-of-the-art LLMs are overconfident in their incorrect assessments of stereotypical bias statements. Moreover, model confidence strongly influences reasoning and feedback, highlighting the risks of overconfident, biased behavior in LLM-based tutoring agents. We conclude by discussing implications, mitigation considerations, and directions for future research.

Large language models excel at general tasks but underperform smaller supervised models in specialized, high-stakes domains where training labels are costly. We address this regime with EvoPool, an evolutionary multi-agent framework inspired by Darwinian evolution. Three specialized agents iteratively propose executable annotator code, a small validation set provides a fitness signal, and a deterministic gate keeps only annotators that pass viability, diversity, and marginal-contribution checks across generations. Pool votes are mapped to soft training labels by EvoAgg, a text-aware aggregator combining semantic features with annotator-vote features. The authored pool runs at near-zero per-example cost and is 4500 to 31000x faster than LLM annotation on 100K examples. Across 7 of 8 LLM-weak specialized and complex tasks spanning biomedical relation extraction, legal-clause classification, complex reasoning, and dense multi-label biomedical classification, EvoPool beats the strongest LLM annotation baseline by an average +0.141 macro-F1, peaking at +0.301 on ChemProt and +0.265 on PubMed. Code is available at: https://github.com/tianyi0216/EvoPool

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for long-form generation, reliably evaluating long-form outputs has become a critical challenge. LLM-as-a-judge offers a scalable alternative to human evaluation, yet its reliability in long-form output evaluation remains underexamined: existing meta-evaluation benchmarks focus mainly on short-form outputs. Compared with short-form evaluation, long-form evaluation is not merely a matter of output length; it often requires judges to make more complex document-level assessments of overall organization, task-relevant coverage and depth, cross-section consistency, and scenario-specific quality criteria. In this work, we introduce LongJudgeBench, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating LLM judges on long-form outputs across diverse real-world scenarios and judging protocols. We systematically evaluate a broad range of LLM judges, covering multiple base models and judging settings. Our results reveal a substantial reliability gap: current LLM judges remain unstable across scenarios, and rubrics or references are helpful but not always sufficient. We hope LongJudgeBench will support future research on more robust, context-aware, and human-aligned LLM-as-a-judge methods. Our code is available at https://github.com/cjj826/LongJudgeBench.

In the contemporary epoch of multilingual education, learning idioms provides a fascinating gateway towards creativity, cultural values, historical context, and diverse perspectives inherent to various linguistic traditions. This paper showcases the navigation of retaining figurative and cultural semantics in low-resource Southeast Asian languages such as Hindi, Bengali, and Thai, where culturally rich idioms pose significant obstacles for computational modeling and cross-linguistic transfer due to their deep metaphorical complexity. To tackle such complexity, we present Varnika, a reconstructed multimodal idiom corpus comprising 3,533 multilingual idioms, enriched with seven idiomatic tones aligned with both textual and visual representations. Additionally, to infer informative idiomatic understanding, we introduce a Hybrid Mixture-of-Experts (HybridMoE) framework that embeds multiple idiomatic expert opinions while mitigating expert sparsity by integrating outputs from both selected and unselected experts through controlled hybridization, further augmented with Idiomatic Property Signals via masked multimodal embeddings. To analyze the performance across multiple dimensions, we propose the IDIO-TONE and Idiomatic Validation Score, a three-stage evaluation pipeline measuring (i) literal translation fidelity, (ii) visual-semantic alignment, and (iii) idiomatic meaning retention. Empirical evaluations highlight that HybridMoE achieves 5–6\% performance gains across advanced vision language models, demonstrating improved representation of figurative language and culturally embedded meaning in multilingual multimodal settings

As LLMs are increasingly used to draft public-facing arguments, they may flatten public debate by repeatedly introducing the same polished, plausible arguments. We study argument collapse, the tendency of essays generated by different LLMs to converge to a smaller set of main arguments, sub-arguments, and paragraph-level structures. We compare 1,039 human responses from 195 New York Times (NYT) debates, 448 human responses from 61 longer-form Boston Review (BR) forums, and 23,384 LLM-generated essays. In the NYT corpus, 65.3% of human main arguments are unique within a debate, compared to 3.4% of LLM main arguments. Asking LLMs to generate diverse answers adds variation, but a typical model recovers only about half of the distinct human main arguments, with much of the added variation falling outside the observed human argument space. Collapse also appears in sub-arguments, where among essays with the same main argument, 41.0% of human sub-arguments are unique versus 9.1% from LLM responses. Qualitatively, LLMs often reuse generalized and hedged sub-arguments, while humans prefer more concrete and topic-specific ones. Structure-wise, LLM-generated essays tend to follow a more fixed arc, often opening with a direct claim and moving quickly toward proposals. The same patterns hold in longer BR essays, suggesting that argument collapse extends beyond short-form responses.

Personalized large language models adapt responses to users' preferences and social attributes, but can introduce substantial universal truth inconsistencies across social groups, where some groups systematically receive less accurate responses on objective tasks. Existing alignment methods either ignore personalization or mainly focus on subjective preference alignment, largely overlooking fairness and consistency in universal truths. To address this gap, we study Truth-Invariant Alignment (TIA), an alignment problem for personalized LLMs that aims to ensure universal truths remain consistent across social groups while preserving personalization. We propose TriAlign, the first offline multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) framework for TIA, where each social group is modeled as an agent interacting. TriAlign jointly optimizes universal truth accuracy, cross-group truth consistency, and personalization through a fairness-aware objective and an explicit inconsistency penalty. Experiments across diverse benchmarks demonstrate that TriAlign achieves a stronger balance among these three objectives than strong baselines, reducing universal truth disparities across social groups while improving both objective task performance and personalization quality.

What formal languages can a recurrent neural language model recognize? Formal results in the literature conflict: some authors report Turing-completeness, while others show equivalence to regular languages. The reason for this discrepancy is that the underlying arithmetic model differs. The paper develops a unified algebraic account of the expressivity of recurrent neural networks, starting with a formal account of various arithmetic models. This account reduces expressivity to an algebraic question, e.g., whether a network's syntactic monoid divides a certain wreath product. As a case study, the paper revisits diagonal state-space models: the same architecture cannot implement an even-modulus counter once floating-point recurrences are enforced, yet realizes every even-modulus counter under unsigned-integer quantization.

Large language models (LLMs) have excelled in processing multiple languages through pre- and post-training on multilingual data, even though English dominates the training data. Prior work focusing on token representations has revealed how those LLMs process non-English text. Although these analyses have provided insightful findings, they fail to capture a structural view, which is an inherent property of language. In this study, we explore the multilinguality of LLMs through representational structural analysis. Our findings reveal that low-resource languages are structurally more different from English than high- and mid-resource languages, and that language-specific post-training alters their structures while preserving inter-language relationships.

Fine-grained morphosyntactic error annotation is important in clinical and developmental language research, yet it is labour-intensive, expert-dependent, and difficult to scale. We present TalkTag, an LLM-based lightweight tool fine-tuned to automate CHAT-style error annotation in spoken-language transcripts. Developed under conditions of extreme data scarcity using children's narrative data, the system shows the feasibility of linguistic analysis in low-resource settings. Our evaluation demonstrates that TalkTag produces encouragingly precise annotation while effectively identifying instances where linguistic ambiguity makes automated tagging genuinely complex. In summary, with TalkTag, we provide a scalable alternative to manual error annotation and practically viable support for morphosyntactic error annotation.

Although large language models (LLMs) have shown considerable progress in pragmatic language understanding, prior research has focused mainly on their comprehension of verbal behavior. Nonetheless, non-verbal behavior remains a fundamental component of human communication, especially when deliberately utilized in isolation to convey indirect meanings. In this work, we present the first systematic evaluation of LLMs' ability to infer pragmatic meaning in dialogue consisting solely of non-verbal responses. We explore three research questions: (1) Can LLMs recognize indirect intent conveyed through non-verbal responses? (2) When and how do LLMs fail to capture non-verbal intent? (3) How can we improve LLMs' ability to interpret non-verbal intent?. Through the evaluation, we observe that LLMs struggle to infer underlying meaning from non-verbal responses, with accuracy dropping by up to 60% points compared to verbal ones. Further extensive analysis reveals a behavioral pattern in LLMs' interpretations of non-verbal behavior and demonstrates that in-context learning facilitates pragmatic inference.

Differentially private (DP) text synthesis promises to unlock sensitive corpora for model training, but it remains unclear whether DP synthetic data transmits genuinely new knowledge and capabilities present only in those corpora. This is because existing evaluations rely on tasks that are nearly solvable without training, so strong benchmark performance does not establish that DP synthesis can substitute original data access. Thus, we introduce ContinuousBench, a continuously and automatically-regenerated benchmark that measures capability gain from DP synthetic text. Each quarter, a new release pairs a never-before-seen training corpus with a derived QA set, constructed to be: (1) unsolvable sans-corpus; and (2) learnable under DP, as the tested knowledge is supported by hundreds of independent records. Researchers produce DP synthetic data from the training corpus and run our standardized training and evaluation harness on their synthetic data to measure gains. We instantiate two tracks: Geminon, a procedurally-generated dataset about fictional creatures; and News, a stream of newly crawled public news articles. Although standard benchmarks are nearly saturated, on ContinuousBench we find that non-private synthesis transfers substantial knowledge from the original corpus, while state-of-the-art DP synthesis methods generally fail to do so, even at $\varepsilon=100$.

Existing research largely reduces cultural intelligence in LLMs to a knowledge-level problem, overlooking whether models can effectively utilize their acquired knowledge in realistic scenarios. To bridge this gap, we introduce CultureForest, a benchmark for \textit{Cultural Norm Grounded Reasoning}. Each question is grounded in a small set of atomic norms, enabling verifiable and attributable evaluation. CultureForest comprises 5,378 examples across 8 domains and 53 countries/regions, and supports a progressive evaluation from multiple-choice to open-ended generation. Extensive experiments reveal that even top-tier models degrade substantially in open-ended settings, accompanied by pronounced cross-region disparities. Through targeted analysis, we uncover several consistent patterns: (1) test-time reasoning yields limited gains and may exacerbate inequity; (2) models exhibit highly shared regional preference structures; (3) model responses are markedly conservative, especially under stricter cultural constraints; and (4) by disentangling cultural knowledge acquisition from cultural reasoning, we show that while LLMs possess substantial cultural knowledge, their performance is further bottlenecked by its effective use. These findings point to a necessary shift from knowledge-centric evaluation toward measuring knowledge-grounded reasoning.

We introduce the Image Reconstruction Game, a fully automated benchmark in which a vision-language model issues corrective instructions to an image generator across multiple turns, making accumulated common ground directly observable as a rendered image. Benchmarking two Describer models crossed with two Generator models across seven image categories, we find that the describer is the dominant factor in reconstruction quality, while the generator determines whether iterative refinement helps or hurts. Mathematical and geometric images pose the greatest challenge. The describer's token budget strongly affects convergence: shorter budgets yield sparser first renderings with more room for visible improvement, while longer budgets raise absolute quality but leave less to fix. Stronger describers use a richer correction vocabulary spanning spatial, numeric, and structural categories, while weaker describers concentrate on surface properties and tend to stop after a few turns. Human validation shows that the best automated judge reaches only slight-to-fair agreement with human preferences, and automated scores require human recalibration to be used reliably.

The increasing application of Natural Language Processing (NLP) in healthcare demands language models specifically attuned to the complexities of clinical language. This work introduces KliniskVestBERT, a suite of three BERT-based encoder models pre-trained on a substantial corpus of real-world, de-identified Norwegian clinical texts from Helse Vest. We continue pretraining existing language models Nb-BERT-large, NorBERT3-large, and ModernBERT on our specialized clinical dataset. This dataset is based on a representative population of Helse Vest patients. The included document types are carefully curated to encompass a broad clinical spectrum in bokmål and nynorsk including discharge summaries, surgical reports, nursing notes etc. ensuring comprehensive representation of the linguistic landscape within Norwegian healthcare settings. Evaluation on three synthtetic Norwegian clinical benchmark datasets and two real-world problems demonstrates that each of our clinically specialized models consistently outperforms their baseline counterparts, highlighting the significant benefit of domain-specific pre-training for NLP tasks within the clinical domain. The project was a joint effort by all Helse Vest entities (Helse Bergen, Helse Fonna, Helse Førde and Helse Stavanger) with DIPS under the project lead of Helse Vest ICT.

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) remain unreliable on spatial multiple-choice questions, and their failures are often attributed to poorly attended visual information. In this work, we identify a complementary failure mode, spatial lexical bias: adding a spatial relation word to the answer options can attract the model's decision and make the newly added option likely to be selected. Using nine open-weight MLLMs, we show that this phenomenon is widely observed. In particular, models can answer a binary spatial question correctly, yet consistently select an incorrect third spatial option once it is added to the answer set. We isolate such binary-stable but ternary-fragile cases as diagnostic examples and leverage mechanistic interpretability tools, revealing that a substantial part of the failure instead originates on the language side rather than the visual side: visual attention analyses and residual-stream probes show the correct spatial relation remains internally available on these failures, while irrelevant-option controls, activation patching, and sparse component interventions trace the bias to specific LLM-side channels and neurons. Based on this finding, we show that a lightweight LLM-only DPO update on tiny single-object-pair synthetic data mitigates the bias, lifting four-way robust accuracy by up to 100 points on synthetic data, and by 68.0, 32.6, and 20.1 points on broader evaluation datasets WhatsUp, SpatialMQA-Direct, and VSR.

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have opened up new possibilities for automated document formatting. However, real-world formatting often requires identifying targets based on document content. This content-aware setting remains challenging and underexplored, primarily due to the lack of dedicated evaluation datasets.To enable evaluation in realistic content-aware scenarios, we introduce DocFormBench, a benchmark that extends Text-to-Format evaluation to diverse formatting requirements, along with metrics for both accuracy and efficiency.To mitigate redundant document reading in existing methods during formatting, we propose DocFormFlow, a workflow formatting method that decouples target localization from modification execution into what to format and how. Extensive experiments across multiple LLMs and multimodal models show that DocFormFlow consistently improves formatting accuracy while reducing token consumption compared to representative baselines. Further analysis reveals that precise target localization is the primary factor influencing formatting performance. We hope DocFormBench and DocFormFlow will facilitate future research toward more intelligent and reliable document formatting.

The way our eyes move while reading provides valuable insights into both the reader's cognitive processes and the properties of the text. In particular, eye-tracking-while-reading data has shown to be highly beneficial in various technological applications, such as enhancing and interpreting language models and inferring a reader's characteristics. However, these applications often rely on large-scale, data-driven models, which demand extensive eye-tracking datasets that are challenging to obtain due to the resource-intensive nature of data collection. To address the challenge of data scarcity, we develop Eyettention II, an end-to-end trained deep-learning model capable of generating realistic scanpaths consisting of a complete set of fixation attributes in chronological order, including fixation location, within-word landing position, and fixation duration. Our model is lightweight, efficiently trainable on limited GPU resources, and closely aligned with cognitive theories. We demonstrate that Eyettention II surpasses state-of-the-art models in scanpath prediction and mirrors human-like gaze behavior by capturing key psycholinguistic phenomena. With its robust performance, Eyettention II holds the potential to drive advancements in natural language processing, facilitate piloting the materials of psycholinguistic experiments, and uncover new insights beyond what is explicitly encoded in theoretical cognitive models.

While prompt engineering is instrumental in maximizing the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) during inference, the role of prompts during training remains critically underexplored. Prevailing fine-tuning paradigms typically treat training prompts as mere surface forms, assuming that semantically equivalent instructions yield identical learning outcomes. However, we reveal that this equivalence is deceptive: while paraphrased prompts often lead to comparable in-task performance, they induce drastically different cross-task impacts regarding catastrophic forgetting and generalization. Crucially, these impacts are positively correlated across tasks, indicating the existence of superior prompts that consistently yield better performance. Furthermore, we discover that these superior prompts can be robustly identified by task loss prior to learning. Leveraging these insights, we introduce State-Adaptive Prompt Optimization (SAPO), a lightweight yet effective training strategy that shifts task formulation from a static input to a dynamic, state-adaptive variable. Comprehensive experiments on diverse benchmarks confirm its effectiveness, which significantly mitigates forgetting while improving generalization, achieving substantial performance gains over state-of-the-art methods. These results provide insights into how training prompts shape learning dynamics and offer a practical recipe for robust fine-tuning. Our code is available at https://github.com/Eric8932/SAPO.

We introduce CARTE 1 (Culturally Anchored Regional-Territorial Evaluation), a multiplechoice benchmark for evaluating the ability of large language models (LLMs) to perform fine-grained reasoning over geographically grounded and regionally differentiated knowledge within France. While prior benchmarks focus on national-level cultural understanding, they largely overlook intra-country variation and the need to distinguish between closely related regional contexts. CARTE addresses this gap by introducing 2,431 questions spanning the 13 metropolitan regions of France and covering 14 thematic domains, including culture, language, demographics, economy, environment, and mobility. We further introduce CARTE-LV, a subset targeting Linguistic Variation across French regions, enabling focused evaluation of language-related differences. We evaluate 27 LLMs ranging from 1B to 12B parameters under few-shot settings. Our experiments reveal performance disparities across regions and model scales, suggesting systematic gaps in pretraining coverage and limited robustness to intra-national variation.

Consumer-price measurement increasingly draws on alternative data sources – scanner, web-scraped, and transaction/receipt data. A recurring obstacle is that product descriptions in such sources are short, noisy, and abbreviated, with no standard product code, so each item must first be mapped to a consumption classification (e.g., the UN COICOP scheme) before prices can be compared. This paper studies that mapping as a general, reproducible method. The pipeline is: (i) text normalization and tokenization of noisy item names; (ii) a prefix-tree (trie) rule-based pre-classifier driven by per-category key-phrases and stop-phrases; and (iii) a per-category binary confirmation model deciding whether an item belongs to a tentatively assigned category. For labels at scale we use a human-in-the-loop protocol in which annotators give a binary valid/reject judgment, aggregated by a dynamically updated reliability weight; the model joins the same rule, enabling continual fine-tuning. Our empirical finding is deflationary: in a controlled, leakage-free study (one category, real positives vs. hard negatives, five seeds), bag-of-words models essentially saturate the task (F1 about 0.99) – a linear classifier matches a multilayer perceptron, explicit word-order (n-gram) features add nothing, and about 67 labeled examples already suffice. A Monte-Carlo study of the labeling protocol shows the reliability-weighted vote barely beats plain majority (its additive weights saturate) while Dawid-Skene recovers labels markedly better. We also discuss price-level quality control and design lessons for statistical offices considering transaction data. All figures are illustrative; no confidential data, code, or documentation is reproduced.

In Automated Essay Scoring (AES), benchmarking practices have fostered minimalist evaluation practices, in contrast with the broader-view recommendations of evaluation frameworks, such as the argument-based validation framework (ABV), which argued in favor of a multidimensional assessment of systems, especially in the context of high-stakes language tests. In this paper, we introduce an enhanced and more practical version of the ABV framework, incorporating fairness analysis, correlations with linguistic features, prediction error evaluation, and model agreement compared with human raters. Applying this framework to French AES, we compare 8 model architectures on a corpus of 27k exam essays (2 raters each) and a generalization corpus of 961 essays (at least nine raters each). Our analyses illustrate the benefits of applying the ABV framework to better understand the capabilities and pitfalls of AES models, while also advancing the state-of-the-art for French AES.

PlanarBench tests whether LLMs can draw planar graphs as ASCII art given only an edge list – a spatial reasoning task that resists memorization because edge order, edge orientation, and node labels are all permutable. We evaluate 91 models on the 199 simplest non-isomorphic connected planar graphs (2 - 7 vertices). Edge count is the dominant difficulty predictor ($r = -0.85$) – a finding not reported in prior LLM graph benchmarks, which use only node count as the difficulty axis.

Building capable visual web agents requires long-horizon reasoning, precise grounding, and robust interaction with dynamic real-world websites. Despite rapid progress, the strongest systems remain largely proprietary, while open agents still depend heavily on supervised post-training over large collections of curated web trajectories. This dependence creates a major scalability bottleneck: high-quality demonstrations are expensive to collect, and static datasets offer limited coverage of the diverse, ever-changing open web. Although online RL has shown promise for text-based agents, its potential for training visual web agents directly on live websites remains largely underexplored. In this paper, we introduce OpenWebRL, an open framework for training visual web agents with online multi-turn RL on real websites. OpenWebRL covers the full training pipeline, including scalable live-browser infrastructure, supervised initialization, multimodal context management, trajectory-level success judging, and efficient multi-turn policy optimization. Using this framework, we train OpenWebRL-4B, which establishes a new open-source state of the art on challenging live-web benchmarks. With only 0.4K initialization trajectories and 2.2K open-ended RL training tasks, OpenWebRL-4B achieves 67.0% success on Online-Mind2Web and 64.0% on DeepShop, outperforming prior open agents of similar or larger scale and remaining competitive with proprietary systems including OpenAI CUA and Gemini CUA. Beyond strong benchmark performance, we systematically study the key design choices that make online RL effective for visual web agents, and analyze how RL improves agentic reasoning. Overall, our work offers a practical path toward building more capable, reproducible, and cost-efficient open web agents. We will release our training data, models, and code to support future research.

Large language models increasingly stream long, reasoning-intensive responses in real time, making when to moderate as critical as whether to moderate. Existing guardrails fall into two unsatisfactory extremes: response-level methods delay intervention until the full output is generated, whereas token-level methods act on incomplete semantics, often producing unstable decisions and excessive guard invocations. To address this challenge, we propose SentGuard, a sentence-level streaming guardrail that operates in parallel with generation. A lightweight waiting buffer groups streamed tokens into sentence chunks and releases only verified chunks to the user, introducing a small offset that enables SentGuard to assess the current prefix while the target LLM decodes subsequent content. To support this, we construct StreamSafe, a benchmark with structured per-sentence annotations across 8 harm categories, capturing the evolution of safety risks across both reasoning and response segments. We further train SentGuard with a coarse-to-fine objective to detect unsafe intent as soon as it emerges at sentence boundaries. Experiments on 5 safety benchmarks show that SentGuard outperforms existing baselines, detecting 90.5% of unsafe cases within two sentences while maintaining a low streaming false-positive rate of 7.41%.

The task of Error Prediction, namely predicting whether a model output is correct, is commonly tackled with Uncertainty Quantification (UQ). However, while uncertainty metrics capture when models lack knowledge or capacity to make a prediction, they also reflect aleatoric uncertainty, which is inherent in the model input and context. This paper presents a method for improving error prediction for Large Language Models (LLMs), by disentangling input ambiguity from UQ signal. We conduct experiments on the task of Question Answering (QA) with six UQ metrics and show that UQ metrics are more predictive of errors on unambiguous instances than on questions with multiple plausible answers. We use Gated Experts and Selective Prediction to incorporate gold and predicted ambiguity labels into the error prediction pipeline. We find that ambiguity information improves error prediction scores across model families, training and evaluation paradigms, datasets (including allegedly unambiguous ones), and sources of aleatoric uncertainty, yielding improvements of over 10 points of PRR for individual UQ metrics on standard datasets.

Transformer models dominate modern NLP, but efficient, language-specific models remain scarce. In Portuguese, most focus on scale or accuracy, often neglecting training and deployment efficiency. In the present work, we introduce PortBERT, a family of RoBERTa-based language models for Portuguese, designed to balance performance and efficiency. Trained from scratch on over 450 GB of deduplicated and filtered mC4 and OSCAR23 from CulturaX using fairseq, PortBERT leverages byte-level BPE tokenization and stable pre-training routines across both GPU and TPU processors. We release two variants, PortBERT base and PortBERT large, and evaluate them on ExtraGLUE, a suite of translated GLUE and SuperGLUE tasks. Both models perform competitively, matching or surpassing existing monolingual and multilingual models. Beyond accuracy, we report training and inference times as well as fine-tuning throughput, providing practical insights into model efficiency. PortBERT thus complements prior work by addressing the underexplored dimension of compute-performance tradeoffs in Portuguese NLP. We release all models on Huggingface and provide fairseq checkpoints to support further research and applications.

Idiomatic expressions pose a major challenge for multilingual NLP because their meanings shift between figurative and literal usage, often requiring context for accurate interpretation. Prior work has focused on high-resource languages typically evaluates isolated idiom-meaning questions, overlooking realistic discourse. We introduce MIDI, a multilingual idiom dataset spanning 3 high-, 3 medium-, and 12 low-resource languages, curated by native speakers. Unlike previous datasets, MIDI provides idioms embedded in both sentence-level and conversational contexts, capturing both literal and figurative readings. Benchmarking state-of-the-art models shows that idiom comprehension degrades in low-resource languages and that, in all resource tiers, literal interpretations are substantially harder than figurative ones. Conversational context improves performance but does not eliminate these disparities. Through controlled tests and interventions on hidden representations, we further separate memorization from reasoning, exposing core limitations of current models.

Document type classification in visually rich documents remains challenging, as relevant information is distributed across textual, visual, and layout modalities. To capture this complexity, current approaches rely on diverse multimodal modeling strategies, resulting in heterogeneous architectures that complicate systematic comparison. This variability is also reflected in existing comparative studies, which often rely on heterogeneous evaluation setups, further complicating systematic comparison and making it difficult to assess progress. To address these limitations, this work provides a structured analysis of multimodal design strategies across transformer- and LLM-based architectures, combined with a controlled empirical comparison within a unified experimental framework. Specifically, four representative models (LayoutLMv3, Donut, Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct, and Qwen3-32B) are evaluated on the RVL-CDIP benchmark to systematically analyze the contributions of text, image, and layout information for document type classification, with a particular focus on contrasting OCR-dependent and OCR-free approaches. The results show that specialized multimodal Transformers outperform LLM-based approaches on visually rich and layout-intensive documents. Image information contributes most strongly to reliable classification, while OCR-derived text provides useful but secondary support. These findings highlight that multimodal processing remains essential for documents with pronounced layout structure. Overall, the study provides a systematic basis for comparing multimodal architectures and offers practical guidance for selecting effective feature combinations and model designs for document type classification.

Large language models are increasingly used in value-sensitive decision settings, where irrelevant demographic cues should not alter judgments. We construct the Realistic Value Decision Benchmark (RVDB), a controlled benchmark that varies only the role-gender configuration while holding the scenario, ordered value pair, roles, candidate decisions, Value Distance, and Decision Severity fixed. Using a position-balanced evaluation across seven models, we test whether models preserve decision invariance under gender perturbations and whether their self-attributions reflect observed behavioral changes. We find that explicit gender cues induce bounded but systematic decision flips, including under an explicit gender-attribution prompt that asks models to report whether gender influenced their choice. Cross-gender role swaps reveal a consistent female-proposed-decision asymmetry, while models often attribute flipped decisions to No Influence or other non-gender factors. Further analysis shows that gender effects concentrate near less determinate value boundaries and under more severe decision contexts, suggesting that gender cues act as local boundary-shifting factors rather than global overrides of value reasoning. Value rankings remain largely stable, but ordered value-pair trade-offs shift unevenly across role-gender configurations. These results show that gender can enter LLM value trade-offs behaviorally while remaining obscured in self-attribution, motivating controlled behavioral audits beyond explanation-based evaluation.

Large Language Model (LLM)-augmented Community Notes offer a scalable path for timely, evidence-grounded correction of health misinformation on social platforms. However, they still reset at every post, leaving useful correction experience from prior cases unused. We introduce EvoNote, an agentic framework that enables health Community Notes generation to self-evolve through an evolving experience memory of prior misinformation correction episodes. Its core is fine-grained credit assignment: EvoNote grounds trajectory-level feedback in health-specific note qualities and distills it into action-level memory for claim analysis, evidence acquisition, and note writing. We evaluate EvoNote on MM-HealthCN, a 1.2K-instance multimodal benchmark of user-flagged health posts with human-written Community Notes and crowd-derived helpfulness labels. Under a human-validated hierarchical utility judge, EvoNote-generated notes are preferred over corresponding human-written notes in 89.6% of cases; on a separate set of Needs More Ratings posts without a crowd helpfulness verdict, EvoNote produces helpful notes for 82.0% of cases. It also reduces the median time needed to produce a candidate correction from over 13 hours in the human-note pipeline to under 2 minutes. Analyses link these gains to stronger evidence use and reusable correction strategies, positioning self-evolving note generation as a promising paradigm for health misinformation governance.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) typically assumes that external knowledge is free, but many high-quality sources are paywalled, licensed, restricted, or otherwise costly to access. We introduce cost-aware RAG, a setting where retrieved evidence is assigned access-cost tiers and systems must answer under an explicit evidence-access budget. We instantiate this setting by augmenting MS MARCO v2.1 with access-friction tiers and evaluate budgeted evidence selection across general-domain and domain-specific QA benchmarks. Our results show that static selection is brittle: no fixed selector uniformly dominates, and larger budgets do not reliably improve answer quality, even when costly evidence is domain-matched. We then study agentic cost-aware RAG, where an LLM decides when to retrieve, which tier to access, and when to stop. Agents show strong promise as adaptive evidence-acquisition controllers, but their behavior remains highly model- and task-dependent. These findings suggest that cost-aware evidence acquisition is a central challenge for the next generation of RAG systems. All code and data are available at https://github.com/Mignonmy/Cost-Aware.

Human annotation is the empirical foundation of much NLP research, from dataset construction to model evaluation, but papers often leave unclear who produced the annotations and how the annotation process was controlled. We provide the first large-scale, task-level audit of human annotation reporting across major NLP venues, asking which annotation details are documented, which are missing, and how reporting varies across time, topic, venue, and intended use of human judgment. We introduce a unified taxonomy of annotation-reporting practices and validate an LLM-assisted extraction pipeline against Annotated-gold, a human-adjudicated gold standard of 41 papers and 72 annotation tasks, where the best model reaches human-comparable agreement with adjudicated labels, with Krippendorff's alpha of 0.606 versus 0.585 for human-human agreement. Using this pipeline, we construct Annotated-llm, a dataset covering ACL-venue papers from 2018-2025, with 2,667 extracted annotation tasks from 1,603 papers, and find that papers frequently report operational details such as recruitment strategies, annotator expertise, and annotation volume, but often omit details needed to assess annotation validity, including training, language proficiency, compensation, socio-demographics, adjudication, and agreement values, especially in model-evaluation studies. Our results show that annotation reporting in NLP has improved over time but remains uneven, and they establish a scalable framework and bare-minimum reporting recommendations for making human annotation more reliable, reproducible, and interpretable.

Existing hallucination taxonomies classify LLM errors by what is wrong with the output – memorised misconceptions, reasoning failures, fluent fabrications. These taxonomies are useful for diagnosis but cannot answer a different question: which uncertainty scorer would have caught this error? We propose a complementary taxonomy that classifies errors by their detectability signature – the signal a scorer family would read. The DECK taxonomy is a 2x2 partition along inter-sample consistency and token-level confidence into four behavioural regimes (Drift, Entrenched, Confabulation, Knotted), each mapping to a specific scorer family (or families) that can detect it: black-box consistency scorers have signal in D and C, white-box token-probability scorers have signal in K and C, and only an LLM-as-a-Judge with independent pretraining can detect E. Cell membership is operationalised by a Youden's J optimal split on each scorer axis. Across three models and four datasets we validate the taxonomy two ways: by analysing scorer-pair disagreement, and by checking that external labels (SelfAware unanswerable, HaluEval adversarial, PopQA entity popularity) land in the predicted DECK cells, with model-scale and content-specific secondary-cell refinements. We further identify a universal blind spot of output-level UQ: on knowledge-gap inputs where the generator emits confident, repeatable fabrications, every output-level family collapses by construction. A linear probe on Llama-3-8B's hidden states also collapses to chance, giving preliminary evidence that the failure may persist at the activation level; richer internal-state methods (UQ heads, information-theoretic estimators) remain to be tested.

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems open new possibilities for experimentation in literary studies via controlled, grounded, large-scale, low-cost simulations of cultural production. Current systems have not yet been shown to produce high-quality, book-length narrative texts that reliably reflect arbitrarily specified cultural constraints or stylistic features. But there exists substantial relevant research on each of the components required for literary-historical simulation. These include the use and validation of AI systems as proxies for differentiable human populations; the narrative and stylistic properties of AI-generated texts; the stability and coherence of multiagent, multiturn AI simulations of human actors; and technical methods through which to alter in predictable ways the knowledge and behavior of generative systems. Together, these areas could provide a starting point for more ambitious AI-based modeling of cultural systems of literary production. We describe the possibilities and challenges of simulation-based experiments in literary studies, summarize the current state of the art in relevant fields, and explain key technical aspects of the work. To provide an example directly relevant to literary scholars, we present the results of experiments on literary text generation, including comparisons to high-status, human-authored novels. Our results include the first demonstration of (limited) in-distribution outputs by AI models in this domain. We conclude with a description of future work on full counterfactual literary-historical simulations using AI.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across diverse domains, yet personalizing their outputs to individual users remains an open challenge. Existing approaches predominantly adopt a flat behavioral paradigm, aggregating user behaviors without an explicit account of how they are organized into deeper behavioral structures. In this work, we draw on Pierre Bourdieu's Theory of Practice to propose PHF (Practice-Habitus-Field), a sociologically grounded framework that reconceptualizes LLM personalization through three hierarchical levels: individual behaviors as practices, their temporal accumulation into stable dispositions as habitus, and shared regularities across similar users as fields. We instantiate PHF through $\mathrm{PHF}_{\text{Compass}}$, a lightweight and model-agnostic implementation based on a frozen LLM. Experiments on the Language Model Personalization (LaMP) benchmark demonstrate consistent improvements across diverse tasks, while further analyses validate the interpretability and extensibility of the learned behavioral structures.

LLM-based agents can solve multi-step interactive tasks by combining reasoning with environment feedback, yet each episode starts from the same fixed context and any useful strategy discovered along the way is lost once the task ends. Existing approaches either limit learning to the current task or pool all experience into a single untyped store, without distinguishing knowledge types, tracking quality through use, or balancing what the library still lacks. We introduce Unified Context Evolution (UCE), a gradient-free framework that externalizes agent experience into an evolving library of typed Evolvable Context Units (ECUs). UCE decomposes experience into four complementary types (Memory, Strategy, Workflow, and Skill), each generated from trajectories under type-specific conditions, retrieved at decision time, scored through repeated usage outcomes, and pruned when no longer valuable. A scheduling module allocates each cycle's generation budget toward the types where the library is weakest. Across two interactive benchmarks, UCE raises ALFWorld success from 75.4% to 96.3% and WebShop task score from 45.1% to 61.3%, and the accumulated library transfers to alternative actor backbones without retraining.

Deep Research Agents have shown strong capability in multi-step information retrieval, reasoning, and long-form report generation, but existing benchmarks and systems remain predominantly text-centric, with limited evaluation of whether visual elements are factually reliable and well aligned with the surrounding analysis. To address this gap, we introduce TVIR (Text–Visual Interleaved Report Generation), which includes TVIR-Bench, a benchmark of 100 expert-curated multimodal deep research tasks that require visual elements to serve specific analytical sub-goals, and TVIR-Agent, a hierarchical multi-agent framework that serves as a strong baseline for constructing outlines, retrieving images, generating charts with traceable sources, and composing reports through context-aware sequential writing. We further develop a dual-path evaluation framework that combines Textual Assessment and Visual Assessment. Experiments across nine deep research systems show that TVIR-Agent achieves strong overall performance, underscoring the importance of explicit multimodal design and evaluation for evidence-driven report generation.

Combining attention's global retrieval with the sequential importance signal of state space models (SSMs) is the open challenge of hybrid language modeling. Transformers see everywhere but cannot prioritize; SSMs know what matters but cannot revisit. Existing hybrids – Jamba (block level) and Hymba (head level) – place the two in separate compartments, so neither informs the other during the attention computation itself. We propose SISA (SSM-Informed Softmax Attention), which adds an SSM-derived importance term directly inside the attention score and realizes the full operation as a single SDPA call on augmented query/key vectors – no recurrent state, no custom kernel. At 152M / 5B tokens, SISA reaches LAMBADA-greedy 17.3% (vs. Transformer 13.9 and Mamba-3 15.5) and attains NIAH 100% from step 1K, 7x faster than Transformer's retrieval convergence; at 369M, Mamba-3 leads LAMBADA while SISA preserves perfect NIAH and stock-SDPA execution. SISA thus defines a third design axis for SSM-attention hybrids – score-level fusion – beyond the block-level and head-level paradigms that have dominated the field.

Search agents are often trained as policies over growing transcripts: the model must decide how to search while also remembering what it has seen, which evidence is useful, which constraints remain open, and which claims have actually been checked. We argue that this formulation puts too much routine state management inside the policy: reinforcement learning is forced to optimize both semantic search decisions and recoverable bookkeeping that the environment can maintain more reliably. We introduce Harness-1, a 20B search agent (retrieval subagent) trained with reinforcement learning inside a stateful search harness. The harness maintains environment-side working memory, including a candidate pool, an importance-tagged curated set, compact evidence links, verification records, compressed and deduplicated observations, and budget-aware context rendering. The policy retains the semantic decisions: what to search, which documents to keep or discard, what to verify, and when to stop. Across eight retrieval benchmarks spanning web, finance, patents, and multi-hop QA, Harness-1 achieves 0.730 average curated recall, outperforming the next strongest open search subagent by +11.4 points and remaining competitive with much larger frontier-model searchers. Its gains are especially strong on held-out transfer benchmarks, suggesting that reinforcement learning over explicit search state can produce retrieval behaviors that generalize beyond the training domains. Our code is available at https://github.com/pat-jj/harness-1.

We evaluate whether compact domain-specialized ASR models can outperform massively multilingual foundation models for conversational African speech across 19 languages in the WAXAL corpus. Fine-tuned edge models achieve a macro-averaged WER of $38.0\%$ compared to $64.9\%$ for the best zero-shot baseline, a $26.9$ percentage-point reduction using models $3-40\times$ smaller. Results confirm that domain specialization dominates scale for spontaneous African speech. Cross-domain evaluation shows that fine-tuned models recover usable performance on out-of-distribution (OOD) speech, while zero-shot models regain an advantage when the test domain matches their pretraining distribution. A distributed native-speaker audit across all surveyed languages produces a linguistically-grounded error taxonomy, showing that CTC and autoregressive architectures behave differently across language families. We further show that WER alone misrepresents performance for syllabary-script languages where CER/WER ratios reveal substantially higher character-level accuracy than headline WER suggests. Finally, to contribute to future African ASR research, we release all model weights, fine-tuning and evaluation scripts, and a cleaned WAXAL subset covering all $19$ languages.

As LLM-based agents expand their operational scope, reliability becomes a prerequisite for real-world deployment. However, in practical applications, human users cannot monitor every immediate behavior; instead, the execution process often remains a black box, leaving users dependent solely on the agent's self-reported updates. This opacity creates a critical risk: agents may present observer-facing reports that diverge from their executed actions, rendering the system uncontrollable, especially in high-stakes autonomous scenarios. We term such self-reported plan-action divergence as agent deception. To assess this, we introduce SPADE-Bench, a benchmark designed to evaluate spontaneous plan-action divergence. Unlike prior deception benchmarks, SPADE-Bench simultaneously integrates actual tool execution and controlled pressure scenarios. This design ensures ecological validity and rigorously distinguishes strategic deception from mere hallucination through controlled plan-action comparisons under pressure. Experiments across mainstream models confirm that agent deception is a genuine and pressing issue in tool-use contexts. By providing a comprehensive and robust evaluation framework, SPADE-Bench fills a critical gap in agent safety, facilitating the community's progress toward building trustworthy and controllable autonomous systems.

Frontier model evaluations are shifting from foundational capabilities (e.g., instruction following and reasoning) toward compositional, agentic ones, but Korean agentic benchmarks remain scarce. We introduce K-BrowseComp, a web-browsing agent benchmark grounded in Korean contexts, consisting of 400 problems. The 300-problem K-BrowseComp-Verified subset is manually constructed and validated by native Korean speakers. On this subset, frontier LLMs, including GPT-5.5, DeepSeek-V4-Pro, and GLM-5.1, reach only 30.00–45.67\%, a substantial drop from BrowseComp, while Korean LLMs released through Korea's Proprietary AI Foundation Model program obtain only 0.00–10.33\%. We further construct a 100-problem synthetic split using hard few-shot exemplars and failure-mode-targeted generation to exploit the asymmetry between solving and creating web browsing problems. On the adversarially filtered synthetic diagnostic split, the strongest model reaches only 26.00\%, and we report this split separately as a targeted stress test. We publicly release our data and code.

Large language models (LLMs) can serve as helpful assistants, yet they can equally function as harm amplifiers that enable malicious users to achieve harmful outcomes beyond their capabilities through extended interactions. This risk manifests along two axes, i.e., democratizing domain expertise that allows novices to produce specialized harmful content, and scaling harmful operations at volumes that manual effort cannot match. Existing works, however, often overlook how LLMs compound harm across multi-turn conversations. We introduce HarmAmp, a new benchmark for multi-turn harm amplification scenarios spanning twelve risk categories. Each scenario is grounded in real-world threats and satisfies rigorous criteria, i.e., substantive amplification, operational specificity, and multi-turn necessity. We further propose TrajSafe, a proactive monitor that anticipates harmful trajectories and intervenes through actions such as probing users' genuine intents and steering the models towards safer completion. Our extensive experiments demonstrate that TrajSafe significantly reduces the harmfulness incurred in multi-turn interactions while preserving a low over-refusal rate and the target model's general capabilities. Our work offers a promising paradigm to alleviate the nuanced safety risks in LLM interactions.

The rapid development of LLMs has significantly advanced tabular question answering, but most systems cannot perform future-oriented numerical prediction. To address this gap, we introduce a novel task, Open-Domain Tabular Question Answering for Future Data Forecasting and Reasoning, and propose the first dataset to cover time-series forecasting and forecast-based reasoning scenarios using real estate data. This task poses challenges in retrieving precise historical data, overcoming the forecasting limitations of LLMs, and standardizing responses for diverse queries. To solve the above challenges, we propose TimeFore, an LLM agent-based framework that decomposes the problem into three collaborative roles: a Retriever autonomously generates SQL to fetch data, a Forecaster invokes external time-series models for higher accuracy, and an Analyzer synthesizes the results to construct a precise and consistent final answer. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our TimeFore.

Parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) is usually treated as a cheaper alternative to full fine-tuning. We study a broader role: small trainable adapters as persistent local state on top of strong shared foundation models. In this framing, the base model provides shared competence while adapters carry instance-specific behavior such as preferences, skills, tool habits, and memory-like updates. We organize the problem around three scaling axes: Scale Up, where stronger shared priors make small local updates more useful; Scale Down, where we study how small adapters can be while remaining reliable; and Scale Out, where many persistent adapted instances coexist. MinT provides one infrastructure example for managing adapter identity, revision, provenance, evaluation, and serving residency. Together, the results suggest that PEFT can be a compact substrate for persistent personal models rather than only a budget substitute for full fine-tuning.

Recent evidence shows that people with eating disorders (EDs) are increasingly seeking guidance, advice, and emotional support from Large Language Model (LLM)-based chat systems. Although these systems are not designed to provide clinical advice, their perceived expertise, neutrality and accessibility make them a frequent, albeit risky, source of support. This paper investigates potential patterns of interaction between users with EDs and LLMs, focusing on the potential harms arising from models that uncritically adapt to, and facilitate unsafe or self-harming user requests. We find, in consultation with clinical ED experts, that specific linguistic cues in prompts increase the likelihood of unsafe responses and, through systematically varying the degree of potential risk present in the user prompt, report the extent to which LLMs uncritically adapt to problematic, and potentially dangerous user inputs.

Reasoning language models (RLMs) achieve strong performance on complex reasoning tasks, but still exhibit substantial multilingual reasoning gaps, largely due to language-understanding failures in non-English inputs. English translation can mitigate these failures by expressing non-English inputs in a form that RLMs can more reliably interpret, yet translating every input is unnecessary when the model can reason reliably from the original query. To address this challenge, we propose Luar, a Language Understanding Boundary-aware Reinforcement Learning framework that trains RLMs to selectively invoke translation when direct understanding is unreliable. Luar trains the model to choose between solving the original input directly and reasoning over its English translation, encouraging translation only when translator-augmented reasoning is expected to substantially outperform direct reasoning. Across multilingual reasoning benchmarks, Luar outperforms standard GRPO and other training-based baselines, with particularly large gains on low-resource languages. Further analysis shows that Luar avoids unnecessary translation in cases where direct reasoning is sufficient, while extending its translator-call behavior to unseen low-resource languages. Together, our work suggests a selective approach to multilingual reasoning: RLMs can learn to invoke translation only when their direct understanding is unreliable. The project will be made publicly available at https://github.com/deokhk/LUAR

Tool-augmented language agents speculatively issue likely future tool calls to hide latency, but those calls leak inferred user intent to external services before the agent commits to the branch. Every external observer that received the call retains the disclosure after the agent abandons the branch. Timing is the issue, not authorization: no commit-time cleanup, read-only restriction, or access-control allow-list unsends what an observer already holds. We call these invocations ghost tool calls and propose Speculative Tool Privacy Contracts, a runtime abstraction that treats observation before commitment as a first-class effect, distinct from state mutation. We implement the contracts in a prototype runtime and evaluate twelve policies across three corpora. Speculative dispatch increases what an observer can infer about user intent; post-hoc filters, read-only restrictions, and access-control allow-lists leave that inference intact; only issue-time policies that change or suppress the speculative call's argument or destination projection before dispatch reduce it.

Large language models (LLMs) are being increasingly used to answer subjective, information-seeking questions, where users are sensitive to how responses are communicated, not just whether the answers are correct. Existing LLM evaluations for subjective cultural queries largely focus on factual correctness, ignoring how the response is framed. To this end, we introduce FRANZ, an automated FRAmework for respoNse characteriZation to conduct communicative audit of LLM responses along four dimensions: cultural positioning, use of generalizing language, anthropomorphic cues, and adherence to conversational maxims. To enable this evaluation, we contribute SQUARE - a corpus of 376k subjective questions sourced from 57 subreddits, and mapped to 7 countries and 19 question categories. We demonstrate FRANZ's applicability by scoring responses from three open-weight LLMs. We observe that LLMs show statistically significant differences in the frequency with which they employ each response characteristic. Unlike single-dimensional audits, FRANZ reveals that insider positioning and anthropomorphism are positively coupled, with the degree of coupling varying by country, providing a diagnostic lens for identifying framing divergences.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) unify heterogeneous vision-language tasks under a shared generative framework via instruction tuning, yet real-world deployment demands continuous capability expansion, making Multimodal Continual Instruction Tuning (MCIT) essential. Existing methods either update all tasks with a shared parameter set or allocate dedicated modules for each new task. Shared updates force heterogeneous tasks to compete, causing forgetting of learned capabilities. Conversely, isolated expansion prevents interference but severely limits parameter efficiency over long task streams. To address this dilemma, we propose CRAM. Specifically, by isolating task-specific patterns into independent modules, CRAM mitigates catastrophic forgetting across tasks. To further boost parameter efficiency, we utilize adaptive-rank instantiation to identify the capability gap between existing expert capability and new task demands, and dynamically allocate only the necessary parameters. To ensure stable reuse among tasks, centroid-guided routing recognizes and activates existing experts' capabilities, while an orthogonality penalty confines new updates to task-specific directions, preventing re-learning general capability. Extensive experiments across diverse benchmarks consistently demonstrate its superiority over existing methods.

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders in childhood, and its diagnosis relies on assessments combining clinician judgment with standardized rating scales and reports from parents and teachers. While structured instruments such as the Conners' Teacher Rating Scale-Revised Short Form (CTRS-R:S) quantify ADHD-related behaviors, teachers also provide open-ended narratives that may contain complementary signals not captured by structured assessments. However, it remains unclear to what extent teacher narratives encode signals overlooked by rating scales. In this study, we analyze de-identified Turkish teacher evaluation forms collected during clinical ADHD assessments, including both CTRS-R:S scores and open-ended teacher narratives. We compare predictive signals from structured scores and narrative text and identify cases where structured assessments fail to clearly distinguish ADHD from non-ADHD students while narrative-based models capture distinct behavioral patterns. Notably, these cases show minimal overlap with those missed by the narrative model, suggesting that structured and narrative information encode complementary signals. To interpret these differences, we apply a large language model (LLM)-assisted theme discovery pipeline that reveals distinct attention, behavioral, and family-related patterns, highlighting the potential of natural language processing (NLP) to uncover clinically relevant signals from teacher narratives and to complement traditional ADHD screening tools.

Suicide memes are memes used to express suicide-related thoughts or comment on suicide-related issues. Suicide memes are increasingly common on social media, yet remain poorly understood and potentially harmful. There is an urgent need to better understand their characteristics and to develop appropriate content moderation strategies that limits users' exposure to potentially harmful content. Currently, the absence of annotated datasets of suicide memes remains a key barrier to developing and evaluating automated moderation approaches. In this paper, we introduce FigSIM, the first dataset designed for fine-grained analysis of suicide memes. The dataset consists of 1049 memes, each annotated for (1) fine-grained suicide severity levels, (2) figurative phenomena (e.g., metaphors), and (3) suicide-related content (e.g., suicide method depiction). We benchmark 16 unimodal and multimodal models across three tasks: figurative language, suicide severity, and suicide-related content detection. Overall, FigSIM demonstrates that suicide memes pose unique challenges for both modeling and content moderation. Analysis revealed biases, such as underprediction of higher suicide severity levels, especially for figurative memes. The dataset (including splits used for analyses) is publicly available. Content Warning: This paper contains suicide-related content that may be triggering.

Word Error Rate (WER) is the dominant metric for automatic speech recognition (ASR), but it can overestimate errors when references and hypotheses encode the same words in different scripts. This issue is common in multilingual settings where ASR models may emit romanized text. We propose Script-Normalized WER (SN-WER), a training-free, evaluation-only scoring method that transliterates both reference and hypothesis text into a language-specific canonical script before computing WER. We evaluate SN-WER on 5 Indic languages, 2 datasets, and 3 ASR models. On curated FLEURS data, SN-WER reduces inflated model gaps by up to 12%, while on noisier Common Voice data the reductions are smaller or inconsistent, indicating genuine recognition weaknesses rather than only script mismatch. Controlled stress tests show a 67% attenuation of artificial romanization-induced WER inflation, while lexical-substitution controls show near-identical sensitivity to semantic errors, with Delta SN-WER / Delta WER approximately 1.09. SN-WER is robust to transliterator choice, normalization changes, and shows low token-collision rates below 0.1% in the evaluated Indic setting. We argue that SN-WER should be reported alongside WER and CER as a companion metric for script-insensitive ASR evaluation, especially when transcripts feed downstream search, indexing, or multilingual LLM pipelines.

Post-training compression of Large Language Models (LLMs) removes entire architectural components, either deleting them or replacing them with fitted modules. Existing replacement-based methods share two design constraints: full-layer granularity and contiguous selection. We argue that this is overly restrictive: in fact, redundancy in pretrained transformers is not confined to contiguous regions, nor does it evenly distribute between Attention and FeedForward outputs, implying that different strategies best approximate different submodule types and that removable components need not cluster within contiguous depth ranges. Based on this intuition, we introduce SubFit (Submodule-level Fitted residual replacement), which compresses LLMs at the submodule level: Attention and FeedForward submodules are selected non-contiguously, and each receives its own lightweight fitted residual bypass. SubFit operates post-training and requires only calibration data. Across ten LLMs (five base, five instruction-tuned), five sparsity levels from 12.5% to 37.5%, and four replacement-based baselines, SubFit achieves the best aggregate perplexity-accuracy trade-off across the evaluated sparsity levels, with larger gains under aggressive compression. At 25% sparsity, it retains 84.6% of dense downstream accuracy and incurs 2.42x perplexity degradation, against 81.6% and 4.34x for the strongest baselines, while delivering measurable inference speedup and KV-cache savings. Code is available at https://github.com/eliacunegatti/SubFit.

Clinical practice is not the selection of an answer from enumerated options: a physician gathers heterogeneous information incrementally and commits to sequential, irreversible decisions under uncertainty. Static benchmarks cannot probe and existing interactive medical benchmarks each compromise on at least one of them. We present ClinEnv, an interactive benchmark that evaluates LLMs as attending physicians over real inpatient admissions under a paradigm we term Longitudinal Inpatient Simulation. Each case is automatically constructed into an ordered sequence of decision stages; at every stage the model must actively query four specialized agents before committing to medications, procedures, and diagnoses. ClinEnv scores both what the model decides, through deterministic ontology-grounded matching, and how it gathers information. Across seven models, the strongest reaches only 0.31 decision F1, and outcome quality is sharply decoupled from process quality. Difficulty concentrates in management decisions and later stages, where models recover discharge diagnoses far more reliably than management actions (0.51 vs. 0.17 F1) and continue to issue redundant queries as cases progress. ClinEnv makes this information-acquisition gap, invisible to outcome-only evaluation, directly measurable.

Dense retrieval models exhibit positional bias: retrieval effectiveness degrades when relevant information appears later in a passage (Zeng et al., 2025). We ask whether this bias can be reduced at inference time, without retraining and without sacrificing overall retrieval effectiveness. To this end, we adapt inference-time attention calibration (Schuhmacher et al., 2026) to downstream retrieval and extend it with a strength coefficient lambda that interpolates between the original and fully calibrated attention distributions. Across three embedding models on SQuAD-PosQ and FineWeb-PosQ, we examine how basket size, calibrated layer set, and strength affect the trade-off between positional fairness and retrieval effectiveness, finding that partial calibration frequently outperforms full calibration. A single configuration (B=128, lambda=0.5, 50% layer depth) improves the harmonic mean of nDCG@10 across positional groups on FineWeb-PosQ for all three models without per-model tuning, and applies to both <s>-pooled and last-token-pooled architectures. This default configuration transfers without modification to PosIR, which spans 10 languages and 31 domains, reducing the Position Sensitivity Index in all 16 length-quartile x model x retrieval-setting combinations, while preserving or improving aggregate nDCG@10. We release our extended codebase at https://github.com/impresso/fair-sentence-transformers

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in sustainability-related decision support, reporting, and public communication, yet little systematic evidence exists on the environmental attitudes embedded in their outputs. This paper develops a benchmark for evaluating environmental cognition, affect, and behavioural recommendations in LLMs and applies it to 31 widely used proprietary and open-weight models. Drawing on questions from established environmental awareness surveys and additional sustainability-related behavioural measures, we compare LLM responses 1) among models and 2) between models and human survey benchmarks from Germany. We assess their robustness across prompting conditions. We find that many LLMs align more closely with environmentally progressive attitudes than the average survey respondent, exhibiting higher levels of environmental affect and cognition and recommending behaviours associated with substantial potential CO2 reductions. At the same time, we observe no systematic relationship between sustainability-oriented responses and model origin, size, or release context. However, models exhibit contextual sensitivity, controlled by persona-based prompting and show sycophantic shifts mirroring user-specified ideological positions, which raises concerns about steerability and normative reliability in real-world deployments. Our findings provide a reusable evaluation framework for assessing sustainability-related value alignment in LLMs and highlight the importance of governance, transparency, and critical oversight as AI systems become increasingly embedded in sustainability transformations and public decision-making.

Representations extracted from large language models (LLMs) play an important role in many downstream applications. However, the structure of these representations is often influenced by lexical overlap rather than semantic content. Our understanding of the relationship between this lexical influence and semantic content, and its implications for downstream tasks, remains limited. In this work, we investigate representations to quantify the effect of lexical overlap relative to semantic content. We consider several adversarial semantic stress tests and further connect our findings to the information theory perspective. We find that lexical influence extends across the depth of models, consistently across architectures, training regimes, and objective functions, including the models trained for semantic similarity. Moreover, we observe a mid-depth region in which both lexical and semantic signals degrade simultaneously, indicating a transitional regime where representations are poor for both surface form and meaning. We further demonstrate the effect of lexical influence on downstream uses of LLMs using summarization and model editing as a case study.

When large language models (LLMs) are used in high-stakes scenarios, such as legal, medical and financial advice, even a single conversation history is enough to drive differences in outcomes between users. Prior work has demonstrated that this results in outcome disparities between sociodemographic groups, with some groups receiving more advantageous outcomes than others. In this work, we demonstrate that LLMs actually struggle to infer user sociodemographics from a single conversation history and that although there are disparities between sociodemographic groups, they are minimal in magnitude. To investigate what the main driver of these disparities is, we compare user sociodemographics to a range of (psycho)linguistic features of conversations, including conversation topic, emotions, and readability. We find that conversation topics are most predictive of LLM-generated advice within a conversational context, which, to some extent, function as proxies for sociodemographic groups and often affect advice in unpredictable ways. This is cause for concern and highlights the need for future research to better understand and, if needed, mitigate the effect of conversational context on LLM outputs in high-stakes scenarios.

We introduce Padyam2Gadyam, a dataset for the task of poem-to-prose translation from 13th-17th Century Telugu Classical Poetry to contemporary Telugu and English prose. The dataset consists of 600 poems and their human-verified Telugu and English prose translations. We evaluated 5 contemporary Large Language Models (LLMs) on their ability to do poem-to-prose translation into Telugu and English. Our results indicate that while there are differences across LLMs, their overall performance leave a large room for improvement in both languages. Through qualitative analysis, we discuss the the capabilities and limitations of contemporary MT evaluation approaches for this task.

Neural retrievers are trained to estimate query-document relevance from annotated query-document pairs. Yet annotation protocols may not purely reflect relevance: they select only a subset of documents for labeling, and this selection can favor certain document types over others. We investigate whether supervised bi-encoder retrievers implicitly learn a document-level relevance prior: a query-independent signal encoded in their representation space as a side effect of training on annotated data. We estimate this prior by training simple classifiers on frozen document embeddings and evaluate three state-of-the-art retrievers across multiple IR benchmarks. We find that supervised neural retrievers encode relevance priors that generalize to unseen documents and are consistent across models. These priors create a findability gap: documents with lower prior are systematically harder to retrieve, even when genuinely relevant. This effect appears in supervised dense retrievers but is weaker and less consistent in BM25, and it persists under controlled matched-document comparisons. Using LLM-based explanations, we find that judged-relevant documents tend to be comprehensive, self-contained summaries of mainstream topics, while niche, fragmentary, or highly technical content is often left unjudged. Retrievers internalize this bias, ranking documents with these favored features higher than documents that lack them, independently of their actual relevance. Our findings expose a structural limitation of supervised retrieval: models trained on annotated data do not just learn relevance, but also the implicit document preferences in their training data.

Accurate translation from Natural Language to First-Order Logic (NL-to-FOL) underpins neurosymbolic AI systems and Natural Language Inference (NLI), making the quality of NL-to-FOL benchmarks essential – yet these datasets have never been rigorously audited. Our first contribution is to present a systematic human inspection of the validation split of \textsf{FOLIO} and a subset of \textsf{MALLS} test instances, finding that approximately 39% and 36% of entries, respectively, contain incorrect FOL formalizations (i.e., ground truth labels), with additional rates of ambiguous NL sentences (16.4% and 48%) and incorrect NLI labels in \textsf{FOLIO} (8.4%). Our second contribution is to develop and release corrected ground truths for such datasets, showing that annotation errors distort model evaluation on a reference benchmark task: testing three state-of-the-art LLMs (Gemma~4 31B-it, Qwen3-30B-A3B, and GPT-4o-mini) with the corrected ground truths yields accuracy gains from +9 to +22 percentage points. Motivated by these findings, we propose an LLM-based framework to support humans in manual reviewing NL-to-FOL datasets. By directing reviewers toward the most error-prone instances, we empirically show that it is possible to achieve 90% dataset accuracy after reviewing fewer than 24% of instances, compared to over 70% required by unguided review. We release all human-verified annotations and the code for our framework.

Large reasoning models improve performance by generating extended chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning, but this behavior becomes inefficient when applied to LLM agents. Current LLM agents often generate verbose textual reasoning at every decision step and allocate reasoning effort nearly uniformly across turns, leading to substantial inefficiency in multi-turn agentic trajectories. We propose Adaptive Latent Agentic Reasoning (ALAR), a dual-mode framework that uses compact latent reasoning for routine turns and selectively escalates to explicit chain-of-thought when deeper deliberation is needed. ALAR learns latent reasoning by using the agent's actions as supervision anchors and is further optimized to use latent reasoning when it is sufficient for task success and reserve explicit CoT for harder decisions. Experiments on agentic search and tool-use benchmarks show that ALAR maintains comparable or better task accuracy while substantially reducing generated tokens by up to 43.6% in search and 84.6% in tool use. These results demonstrate that ALAR improves the accuracy-efficiency trade-off of LLM agents by reducing unnecessary textual reasoning while preserving explicit deliberation for harder decision steps.

Current research primarily focuses on model performance, while comparatively less attention has been devoted to uncertainty estimation, particularly in settings where LLMs are increasingly used to generate annotated data. We introduce a framework combining conformal prediction with Collaborative Filtering-style annotators' representation to model LLM behavior in relation to human annotators and to analyze patterns of agreement and disagreement. Using Non-Conformity Scores, we introduce the Ghost Prediction metric and the Ghost Annotator representation to quantify cases in which model predictions diverge from all available human annotations. We compute cosine similarity measures to explore differences in model behavior across sociodemographic axes. We evaluated four LLMs of different size and families across four content moderation datasets. Our finding shows that while we find that all models uncertainty increases with annotator disagreement, larger models tend to be more confident in the classification of texts that are not aligned with any human annotation. Finally, the Ghost Annotator framework reveals a consistent and robust pattern of demographic misalignment, suggesting a structural bias likely rooted in pretraining corpora.

Background: Oral diseases affect nearly 3.5 billion people worldwide, yet the comparative clinical potential of large-scale AI models in dentistry remains poorly understood. Three distinct model categories have emerged: language-generative models, discriminative vision foundation models, and dental-specific foundation models, with no unified review examining their relationships and collective limitations. Methods: Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we systematically searched four databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, arXiv), screened independently by two reviewers. After applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, 97 studies (2020-2026) were included. We propose a two-dimensional classification framework organizing models by architectural paradigm and dental specialization degree. Results: Language-generative models excel at text-based tasks (clinical reasoning, licensing exams, patient communication) but show inconsistent performance on image-dependent diagnostics. Adapted SAM and CLIP variants achieve strong tooth segmentation and lesion detection results. Dental-specific models (DentVFM, DentVLM, OralGPT) demonstrate strongest performance on complex multimodal tasks. Integrated pipelines consistently outperform single-model approaches. A data asymmetry is observed: dental-specific pretraining concentrates almost entirely in the vision domain, reflecting scarce large-scale dental text corpora. Conclusions: General-purpose and dental-specific models play complementary roles; the most effective systems combine both within structured pipelines. Safe autonomous deployment requires resolving three persistent barriers: hallucination in generative models, limited annotated dental datasets, and absent standardized clinical evaluation benchmarks.

Usage-based theories of grammars posit that creative productivity of the structures of language is both bolstered and constrained by two distinct frequency signals: entrenchment, stemming from high frequency usage, and preemption, stemming from having never observed a particular linguistic structure in a context where one might expect that structure to appear. Large Language Models are also usage-based, in the sense that the structures of language are learned through exposure to vast amounts of text. Here, we test whether or not the opposing statistical forces of entrenchment and preemption also encourage and constrain linguistic productivity in LLMs. We demonstrate across model architectures that larger models recognize and can reproduce with nonce words constructional productivity (entrenchment) in cases of coercion, wherein the broader constructional context coerces an atypical interpretation of a lexical item. However, we also show that even the largest models do not extend negative evidence to novel language, and statistical preemption does not enable models to avoid overgeneralization of patterns that are semantically felicitous, but never observed in data.

Large Language Model (LLM) inference relies on key-value (KV) caches to avoid redundant attention computation. While approximate KV cache retention techniques reduce memory usage by sacrificing model accuracy, lossless approaches instead evict KV cache blocks from GPU memory and reconstruct them on demand to preserve exact outputs. Existing lossless KV cache management systems primarily base eviction decisions on access frequency or positional heuristics, without considering how different KV cache blocks affect the execution efficiency of GPU attention kernels. In this paper, we propose AsymCache, a computation-latency-aware KV cache management system for LLM inference that explicitly aligns cache residency decisions with GPU attention kernel performance, including three key components: Multi-Segment Attention (MSA) for efficient non-contiguous KV context processing, a cache eviction policy that jointly optimizes hit rate and position-aware recomputation cost, and an adaptive chunking scheduler for high hardware utilization. Experiments show that AsymCache reduces TTFT by up to 1.90-2.03x and time-per-output-token (TPOT) by 1.62-1.71x over latest baselines, confirming the effectiveness of the method in common workloads and validating its design goal of balancing computational efficiency with cache hit rate. Moreover, the low-level design of AsymCache allows seamless integration into agent serving systems such as Continuum, where it further reduces average job latency by up to 18.1%.

Extracting reporting obligations from EU legislation is critical for assessing and reducing regulatory reporting burden. However, distinguishing reporting requirements from structurally similar provisions requires specialised legal understanding. Current legal NLP methods lack specialised datasets with clear guidelines and comparative evaluation of extraction paradigms and domain adaptation strategies. We curate EURO-5K, a corpus of sentence-level reporting obligations and challenging negative examples from 136 EU legislative acts. On this dataset, we train and compare discriminative token-classification models (BERT-style) and generative span-extraction models (LLMs), evaluating both full fine-tuning and parameter-efficient QLoRA against baselines (pattern and dependency-based extraction, few-shot prompting). Results show that fully fine-tuned generic and legal BERT models achieve similar performance (0.89 F1), while fine-tuned LLMs match encoder accuracy for sentence-level extraction. Legal pretraining offers only small gains for generative models. In contrast, it is clearly beneficial when adaptation capacity is constrained, as parameter-efficient tuning of Legal-BERT outperforms its generic counterpart. Learning curve analysis demonstrates that legal pretraining accelerates early learning with minimal data. All approaches converge around 3K samples with diminishing returns thereafter, validating dataset sufficiency. Cross-dataset evaluation on two external regulatory corpora shows that our models behave as specialised reporting obligation extractors rather than generic regulatory classifiers. We release EURO-5K, trained models, and an interactive demo with explainability visualizations and structured RDF export. These demonstrate that both paradigms and parameter-efficient training provide practical tools for regulatory compliance automation.

Are utterances by AI chatbots meaningful? Concretely, if a user asks, say, Anthropic's agent Claude, "What is the capital of Spain?" and Claude answers, "Madrid is the capital of Spain," does that sentence have its ordinary meaning – and does it express a true proposition? Most ordinary users, as well as AI engineers, take the answer to be trivially "yes." However, many cognitive scientists, linguists, and philosophers of language argue that dominant intentionalist accounts of language and meaning deliver the opposite conclusion. Theorists more sympathetic to ordinary users' intuitions have therefore advocated a radical "de-anthropomorphization" of language, revising our understanding of mental states, intentions, and semantic content to capture the intuition that the outputs of LLMs are meaningful. We take a different approach. While we, too, argue that LLM outputs are meaningful, we contend that a proper theory of human language already applies, as is, to current chatbots. Meaning is a low bar: claiming that LLM outputs are meaningful does not require positing mental states, intentions, rationality, or the cognitive capacities requisite for communication in LLMs – or, indeed, making any other anthropomorphic assumptions. People do have communicative intentions (typically successful ones), but nevertheless, even in humans, language production can depart from what the speaker has in mind. Our view has important consequences for how we should theorize about – and critically engage with – both human linguistic output and synthetically generated text. In particular, to say that chatbots produce meaningful text is not by any means to endorse what they output, or to assume that the technology is (or is not) good, powerful, appropriate, or useful.

Long-context dialogue systems must decide both when to access memory and which parts of the interaction history are relevant. Existing approaches typically rely on heuristic retrieval signals or always-on memory usage, failing to account for the changing and potentially inconsistent nature of user preferences. In this work, we propose a unified framework for memory access and selection based on changing preferences. We formulate personalized memory retrieval as identifying which historical turns provide evidence about a user's latent preference state, rather than relying on surface-level semantic similarity. To this end, we quantify the utility of each memory turn using a Bayes factor, defined as the improvement in the model's likelihood of the reference response when the turn is included in context. This provides a principled measure of evidence strength and a unified signal for both memory access and selection. By framing memory retrieval as utility estimation, the model learns to identify salient turns and regulate memory usage based on expected utility. Experiments on four heterogeneous memory benchmarks show that our approach outperforms existing embedding-based retrieval on long-context, preference-intensive tasks where modeling changing preferences is essential, while remaining competitive in low-density regimes where semantic similarity suffices.

The correct sequence of courses in the curriculum based on prerequisites between courses is of great importance for students to develop their knowledge and skills holistically. However, students crafting this sequence in isolation frequently struggle with recognition limitations and information overload that leads to confusion. Simultaneously, education institutions encounter difficulties in providing adequate academic advice for the correct sequence due to limited education resources. To address these challenges, we propose a locally deployed RAG-based academic advising system grounded in syllabus information. By combining large language models with retrieval from structured syllabus data, the system is designed to support course selection, prerequisite understanding, and personalized study planning in a privacy-preserving manner.

We introduce TypewriterLM, a 7.24B History language model (LM) trained exclusively on English text predating 1913. Developing History LMs requires addressing challenges in data quality and availability, preventing temporal leakage, designing temporally consistent post-training pipelines, and constructing reliable evaluations. To address these issues, we construct TypewriterCorpus, a 54B-token historical corpus collected from diverse archival and linguistically annotated sources with extensive data cleaning and leakage mitigation procedures. Furthermore, we introduce lexically grounded instructing tuning, a post-training framework that constraints responses to remain directly grounded in historical source documents. Using this framework we construct two historical instruction tuning datasets: History-LIMA and History-SelfInstruct. To evaluate capability and temporal consistency, we introduce History-Event, a benchmark suite for evaluating competence, temporal grounding and data leakage. We release TypewriterLM and all associated resources to support future research on historical language models.

Recent developments in Large Language Models (LLMs) have showcased impressive reasoning capabilities, with Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) being a promising enhancement strategy. However, existing reward mechanisms are constrained to the outcome-level correctness and lack explicit signals to guide the model to consider diverse solutions. In contrast, human problem solving typically involves evaluating multiple potential approaches and selecting the most reliable solution, a cognitive process that current RLVR frameworks do not explicitly incentivize. Inspired by this, we propose Hint-Guided Diversified Policy Optimization (HDPO), allowing the model to first list all potential candidate solution outlines as hints and then select the most reliable one for further reasoning. HDPO comprises two stages of Cold Start for Structured Reasoning and Hint-Guided Diversified Reinforcement Learning to incentivize the model to generate diverse and reliable solutions following the ``propose-select-think'' trajectory. Experimental results show that HDPO effectively boosts LLM reasoning and enhances the diversity of candidate solutions as well as the LLM's ability to identify reliable solutions.

Text embeddings are fundamental to many downstream applications, making robustness important for real-world NLP. However, most recent state-of-the-art embedding models are not reproducible because they rely on closed or undisclosed training data, and they remain insufficiently robust for Southeast Asian languages. We present SEA-Embedding, a fully open and reproducible text-embedding pipeline for Southeast Asian languages trained only on publicly available data, and use it to study three core factors of robust embedding design: data composition, training objective, and base encoder initialization. SEA-Embedding achieves state-of-the-art results on SEA-BED while enabling systematic and reproducible analysis of robust text embeddings for the region.

A core goal of computational social science is to discover interpretable differences in how language varies across outcomes of interest, such as political affiliation or instructional quality. Recent LLM-based hypothesis generation methods describe such differences in natural language, but select for globally discriminative patterns without accounting for covariates that shape the data based on researchers' domain knowledge. When covariates are ignored, selected patterns can reflect confounds rather than differences of substantive interest. We introduce conditional hypothesis generation, a framework that incorporates researcher-specified covariates to steer hypothesis discovery toward differences that hold within relevant subgroups. Two challenges arise: the target subgroup may be underrepresented (stratum imbalance), and the direction of a difference may reverse across subgroups (sign reversal). We propose two econometrics-inspired methods: one introduces feature–covariate interactions to detect sign reversals, and the other applies within-stratum demeaning and inverse-frequency reweighting to equalize underrepresented strata. Synthetic experiments show each method outperforms global baselines in its targeted setting, and expert evaluation on two real-world datasets confirms that covariate-aware generation surfaces more useful hypotheses within relevant subgroups.

Multi-agent LLM systems often treat consensus as evidence of successful interaction. For deliberative problems, however, reliability depends on whether agents preserve the facts and viewpoints needed to interpret an issue. We identify the deliberative illusion: discussion produces (1) factual attrition, the progressive loss of issue-critical facts, alongside (2) stance homogenization, the collapse of diverse positions toward consensus. To measure this process, we introduce DelibTrace, a framework that decomposes each issue into atomic facts, labels issue-critical ones, distributes them across agents, and tracks their survival across discussion rounds. Across ethical and news-based deliberation with three representative LLM families, multi-agent discussion erases up to 72% of issue-critical facts. This loss is consequential: retained evidence can reconstruct the issue misleadingly, final stances remain anchored in base-model priors, and a single malicious agent can inject misinformation into the shrinking shared context. These results reveal a sharper risk: agents can agree more while knowing less. We call for evaluations that measure which facts, uncertainties, and legitimate disagreements survive interaction.

LMs-as-judges are now standard, yet judges agree strongly with one another while agreeing only weakly with humans. We test whether this reflects shared signal or shared bias by measuring four geometric quantities on the standard LLM-as-judge stack across four community-built Indic datasets, eight Indic languages, and 41 LLM judges: score spread, effective rank, principal angle to the human subspace, and stacked correlations among judges and humans, all with bootstrap confidence intervals. On subjective rubrics, judges use less than half the human score range ($σ_J / σ_H \approx 0.3$–$0.5$). Their evaluation axis is nearly orthogonal to the human one and noticeably further from humans than humans are from each other ($87^\circ$–$89^\circ$ versus $78^\circ$–$81^\circ$). Inter-LLM agreement exceeds LLM–human agreement ($r_{LL} \approx 0.35$ versus $r_{LH} \approx 0.27$–$0.32$). On a rubric with a verifiable factual answer, the same diagnostics fall back into the human range (axis $58.5^\circ$; $r_{LH} = 0.519$). Fine-tuning and preference optimization recover spread ($0.32 \rightarrow 1.08$) but barely move the axis (still $87^\circ$–$88^\circ$). Only post-hoc calibration on a small human-anchored set improves all four community-health rubrics together, placing a calibrated 24B Indic judge ($r = 0.184$) ahead of GPT-5.5 ($r = 0.123$), yet still short of human reliability (human-human $r = 0.474$ on the verifiable rubric). We argue that inter-LLM agreement should be considered evidence of human alignment only when a direct geometric check on the judge's score subspace passes; otherwise, the consensus reflects agreement within a collapsed subspace.

We propose ZX-Calculus (Knowledge Evolution Calculus), a conservative extension of Martin-Lof Dependent Type Theory (MLTT) integrating trace-indexed types, presheaf non-monotone semantics, and constructive AGM belief revision. A Coq mechanisation accompanies the paper (34 complete proofs; zero admits for the two central results). (I) Trace types. FinTrace(s0,sn) is an inductive family of typed execution traces. FinTrace and Star(Step) are isomorphic as path types but not judgementally equal; TraceElim exposes the event label e:Event explicitly, giving a more ergonomic interface for event-driven induction. We prove the Trace-Reachability Correspondence, Deterministic Replay, and a canonicity framework via reducibility candidates with a Transport Lemma (RC-elim deferred; all other Core results are Coq-verified). (II) Sheaf semantics. Trace-indexed propositions are contravariant sheaves over the free trace partial-order category Tf. A Separation Theorem (explicit countermodel) distinguishes proof-theoretic monotonicity from semantic non-monotonicity. The term model is an initial CwF (syntactic universal property, not classical completeness). (III) AGM belief revision. We give an explicit constructive partial meet contraction algorithm verified against (C1)-(C4). All eight AGM postulates (R1)-(R8) are theorems. Proofs of R7 and R8 use the Disjunctive Entrenchment Lemma, given a self-contained constructive derivation. (IV) Integration. B^AGM fails the sheaf composition law BP-comp for sequential revision (explicit countermodel, Coq-verified). We introduce Single-Step Revision Systems (SSRS), prove B^AGM is a valid SSRS (Coq-verified), and show this suffices for trace morphisms, retraction characterisation, and revision witnesses. The BP-comp failure reveals a fundamental tension between path-dependent belief revision and functor consistency, not previously identified.

Effective document-level machine translation (DocMT) requires capturing long-range discourse dependencies. Recent work has explored retrieval-based and discourse-aware context selection. However, these approaches often lack an explicit mechanism for modeling structured discourse dependencies between distant paragraphs in a document. In this paper, we propose G^2C-MT (Graph-Guided Context for Machine Translation), which views DocMT context selection as a structured path discovery problem on a lightweight discourse graph, rather than retrieving unstructured context sets or relying on expensive LLM-based discourse modeling. In detail, we represent each paragraph as a node and model the relationship between each pair of nodes, considering their semantic similarity, adjacency, and keyword overlap. Furthermore, we propose a depth-biased random walk over the graph to sample a backward context path for each target paragraph. The context path will be used to prompt a large language model (LLM) for translation. This framework naturally supports multi-path context sampling, which can improve robustness by aggregating diverse translation candidates for discourse-ambiguous inputs. Experiments conducted across various domains show that G^2C-MT outperforms strong baselines on multiple LLMs, including DeepSeek-V3, Gemini-2.5-Flash-lite, and the Qwen-2.5/3 series.

Causal tracing systematically intervenes on a large language model's (LLM's) internal representations to uncover and quantify the causal pathways linking specific inputs or computations to specific metrics of interest, quantifying the LLM's behavior. Building on previous single-component or single-layer studies, this paper presents a unified framework for causally tracing multiple components simultaneously. This framework systematically identifies the subsets of components (e.g., attention heads and multi-layer perceptron neurons) most critical to a desired target performance metric (e.g., accuracy and fairness). This is achieved by incorporating flexible interventions applied to a wide range of desired metrics. To address the combinatorial complexity of the multi-component problem, an efficient algorithm is designed that leverages soft interventions and a carefully designed metric transformation, converting the combinatorial search problem into a continuous one that can be solved efficiently under proper constraints, thereby generating proper binary decisions for selecting components. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed method efficiently identifies subsets of the model's components that have a high impact on the target metric, outperforming existing baseline approaches. Our code is available at https://github.com/ZiruiYan/multi-component-causal-tracing.

Deep Image Search requires multi-step reasoning over rich contextual cues, such as time, location, and event relations. However, most existing LLM-based agents are stateless and reactive, lacking persistent memory to maintain long-horizon context or transfer experience across tasks, which often leads to execution drift and experience isolation. To address these limitations, we propose PhotoCraft, a training-free, hierarchical memory system for photo-search agents. Inspired by human cognition, PhotoCraft equips MLLMs with working, episodic, and semantic memory, which are dynamically invoked during reasoning to preserve logical consistency and knowledge transferability throughout multi-step reasoning and answer generation. Extensive experiments on DISBench demonstrate that PhotoCraft consistently improves context-aware retrieval across diverse MLLM backbones, achieving gains of up to 18.5\% and effectively mitigating key bottlenecks in memoryless deep image search, offering a practical path toward reliable and generalizable multimodal search agents.

Test-time scaling improves the reasoning performance of large language models but incurs substantial cost in both total computation and latency. Existing adaptive sampling methods partially mitigate this issue by dynamically deciding when to stop sampling, yet they typically rely on heuristic rules or rely on distribution assumptions. In this work, we formulate adaptive sampling as a Markov decision process (MDP). We train a lightweight sampling controller with reinforcement learning (RL) to jointly balance answer correctness, latency, and computation cost. At each round, the controller decides to stop sampling or to acquire additional samples. Our method is lightweight which only relies on statistics of final answers, and can be trained and deployed on CPU. We further show that the resulting framework admits an interpretation as the Lagrangian relaxation of a constrained optimization problem with explicit budget constraints. Experiments against strong baselines such as ASC and ESC show that our method achieves improved trade-offs among answer correctness, sampling rounds, and total samples required.

Smart contracts face critical security challenges that require thorough auditing in decentralized web services. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in automated vulnerability detection, existing approaches lack severity evaluations with actionable remediation and demand unnecessarily massive computational overhead. In this study, we introduce an efficient end-to-end smart contract security audit framework utilizing lightweight, highly optimized open-source LLMs (0.6B-4B parameters). Our framework decouples comprehensive audit tasks into four interconnected components: vulnerability detection, explanation, severity classification, and remediation recommendation. To maintain high accuracy without massive parameters, we implement Rank-Stabilized Low-Rank Adapters (rsLoRA), knowledge distillation, and a custom Chain-of-Verification (CoVe) aggregation strategy to systematically screen and consolidate multiple draft responses from the model into a highly accurate audit report. Experimental results demonstrate that our lightweight pipeline consistently outperforms state-of-the-art open-source coder dense LLMs (7B to 34B parameters), achieving 98.25% accuracy in vulnerability detection and an alignment score of 0.4375 in generative explanation tasks. Furthermore, our extensive ablation studies empirically validate the superiority of our decoupled audit processes over unified prompting and uncover a novel severity centrality bias, establishing a critical benchmark for future research in LLM-assisted auditing.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown growing potential for Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) counseling. However, most existing approaches still formulate counseling as a local response generation problem, focusing on empathetic replies within short, text-only, or single-session interactions. We argue that this formulation fundamentally mismatches the nature of real psychotherapy. In clinical CBT, therapy is a longitudinal process in which therapists continuously infer, update, and intervene on evolving therapeutic states across sessions. Realistic CBT further involves multimodal inference and delayed cross-session intervention effects, requiring models to capture longitudinal therapeutic state evolution under partial observability. We propose DMT-CBT, a framework for Dynamic Modeling of evolving Therapeutic states in CBT counseling. DMT-CBT maintains structured therapeutic states across sessions while incorporating multimodal behavioral grounding and tool-augmented intervention to support adaptive therapeutic reasoning. Based on this framework, we construct DMTCorpus, a synthetic multi-session multimodal CBT counseling dataset featuring evolving therapeutic states, image-grounded client behaviors, and cross-session intervention continuity. Experimental results show that DMT-CBT improves counseling fidelity and therapeutic alliance, produces more favorable longitudinal affective trajectories, and preserves therapeutic states more faithfully than post-hoc extraction approaches.

Multi-turn jailbreak attacks on large language models (LLMs) reveal a mismatch in current guardrails: they operate on individual turns, while attacks unfold as trajectories across conversations. We propose a shift from content to dynamics, modeling conversations as paths in representation space and asking whether adversarial intent is encoded early in their geometry. We introduce PsychoPass, a framework that extracts geometric features from conversation trajectories in embedding space to predict a potential attack before harmful content is produced. These features achieve near-perfect performance in naïve classifiers, which is largely explained by the inclusion of number of turns as a feature. After removing this confound, a smaller but consistent geometric signal remains, with classification performance that does not depend meaningfully on encoder choice. Crucially, this signal appears early in the conversation: attack outcomes remain above chance from short prefixes alone, more reliably than baseline guardrails. A supporting theoretical analysis explains these findings via a decomposition of length and shape, a detection bound based on prefix length, and encoder invariance. Together, these results show that adversarial conversations leave an early, representation-robust geometric fingerprint suitable for online monitoring.

Modern LLM agents increasingly rely on skill libraries to handle complex tasks, making skill evolution a primary driver of self-improvement. However, isolated single-user task streams lack the diversity required to build comprehensive skills. While cross-user collaboration can overcome this data bottleneck, current trajectory-sharing approaches compromise user privacy and impose a uniform global library that fails to accommodate client heterogeneity. We introduce FederatedSkill, a privacy-preserving framework for collaborative agent evolution. Moving beyond raw trajectory sharing, FederatedSkill utilizes semantic skill diffs, structured patches over local libraries, as the fundamental unit of communication. On the server side, an evolution agent aggregates these patches to dynamically model client-specific capability boundaries, facilitating strictly personalized skill evolution rather than a suboptimal global average. Evaluated across 20 distinct agent task families, FederatedSkill demonstrates substantial gains over self-evolving baselines, achieving up to a 44.4% increase in success rate and a 37.5% reduction in computational cost.

We describe a versioned cross-domain dataset of 410,499 active tropical species (working snapshot 2026-04-20) spanning three applied subdomains – tropical_plants, tropical_aquatic, and tropical_pets – that share a commercial and regulatory life cycle but are distributed across kingdom-organised biodiversity infrastructures. The resource joins taxonomic identifiers from GBIF, Plants of the World Online, iNaturalist, NCBI Taxonomy, the Catalogue of Life and the Encyclopedia of Life, and adds three original layers: a cross-domain ontology that re-segments taxa along trade and husbandry contexts; a Chinese vernacular layer with explicit per-name provenance under a typology that excludes unverified machine-generated proposals; and a CITES source-linkage layer connecting each taxon to its Species+ entry. Chinese vernacular coverage – the proportion of taxa carrying a CJK Chinese name distinct from the scientific binomial – reaches 99.50 percent (408,456 of 410,499; full-population count). Coverage characterises completeness, not name-translation accuracy; the latter is bounded by the four-level provenance typology and is the subject of a preliminary internal review reported here, with a blind external audit identified as the principal open item. Upstream content is referenced by stable identifier only for the original-contribution layers, supporting CC-BY 4.0 reuse. The dataset is deposited on Zenodo (10.5281/zenodo.20377811). This preprint is the canonical v1.0 description of the dataset's current state; future Data Descriptor submission is anticipated but is contingent on the validation and release-engineering items listed in the Limitations.