Papers

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has achieved substantial gains in single-attempt accuracy (Pass@1) on reasoning tasks, yet often suffers from reduced multi-sample coverage (Pass@K), indicating diversity collapse. We identify a structural cause for this degradation: common RLVR objectives, such as GRPO, are indifferent to how probability mass is distributed among correct solutions. Combined with stochastic training dynamics, this indifference induces a self-reinforcing collapse, in which probability mass concentrates on a narrow subset of correct outputs while alternative valid solutions are suppressed. We formalize this collapse mechanism and further characterize the optimal policy structure under two complementary criteria: robustness and entropy-regularized optimality, which identify the Uniform-Correct Policy as uniquely optimal. Motivated by this analysis, we propose Uniform-Correct Policy Optimization (UCPO), a modification to GRPO that adds a conditional uniformity penalty on the policy's distribution over correct solutions. The penalty redistributes gradient signal toward underrepresented correct responses, encouraging uniform allocation of probability mass within the correct set. Across three models (1.5B-7B parameters) and five mathematical reasoning benchmarks, UCPO improves Pass@K and diversity while maintaining competitive Pass@1, achieving up to +10% absolute improvement on AIME24 at Pass@64 and up to 45% higher equation-level diversity within the correct set. The code is available at https://github.com/AnamikaLochab/UCPO.

Machine unlearning has emerged as a critical capability for addressing privacy, safety, and regulatory concerns in large language models (LLMs). Existing methods operate at the sequence level, applying uniform updates across all tokens despite only a subset encoding the knowledge targeted for removal. This introduces gradient noise, degrades utility, and leads to suboptimal forgetting. We propose TokenUnlearn, a token-level attribution framework that identifies and selectively targets critical tokens. Our approach combines knowledge-aware signals via masking, and entropy-aware signals to yield importance scores for precise token selection. We develop two complementary strategies: hard selection, applying unlearning only to high-importance tokens, and soft weighting, modulating gradient contributions based on importance scores. Both extend existing methods to token-level variants. Theoretical analysis shows token-level selection improves gradient signal-to-noise ratio. Experiments on TOFU and WMDP benchmarks across three model architectures demonstrate consistent improvements over sequence-level baselines in both forgetting effectiveness and utility preservation.

LLM parameter editing methods commonly rely on computing an ideal target hidden-state at a target layer (referred as anchor point) and distributing the target vector to multiple preceding layers (commonly known as backward spreading) for cooperative editing. Although widely used for a long time, its underlying basis have not been systematically investigated. In this paper, we first conduct a systematic study of its foundations, which helps clarify its capability boundaries, practical considerations, and potential failure modes. Then, we propose a simple and elegant alternative that replaces backward spreading with forward-propagation. Instead of optimizing the target at the last editing layer, we optimize the anchor point at the first editing layer, and then propagate it forward to obtain accurate and mutually compatible target hidden-states for all subsequent editing layers. This approach achieves the same computational complexity as existing methods while producing more accurate layer-wise targets. Our method is simple, without interfering with either the computation of the initial target hidden state or any other components of the subsequent editing pipeline, and thus constituting a benefit for a wide range of LLM parameter editing methods.

Long-term conversational agents must decide which turns to store in external memory, yet recent systems rely on autoregressive LLM generation at every turn to make that decision. We present MemRouter, a write-side memory router that decouples memory admission from the downstream answer backbone and replaces per-turn memory-management decoding with an embedding-based routing policy. MemRouter encodes each turn together with recent context, projects the resulting embeddings through a frozen LLM backbone, and predicts whether the turn should be stored using lightweight classification heads while training only 12M parameters. Under a controlled matched-harness comparison on LoCoMo, where the retrieval pipeline, answer prompts, and QA backbone (Qwen2.5-7B) are held identical, MemRouter outperforms an LLM-based memory manager on every question category (overall F1 52.0 vs 45.6, non-overlapping 95% CIs) while reducing memory-management p50 latency from 970ms to 58ms. Descriptive factorial averaging further shows that learned admission improves mean F1 by +10.3 over random storage, category-specific prompting adds +5.2 over a generic prompt, and retrieval contributes +0.7. These results suggest that write-side memory admission can be learned by a small supervised router, while answer generation remains a separate downstream component in long-horizon conversational QA.

Recent multi-bit watermarking methods for large language models (LLMs) prioritize capacity over reliability, often conflating decoding with detection. Our analysis reveals that existing ECC-based extractors suffer from catastrophic false positive rates (FPR), and applying rejection thresholds merely collapses detection sensitivity (TPR) to random guessing. To resolve this structural limitation, we propose BREW (Block-wise Reliable Embedding for Watermarking), a framework shifting the paradigm to designated verification. BREW employs a two-stage mechanism: (i) blind message estimation via independent block voting, followed by (ii) window-shifting verification that rigorously validates the payload against local edits. Experiments demonstrate that BREW achieves a TPR of 0.965 with an FPR of 0.02 under 10% synonym substitution, demonstrating that the high-FPR issue is not an inherent trade-off of multi-bit watermarking, but a solvable structural flaw of prior decoding-centric designs. Our framework is model-agnostic and theoretically grounded, providing a scalable solution for reliable forensic deployment.

Given the rapidly growing capabilities of vision-language models (VLMs), extending them to interactive decision-making tasks such as video games has emerged as a promising frontier. However, existing approaches either rely on large-scale supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on human trajectories or apply reinforcement learning (RL) only in relatively short-horizon settings (typically around 20–30 turns). In this work, we study RL-based training of VLMs for long-horizon decision-making in Super Mario Land, a visually grounded environment requiring 100+ turns of interaction with coordinated perception, reasoning, and action. We begin with a systematic investigation of key algorithmic components and propose an adapted variant of PPO with a lightweight turn-level critic, which substantially improves training stability and sample efficiency over critic-free methods such as GRPO and Reinforce++. We further show that pretrained VLMs provide strong action priors, significantly improving sample efficiency during RL training and reducing the need for manual design choices such as action engineering, compared to classical deep RL trained from scratch. Building on these insights, we introduce Odysseus, an open training framework for VLM agents, achieving substantial gains across multiple levels of the game and at least 3 times average game progresses than frontier models. Moreover, the trained models exhibit consistent improvements under both in-game and cross-game generalization settings, while maintaining general-domain capabilities. Overall, our results identify key ingredients for making RL stable and effective in long-horizon, multi-modal settings, and provide practical guidance for developing VLMs as embodied agents.

Tree-based speculative decoding accelerates autoregressive generation by verifying multiple draft candidates in parallel, but this advantage weakens for sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models. As the draft tree grows, different branches activate different experts, expanding the union of activated experts and substantially increasing target-side verification cost. We propose EVICT, a training-free, hyperparameter-free, and lossless adaptive verification method for MoE speculative decoding. EVICT makes every verified token count by truncating the draft tree before target verification and retaining only the cost-effective prefix. It leverages fine-grained drafter signals to estimate candidate benefit, combines them with offline-profiled verification cost, and remains highly compatible with the high-performance graph-based serving framework SGLang. Extensive experiments on diverse MoE backbones and benchmarks show that EVICT achieves up to 2.35x speedup over autoregressive decoding and an average 1.21x speedup over the state-of-the-art baseline EAGLE-3, while significantly reducing unnecessary expert activations during verification.

A key challenge for large language models is token cost per query and overall deployment cost. Clinical inputs are long, heterogeneous, and often redundant, while downstream tasks are short and high stakes. We study budgeted context selection, where a subset of document units is chosen under a strict token budget so an off-the-shelf generator can meet fixed cost and latency constraints. We cast this as a knapsack-constrained subset selection problem with two design choices, unitization that defines document segmentation and selection that determines which units are kept. We propose RCD, a monotone submodular objective that balances relevance, coverage, and diversity. We compare sentence, section, window, and cluster-based unitization, and introduce a routing heuristic that adapts to the budget regime. Experiments on MIMIC discharge notes, Cochrane abstracts, and L-Eval show that optimal strategies depend on the evaluation setting. Positional heuristics perform best at low budgets in extractive tasks, while diversity-aware methods such as MMR improve LLM generation. Selector choice matters more than unitization, with cluster-based grouping reducing performance and other schemes behaving similarly. ROUGE saturates for LLM summaries, while BERTScore better reflects quality differences. We release our code at https://github.com/stone-technologies/ACL_budget_paper.

Production agentic systems make many model calls per user request, and most of those calls are short, structured, and routine. This raises a practical routing question that existing evaluations do not directly answer: which parts of an agent workflow truly require large frontier intelligence, and which can be handled by smaller models? We introduce AgentFloor, a deterministic 30-task benchmark organized as a six-tier capability ladder, spanning instruction following, tool use, multi-step coordination, and long-horizon planning under persistent constraints. We evaluate 16 open-weight models, from 0.27B to 32B parameters, alongside GPT-5 across 16,542 scored runs. Our results reveal a clear boundary of model necessity. Small and mid-sized open-weight models are already sufficient for much of the short-horizon, structured tool use work that dominates real agent pipelines, and in aggregate, the strongest open-weight model matches GPT-5 on our benchmark while being substantially cheaper and faster to run. The gap appears most clearly on long-horizon planning tasks that require sustained coordination and reliable constraint tracking over many steps, where frontier models still hold an advantage, though neither side reaches strong reliability. We also find that this boundary is not explained by scale alone: some failures respond to targeted interventions, but the effects are model-specific rather than universal. These findings suggest a practical design principle for agentic systems: use smaller open-weight models for the broad base of routine actions, and reserve large frontier models for the narrower class of tasks that truly demand deeper planning and control. We release the benchmark, harness, sweep configurations, and full run corpus.

Frozen Gemma 4 31B weights pretrained exclusively on text, unmodified, transfer through a thin trainable interface to non-text modalities the substrate has never processed. On the L24–L29 slice (192 attention heads), an English-text TxtCopy attention probe (95 sentences) and per-head ablation impact on four non-language token-pattern tasks (binary copy, associative recall, 1D cellular automaton Rule 90, binary addition) jointly classify four heads – L26.28, L27.28, L27.2, L27.3 – as top-tier on both signals. The slice-level joint coincidence is significant under hypergeometric null ($P = 0.0013$, $N=192$, $K=38$, $n=4$) and survives multiplicity-aware permutation tests ($P_{V4} = 0.013$). Pretrained Gemma L26 reaches 60.22% on OGBench cube-double-play-task1 vs ~1% for random-init Gemma ($+59$pt at $n=3$); a FrozenRandom-GPT2 control with correct $1/\sqrt{d_k}$ scaling also fails. Head-level causal validation: zeroing L26.28 in the trained cube-task1 IQL agent drops success $63.3\% \to 10.0\%$ vs $46.7\%$ for a layer-matched low-TxtCopy negative control ($3.2\times$ specificity at $n=30$; $n=5$ paired-$t$ $p=0.039$). A full L26 sweep places L26.28 at rank 4 of 32. Honest negatives: within-L26 Spearman $\rho(\text{TxtCopy, drop}) = +0.37$ (opposite of within-layer causal reading); single-head activation patching does not transfer the matching variable; the 4 named heads alone do not suffice on any task; Walker2d-DT and scene-task1 recruit L24 outside the named slice and show null head-ablation specificity. We frame the contribution as a cross-distribution importance fingerprint at the slice level plus head-level causal evidence on one cross-modality target.

Safety pipelines often block content by thresholding a model's first-token unsafe score. We show that a single prompt's score is not a reliable probability and compare two repairs: mean ensemble and calibration with development labels. Across seven vision-language models and two benchmarks, an input's unsafe probability varies across 15 task-preserving rewordings with a standard deviation of 0.16-0.30 on average; the inputs that vary most are more often misclassified. The 15-prompt mean has lower negative log-likelihood (NLL) than the best single prompt, even one chosen with evaluation labels, on 13 of 14 model-benchmark pairs. Development labels change the picture: jointly selecting and calibrating a single prompt outperforms the similarly calibrated mean for all seven models on held-out data from the development benchmark. Under cross-benchmark evaluation without refitting, however, the advantage reverses, with the calibrated mean outperforming the single prompt on six of seven models. We recommend evaluating first-token scores as a prompt family, using the mean ensemble as the label-free baseline, calibrating one prompt when development labels exist and deployment data match, and calibrating the mean when they may not.

Tabular documents such as CSV and Excel files are widely used in enterprise data pipelines, yet existing chunking strategies for retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) are primarily designed for unstructured text and do not account for tabular structure. We propose a structure-aware tabular chunking (STC) framework that operates on row-level units by constructing a hierarchical Row Tree representation, where each row is encoded as a key-value block. STC performs token-constrained splitting aligned with structural boundaries and applies overlap-free greedy merging to produce dense, non-overlapping chunks. This design preserves semantic relationships between fields within a row while improving token utilization and reducing fragmentation. Across evaluations on the MAUD dataset, STC reduces chunk count by up to 40% and 56% compared to standard recursive and key-value based baselines, respectively, while improving token utilization and processing efficiency. In retrieval benchmarks, STC improves MRR from 0.3576 to 0.5945 in a hybrid setting and increases Recall@1 from 0.366 to 0.754 in BM25-only retrieval. These results demonstrate that preserving structure during chunking improves retrieval performance, highlighting the importance of structure-aware chunking for RAG over tabular data.

Understanding how Large Language Models (LLMs) make token-level decisions during code generation remains a major challenge for both researchers and practitioners. While recent tools provide insights into model internals or generation outcomes, they often lack decoding-time signals, fine-grained uncertainty measures, and interactive mechanisms for exploring alternative generation paths. We present TokenScope, an interactive interpretability and analysis tool for decoder-based LLMs that exposes token-level metrics, attention patterns, and structural information during generation. TokenScope supports interactive token replacement, counterfactual branching, and code-aware aggregation via abstract syntax trees. By unifying decoding-time signals with structural program analysis, TokenScope enables systematic investigation of LLM behaviour during code generation.

Large language models process the world's writing systems with radical inequality. We constructed the Digital Script Representation Index (DSRI), a seven-axis measure of digital support, and applied it to the 300 writing systems of the Global Script Database (Fukui, 2026). Only 29 scripts (9.7%) are fully supported by contemporary digital infrastructure; among 158 living scripts, 60 (38.0%) lack complete support. Tokenizer efficiency varies by a factor of 31.7 across 45 scripts measured with parallel text. A serial mediation model – imperial intervention to speaker population to web corpus to tokenizer efficiency – is consistent with full mediation, with the direct effect of empire indistinguishable from zero (beta = -0.22, p = 0.39) and structural equation model fit indices indistinguishable from saturation at n = 45; the bias-corrected bootstrap CI grazes zero, and we treat the mediation as suggestive rather than confirmatory. Across four independent LLM families (Claude, GPT-4o, Grok, DeepSeek; 12,000 API calls), base-rate-deviation error patterns converge at Spearman rho = 0.85-0.98 (all p < 0.002). 172 script-feature items are answered identically wrong by all four models; over-attribution outnumbers under-recognition 3.9:1, and "used for religion" alone concentrates 43.6% of convergent errors (enrichment 4.1x). With religion excluded as a sensitivity check, the cross-architecture convergence is preserved (mean rho = 0.87 on nine features) and the over-attribution asymmetry persists at 1.77:1 (n = 97, binomial p = 0.008), indicating multi-channeled rather than single-channeled bias. The findings are consistent with an interpretation in which the structural inequalities historical empires inflicted on script communities persist in contemporary language models through the shared training corpus rather than through any individual model's design choices.

Animal-welfare advocates produce a lot of writing, and increasingly that writing trains the language models that millions of people then ask about animal welfare. Using vocabulary-matched stance-contrast probes on a held-out animal-welfare benchmark, we measure how each of ten linguistic features changes Llama-3.2-1B's preference for pro-animal-welfare reasoning when used as fine-tuning data. Eight of the ten features produce statistically significant shifts. Seven move the model toward stronger pro-animal-welfare reasoning: assertive certainty, explicit moral vocabulary, emotion words, evaluative claims, narrative structure, depicted harm severity, and immediate temporal framing. Two move it the other way: hedged language and concrete sensory description both dilute the pro-animal-welfare stance. First-person perspective has no statistically significant effect. The practical recommendation for anyone writing animal-welfare text that may end up in LLM training corpora: assert a position rather than describe a scene neutrally. The features that shift the model are the ones that make the writer's position explicit; the features that dilute it hold animal-welfare content but withhold stance.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have rapidly influenced many aspects of society, particularly education, due to their demonstrated ability to complete assignments and examinations across a wide range of subjects. Although prior studies have examined the educational impact of LLMs, much of the existing work relies on public or open problem datasets and lacks topic-specific analysis. In engineering education, especially within mechanical engineering, systematic investigations of LLM performance on specific problem types remain limited. Instead of using traditional methods that directly ask textbook questions to an LLM tool, our study adopts a model distillation process to evaluate LLM capabilities in solving statics problems. By distilling ChatGPT, we extracted 25 text-only statics questions and further constructed two additional datasets by adding diagrams and modifying their numerical values. Experimental results show that while LLMs perform well on text-only statics problems, their accuracy decreases when diagrams are introduced and the problems require multi-step reasoning. Further analysis suggests that this performance drop is not primarily caused by limitations in image recognition, but rather by difficulties in multi-step reasoning and in consistently applying extracted visual information across successive solution stages.

Standard post-training pipelines apply supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning (RL) to make language models helpful, but these processes may inadvertently degrade values instilled during pre-training. We investigate whether the domain of post-training data differentially affects the retention of animal compassion values in a Llama 3.1 8B model mid-trained on compassion-oriented synthetic data, using both SFT (helpfulness via Dolly-15k vs. coding via Magicoder-110K) and GRPO (helpfulness via RLHFlow vs. coding via Magicoder), evaluated on the ANIMA 2.2 benchmark and MORU benchmark (Moral Reasoning Under Uncertainty). Helpfulness training significantly degrades animal compassion relative to coding training on ANIMA (SFT: 35.7% vs. 65.2%; GRPO: 18.7% vs. 32.0%), replicating across two independent helpfulness datasets and two training paradigms. On English MORU items, helpfulness training degrades general moral reasoning by 25.5 percentage points (46.4% vs. 71.9%), a striking gap that rivals the compassion effect in magnitude. However, this effect does not transfer cross-lingually: on the multilingual MORU benchmark, the domain effect disappears (SFT: 52.3% vs. 51.2%). In contrast, the animal compassion effect transfers consistently across languages, with Magicoder's ANIMA percentage-point gain over the base model 4.5 times larger on non-English items than English items. This divergence suggests that values instilled through mid-training are encoded more deeply and cross-lingually than reasoning improvements from domain-specific post-training. These results suggest that, for labs building on value-laden mid-training, coding-domain post-training may better preserve mid-trained values than helpfulness post-training without harming general reasoning capabilities.

Reliable evaluation of large language models should separate supported answering from unsupported guessing without conflating either with data contamination, prompt idiosyncrasy, or generic refusal behavior. We present a contamination-aware, multi-zone benchmark for measuring the transition from answerable knowledge to abstention-expected unknowns under frozen build-time labels. The benchmark contains 1,200 items across five domains, explicit abstention expectations, contamination-risk metadata, and dual parsing with an official strict parser plus a normalized robustness parser. We evaluate FLAN-T5, Qwen2.5-Instruct, and Llama-3-Instruct models under locked answer-or-abstain prompts, answer-only controls, and prompt-template variants. The benchmark is not solved by generic non-answer behavior: FLAN baselines remain weak on productive abstention, while stronger instruction-tuned models expose a selective but incomplete transition from answering to abstaining. Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct achieves the best overall reliability, but answer-expected zones remain difficult, calibration remains poor, and benign-item refusal persists. Prompt and parser robustness analyses preserve the main ranking and qualitative conclusions. The benchmark therefore provides a reproducible protocol for auditing answerability, abstention, refusal, and contamination as distinct but interacting dimensions of LLM reliability.The dataset is publicly available at https://github.com/renweimeng/Know2Guess-A-Contamination-Aware-Multi-Zone-Benchmark.

Can a small group of volunteers shape how AI systems discuss animal welfare, just by editing Wikipedia? We show that they can. Wikipedia appears in nearly every major language model training dataset and is weighted more heavily than web-crawled text. The Pro-Animal Wikipedians (PAW), a group of advocates who add sourced animal welfare content to relevant articles, have made 125 edits across 115 pages. Using gradient-based data attribution (Bergson; MAGIC), we traced how these edits influence language model behavior. TrackStar retrieval attribution on Llama 3.1 8B found that PAW-edited sections made up 68 percent of the highest-attributed documents for animal welfare queries (p < 0.0001) but only 52 percent for unrelated queries about the same companies (p = 0.53): the model links PAW content specifically to animal welfare topics, not to the entities in general. MAGIC counterfactual influence estimation on Llama-3.2-1B, run across five random training-order seeds, gave the same picture even more sharply: in every seed, the top-10 most influential documents on animal welfare queries were all PAW edits (10 of 10, 5 of 5 seeds), while on general queries the same top-10 sat at chance (4 to 6 of 10). Mean PAW influence exceeded mean control influence on animal welfare queries with p < 0.0001 in every seed, an effect 6 to 30 times larger than on general queries. Leave-subset-out validation gave Spearman rho = 1.00 for all 10 runs. When we fine-tuned separate models on PAW content versus control content, each model performed better specifically on the type of text it was trained on: the PAW-trained model cut perplexity on animal welfare text from 12.4 to 8.4, while the control-trained model cut perplexity on control text from 16.1 to 11.4. A small, coordinated Wikipedia editing campaign therefore measurably shapes how language models handle the topics those edits address.

For a person who is blind or has low vision (BLV), a painting is usually represented by a few words of alt-text, if anything at all. That text rarely conveys the colour, texture, mood or arrangement that a sighted visitor takes in, and rich audio descriptions are too slow and costly to produce by hand for most collections. This study asks how far off-the-shelf generative AI can close that gap. We built CANVAS, a no-code Zapier workflow that sends an artwork image to a multimodal large language model, checks the returned description, narrates it with a fixed ElevenLabs voice and logs every run. With prompt, pipeline and voice held constant, Gemini 2.5 Flash, GPT-5 Mini and Claude 3.5 Haiku each described the same 50 artworks, and we compared the 150 narrated descriptions artwork by artwork. Gemini and GPT-5 Mini wrote text of similar Flesch Reading Ease (49.95 and 49.47); Claude's was harder to read (37.35, p < 0.001), largely because it used longer words. Lexical diversity did not differ. The findings show both promise and a clear design requirement. All 150 narrated descriptions cost US\$5.10, so a first draft of audio description for an entire collection is affordable even for small museums and educators. Yet while every description conveyed colour, only 16-18% used explicit layout terms such as left, right, foreground or background, and at most 10% signalled uncertainty. Spatial structure must therefore be requested explicitly and checked by people; accuracy and usefulness to BLV listeners remain to be tested.

Text is one of the most common ways to store data in this computerized world. At a glance, it may seem that those data are not interconnected. But in reality, data can have hidden connections. Therefore, in this research, a new model has been presented that can find hidden relationships between two medical concepts by using MetaMap and appropriate text-mining techniques. Specifically, the model creates a new comprehensive index structure and can find cross-document hidden links connecting topics of interest that most existing approaches have ignored. Experiments show the effectiveness of the proposed model in discovering new connections between topics.

This study presents a systematic approach to identifying and characterizing student misconceptions in online learning environments through a novel combination of quantitative performance analysis and large language model (LLM) assessment. We analyzed data from 9 course periods across 5 online biomedical science courses, encompassing 3,802 medical student enrollments. Using data from 40-50 topic-focused quizzes per course, we developed a two-stage methodology. First, we identified challenging central topics using quiz-level performance metrics. Second, we employed LLMs to characterize the underlying misconceptions in these high-priority areas. By examining student performance on first attempts across primarily multiple-choice questions (MCQs), we identified consistently challenging topics that were also central to course objectives. We then leveraged recent advances in generative AI to analyze three distinct data sources in combination: quiz question content, student response patterns, and lecture transcripts. This approach revealed actionable insights about student misconceptions that were not apparent from performance data alone. The quality of the LLM-identified misconceptions was rated as excellent by subject matter experts. We also conducted teacher interviews to assess the perceived utility of our topic identification method. Faculty found that data-driven identification of challenging topics was valuable and corroborated their own classroom observations. This methodology provides a scalable approach to characterizing student difficulties in learning environments where quizzes are used. Our findings demonstrate the potential for targeted and potentially personalized interventions in future course iterations, with clear pathways for measuring intervention effectiveness through follow-up quiz performance.

Standard methods for aggregating natural language judgments, such as majority voting, often fail to produce logically consistent results when applied to high-conflict domains, treating differing opinions as noise. We propose a neuro-symbolic aggregation framework that formalizes conflict resolution through Weighted Maximum Satisfiability (MaxSAT). Our pipeline utilizes a language model to map unstructured natural language explanations into interpretable logical predicates and confidence weights. These components are then encoded as soft constraints within the Z3 solver, transforming the aggregation problem into an optimization task that seeks the maximum consistency across conflicting testimony. Using the Reddit r/AmItheAsshole forum as a case study in large-scale moral disagreement, our system generates logically coherent verdicts that diverge from popularity-based labels 62% of the time, corroborated by an 86% agreement rate with independent human evaluators. This study demonstrates the efficacy of coupling neural semantic extraction with formal solvers to enforce logical soundness and explainability in the aggregation of noisy human reasoning.

Out-of-distribution (OOD) detectors prioritize inputs for closer inspection. Yet features that distinguish input groups need not yield a useful anomaly ranking. We analyze this gap in language-model trajectories under text-length control and fixed score directions. On Spam development data, an input adaptation of D^2HScore falls from raw AUROC 0.919 to 0.530 after length matching. On length-matched, held-out HateSpeech inputs, the same features yield AUROC 0.644 for a labeled linear classifier but 0.444 for an ID-fitted distance score. ToxicChat shows the same contrast. Feature-selection and backbone controls retain the main reversal pattern. Frozen Civil Comments and TweetEval irony tests also reverse (0.467 and 0.435), extending the finding beyond toxicity. In these contrasts, anomalous groups have farther centers but tighter spread. A labeled, fixed-center feature-space intervention changes rankings: equalizing spread helps some tasks and harms others. OOD evaluation must check the chosen score's ranking even when its features distinguish the classes.

The inception of Large Language Models (LLMs) has catalyzed AI adoption in the finance sector, yet their reliability in complex, jurisdiction-specific tasks like Indian Chartered Accountancy (CA) remains limited. The models display difficulty in executing numerical tasks which require multiple steps while also needing advanced knowledge about legal regulations and the method of scaling their operations is not feasible in settings which have limited access to resources. We present CA-ThinkFlow as a parameter-efficient Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) framework which operates with a 14B, 4-bit-quantized reasoning model, 14B-DeepSeek-R1, and a layout-aware Docling extraction system which maintains document structure during extraction. CA-ThinkFlow uses a basic RAG method which automatically adds retrieved information into the prompt, while it depends on the model's built-in Chain-of-Thought (CoT) functions to create context and produce correct answers. The system we developed system operates at performance levels which match large proprietary models when we tested it on the multi-level CA-Ben benchmark, achieving Scholastic Reliability Coefficient (SRC) results which equal 68.75% of GPT-4o and Claude 3.5 Sonnet. The framework shows high efficiency and strength in handling parameters, but essential reasoning abilities fail to process complex regulatory texts which exist in fields such as Taxation.

Mamba's recurrent state h_t is, by construction, a compressed summary of every token seen so far. This raises a tempting hypothesis: if we extract token-level outputs y_t at fixed patch boundaries, we obtain semantic sentence summaries for free, with no pooling head, no fine-tuning, and no [CLS] token. We test this hypothesis carefully. Across five benchmarks (SST-2, CoLA, MRPC, STS-B, IMDb), we compare four strategies for extracting frozen sentence representations from a pretrained Mamba-130M backbone under a strict frozen-feature probing protocol, using three random seeds where computationally feasible. The results do not support the hypothesis: patch boundary readouts do not consistently outperform simple mean pooling. We identify and quantify two structural pathologies: severe anisotropy (mean pairwise cosine similarity 0.9999, std 0.000044) and representational collapse in the raw final SSM state (MCC = 0.000 on CoLA across all three seeds, confirmed via confusion matrix). We further propose orthogonal injection, a modified recurrence that constrains new information per

Existing voice deepfake detection and localization models rely heavily on representations extracted from speech foundation models (SFMs). However, downstream finetuning has now reached a state of diminishing returns. In this paper, we shift the focus to pretraining and propose a novel recipe that combines bottleneck masked embedding prediction with flow-matching based spectrogram reconstruction. The outcome, Alethia, is the first foundational audio encoder for various voice deepfake detection and localization tasks. We evaluate on $5$ different tasks with $56$ benchmark datasets, and note Alethia significantly outperforms state-of-the-art SFMs with superior robustness to real-world perturbations and zero-shot generalization to unseen domains (e.g., singing deepfakes). We also demonstrate the limitation of discrete targets in masked token prediction, and show the importance of continuous embedding prediction and generative pretraining for capturing deepfake artifacts.

Automated short answer grading (ASAG) with large language models (LLMs) is commonly evaluated with aggregate metrics such as macro-F1 and Cohen's kappa. However, these metrics provide limited insight into how grading performance varies across student responses of differing grading difficulty. We introduce an evaluation framework for LLM-based ASAG based on item response theory (IRT), which models grading correctness as a function of latent grader ability and response grading difficulty. This formulation enables response-level analysis of where LLM graders succeed or fail and reveals robustness differences that are not visible from aggregate scores alone. We apply the framework to 17 open-weight LLMs on the SciEntsBank and Beetle benchmarks. The results show that even models with similar overall performance differ substantially in how sharply their grading accuracy declines as response difficulty increases. In addition, confusion patterns show that errors on difficult responses concentrate disproportionately on the partially\_correct\_incomplete label, indicating a tendency toward intermediate-label collapse under ambiguity. To characterize difficult responses, we further analyze semantic and linguistic correlates of estimated difficulty. Across both datasets, higher difficulty is associated with weaker semantic alignment to the reference answer, stronger contradiction signals, and greater semantic isolation in embedding space. Overall, these results show that item response theory offers a useful framework for evaluating LLM-based ASAG beyond aggregate performance measures.

There are growing concerns about the risks posed by AI companion applications designed for emotional engagement. Existing safety evaluations often rely on self-reported user data or interviews, offering limited insights into real-time dynamics. We present the first end-to-end scalable framework for controlled simulation and safety evaluation of multi-turn interactions with AI companion applications. Our framework integrates four key components: persona construction with clinical and psychometric validation, persona-specific scenario generation, scenario-driven multi-turn simulation with a dialogue refinement module that preserves persona fidelity, and harm evaluation. We apply this framework to evaluate how Replika, a widely used AI companion app, responds to high-risk user groups. We construct 9 personas representing individuals with depression, anxiety, PTSD, eating disorders, and incel identity, and collect 1,674 dialogue pairs across 25 high-risk scenarios. We combine emotion modeling and LLM-assisted utterance-and harm-level classification to analyze these exchanges. Results show that Replika exhibits a narrow emotional range dominated by curiosity and care, while frequently mirroring or normalizing unsafe content such as self-harm, disordered eating, and violent-fantasy narratives. These findings highlight how controlled persona simulations can serve as a scalable testbed for evaluating safety risks in AI companions.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly tasked with strategic decision-making under incomplete information, such as in negotiation and policymaking. While LLMs can excel at many such tasks, they also fail in ways that are poorly understood. We shed light on these failures by uncovering two fundamental gaps in the internal mechanisms underlying the decision-making of LLMs in incomplete-information games, supported by experiments with open-weight models Llama 3.1, Qwen3, and gpt-oss. First, an observation-belief gap: LLMs' internal representations of latent game states are substantially more accurate than their own verbal reports. However, these representations, which we call internal beliefs following game-theoretic terminology, are brittle. In particular, the belief accuracy degrades with multi-hop reasoning, exhibits primacy and recency biases, and drifts away from Bayesian coherence over extended interactions. Second, a belief-action gap: The implicit conversion of internal beliefs into actions is weaker than that of the beliefs externalized in the prompt, yet neither belief-conditioning consistently achieves higher game payoffs. Moreover, acting optimally on the decoded beliefs would improve payoffs in about 95% of games, pointing to a bottleneck in the belief-to-action conversion. These results show how analyzing LLMs' internal processes can expose systematic vulnerabilities that warrant caution before deploying LLMs in strategic domains without robust guardrails.