Papers

Multilingual large language models often generalize across languages, and prior work suggests that their internal mechanisms can overlap cross-lingually. It remains unclear, however, when such sharing emerges and whether it varies with the overt realization of the same grammatical operation. We investigate this question for present-tense subject-verb agreement, a morphosyntactic process that varies substantially across languages and is only weakly expressed in English. Using activation patching and attention analysis across 29 languages and five open-source model families, we identify the attention heads causally implicated in agreement and compare these head-level signatures across languages. We find that languages with overt person/number inflection exhibit more similar agreement circuitry than non-conjugating languages, with the strongest sharing appearing when the analysis isolates recovery of the inflectional contrast itself. English provides an informative bridge case, becoming more similar to conjugating languages precisely in contexts where overt agreement is required. Finally, many implicated heads display similar attention patterns across languages, suggesting that cross-lingual overlap reflects shared functional roles as well as shared localization. Together, these results indicate that multilingual LLMs reuse partially shared computational structure for morphosyntactic agreement rather than relying on fully separate language-specific solutions.

The remarkable capabilities of large language models (LLMs) are often undermined by their instability. Even subtle and semantically irrelevant changes in prompts can cause dramatic fluctuations in performance, a phenomenon known as prompt sensitivity. Previous studies typically evaluate prompt sensitivity by comparing the LLM's final outputs when prompts change. However, such coarse-grained metrics fail to explain the internal reasons for prompt sensitivity. In this paper, we introduce interactions as a fine-grained tool to analyze prompt sensitivity of LLMs. Specifically, we decompose the output score of the LLM into a set of interactions. Each interaction represents a nonlinear relationship involving a set of input variables. We discover that subtle changes to prompts can trigger severe instability in interactions, even when the outputs of the LLM remain the same. To this end, we propose an Interaction-based Prompt Sensitivity (IPS) metric by quantifying changes in interactions when we introduce subtle changes to prompts. We apply the IPS metric to 50 open-source LLMs and uncover four factors that reduce the prompt sensitivity of LLMs, including supervised fine-tuning, increased model scales, dense architectures, and few-shot learning. More crucially, we discover a common mechanism by which these four factors reduce prompt sensitivity: all four factors tend to reduce the prompt sensitivity of low-order interactions (i.e., interactions involving few input variables).

Equipping Large Language Models (LLMs) with multi-turn tool-calling capabilities is essential for building autonomous agents. However, progress is fundamentally limited by the reliance on full-length trajectory imitation. For tasks involving multiple order-independent sub-goals, the optimal solution space forms a vast combinatorial diamond lattice. Forcing this rich topology into monolithic trajectories causes a severe topological collapse, indiscriminately penalizing valid alternative explorations and severely degrading policy diversity. To address this, we propose DART-SD (Diamond-topology Aware Retrieval and Tuning for Self-Distillation), a novel framework that shifts the paradigm from global forcing to topology-guided localized correction. DART-SD first models the execution process as a converging Interaction-State Transition Graph (ISTG), faithfully capturing the inherent diamond topology of successful and failed exploratory paths. During autonomous rollouts, the framework identifies the Critical Topological Breakpoint (CTB) and retrieves success-supported recovery references. Finally, we introduce a progressive self-distillation paradigm through CTB-guided localized supervision, ensuring that the training loss is calculated exclusively on the generated recovery steps while strictly protecting the valid reasoning prefix from destructive gradient updates. Experiments on complex multi-turn tool-calling benchmarks demonstrate that DART-SD significantly outperforms traditional full-trajectory baselines.

Knowledge graph question answering (KGQA) and knowledge-graph-based retrieval-augmented generation (KG-RAG) aim to ground answers in explicit graph evidence, but real-world knowledge graphs are often sparse, outdated, and incomplete. Existing robustness evaluations usually report aggregate changes in answer quality after evidence is removed or perturbed, which measures sensitivity to incomplete support but leaves the source of degradation under-specified: the same score change can conflate the type of missing evidence, the response of the evaluated system, and the sensitivity of the answer-matching protocol. To address this gap, we propose MissDiag, a diagnostic evaluation framework for incomplete-knowledge robustness in KGQA and KG-RAG. MissDiag keeps the question and gold answer fixed while applying structurally typed missingness interventions to benchmark-provided support graphs, enabling paired comparisons that decompose robustness changes by evidence type, system response, and evaluation protocol rather than reducing them to a single aggregate score drop. Experiments across multiple system families show that incomplete-knowledge robustness is better understood as a typed degradation phenomenon than as a uniform property: answer-adjacent evidence loss produces the largest observed degradation, source-context removal is often neutral and can be beneficial, and semantic answer matching changes absolute scores while preserving the main typed degradation patterns. By transforming aggregate robustness measurement into typed diagnostic attribution, MissDiag provides a more interpretable basis for comparing, diagnosing, and stress-testing KGQA and KG-RAG systems under incomplete knowledge.

When generating text, a Transformer produces representations of past tokens at every layer, but each layer can normally use only representations from the same depth. This restriction prevents the model from fully reusing information it has already computed. We introduce WhiteMatter, which allows every layer to draw on past-token representations from any depth. A learned mixer selects the most useful depths for the current context and combines their representations into shared key-value (KV) cache channels. Sharing these channels across layers can reduce the cache size. Given the same number of training tokens, WhiteMatter with a full-size cache performs comparably to a standard Transformer with 50% more layers. With half the KV cache, WhiteMatter outperforms matched standard Transformers at two model scales, up to 1.3B parameters. Cross-layer connections, however, introduce dependencies that slow training and prompt processing. We address this problem with cyclic iteration, which updates interleaved groups of tokens in turn while processing the tokens within each group in parallel. On a reference model trained with exact autoregressive execution, cyclic iteration converges 12.5x faster than standard Jacobi iteration.

Digital twins (DTs) increasingly leverage artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) pipelines, both to build real-time DTs from high-fidelity simulations and to instantiate them with historical data. However, engineering these pipelines remains largely ad-hoc: pipelines are hard to specify, validate, and reuse, with scarce dedicated tooling. Function+Data Flow (FDF) addresses this by defining a visual domain-specific language (DSL) that represents functions (ML models) explicitly, enabling their composition and reuse. We implemented FDF in DesCartes Builder, an integrated modeling environment supporting FDF-based DT synthesis and validation. In this paper, we report on an empirical user study evaluating whether FDF and DesCartes Builder can make AI-based DT development more accessible and reliable. Participants implemented a representative real-time DT prototype within DesCartes Builder, and we measured perceived usability and feature adequacy through quantitative and qualitative measures. Our results indicate that DesCartes Builder and FDF achieve a good level of usability across a broad range of potential users, and particularly for the intended audience of domain experts. The study additionally surfaces concrete strengths and areas for improvement of both the tool and the underlying FDF framework. Informed by these findings, we propose H-FDF, a Hierarchical extension of FDF supporting iterative and modular pipelines, enabling the formal specification of more complex DT pipelines such as dual training. Our findings suggest that integrated, model-driven platforms are a promising direction to transform AI-based DT engineering into a disciplined modeling practice.

Cross-lingual sequence alignment is fundamental for building and exploiting parallel corpora, spanning mappings from documents and sentences down to words and subwords. Existing tools, however, typically specialize in a single granularity, so practitioners often need separate systems for word- and sentence-level alignment—especially in multilingual and long-text settings. We present OmniAlign, a unified multilingual aligner that supports both word-level and sentence-level alignment with a single lightweight model. Built on an encoder-only backbone with strong long-context modeling, OmniAlign induces word alignments from contextualized token similarity matrices, and obtains document-level $m$–$n$ sentence alignments via sentence embeddings combined with dynamic programming. To balance fine-grained alignment accuracy and sentence-representation quality, we use a four-stage training pipeline: alignment-oriented continued pre-training, self-supervised learning, supervised fine-tuning on human annotations, and sentence-embedding distillation from a strong multilingual teacher. Experiments show that OmniAlign achieves highly competitive performance on both word- and sentence-alignment benchmarks and generalizes well to unseen language pairs. Surprisingly, later-stage supervised fine-tuning on short texts further improves alignment quality while retaining the long-context understanding acquired in earlier training, keeping the model robust on long-text word alignment. \normalsize {\color{blue}Code: https://github.com/MilkDargon/OmniAlign}\par {\color{blue}Model: https://huggingface.co/WPS-Qingqiu/OmniAlign}

More context does not require a larger retrieval budget. Under the same ceiling, a retrieval system can recover more of the evidence a question requires by following relationships between evidence that flat top-k ranking leaves behind. We test that proposition with Dual-Bounded Relational Recall (DBRR), which allocates a fixed retrieval budget between relevance-selected seeds and bounded graph-adjacent context, against matched flat top-k retrieval using the same relevance-ranking stage and the same maximum number of retrieval units and tokens. The outcome is complete recovery of the official HotpotQA supporting-evidence set for each question. Across 7,405 FullWiki questions, the Primary DBRR allocation increased complete supporting-evidence recovery by 23.8 percentage points over its matched flat baseline (paired risk difference 0.2377; question-level bootstrap 95% interval 0.2269 to 0.2489). It improved 1,952 questions, tied on 5,261, and harmed 192. Bridge questions drove the effect, with a 28.7-point increase; comparison questions showed a smaller 4.2-point difference. In a prespecified, evaluation-only diagnostic population, real relationships also outperformed random-neighbor and degree-preserving shuffled-graph controls. The result is straightforward: under the same context budget, complete-evidence retrieval depends not only on which items rank highest, but on how context is allocated around them. Relational allocation recovered complete evidence sets that flat top-k retrieval left incomplete.

Modern mental healthcare faces a critical shortage of senior supervisory oversight, leading to a "supervision gap" where novice therapists manage high-stakes risks with delayed professional feedback. This paper proposes a new framework utilizing a fine-tuned Mistral-7B-instruct model as an automated "Supervisor-in-the-Loop" system. By leveraging 106 sessions from the DAIC-WOZ dataset, the model performs a tri-stream analysis: (1) Therapeutic Alliance tracking via semantic adherence, (2) Latent risk prediction using attention-weighted analytics, and (3) Supervisory Triage via a Dynamic Clinical Urgency Index (D-CUI). Our multi-modal VAL (Visual-Acoustic-Linguistic) framework achieves 95% technique identification accuracy [95% CI: 75.1%-99.9%], alliance assessment MAE of 0.105 on a 5-point scale [95% CI: 0.059-0.151], therapeutic fidelity alpha = 0.423, and mean D-CUI of 0.370 [95% CI: 0.322-0.419]. Training converged in 105 steps with 85.2% loss reduction on a single Tesla T4 GPU. The system reduces supervisory triage latency from 72 hours to real time (~10 seconds per session), enabling proactive intervention in high-risk cases. The system addresses the cold-start problem through Bayesian priors and implements timestamp-based modality synchronization for robust multi-modal fusion.

Tangut is an extinct language whose script does not explicitly mark word boundaries. We present the first systematic study of Tangut word segmentation using 2,750 expert-annotated segments (31,893 tokens), traditional lexicons, and unlabeled text. Our framework combines a reliability-calibrated lexicon-lattice representation, explicit distributional statistics, and a lightweight character encoder pretrained with MLM. In within-source five-fold cross-validation, the model integrating TangutEncoder, CRF, and external features obtains the numerically highest main-system mean F1 of 0.911 and substantially improves recall beyond the labeled training vocabulary. We further evaluate document-level transfer on 479 segments (4081 tokens) from five works absent from the annotated training corpus. You can access our project at https://github.com/jiangli-va/TangutSeg.

Evaluating interaction quality in real-world HRI is an important challenge. If interaction quality can be estimated reliably, the results can be used to improve dialogue strategies and ultimately enable robots to adapt their behavior autonomously. However, existing automatic evaluation methods have been developed primarily in controlled laboratory settings, and it remains unclear whether they can be directly applied to real-world environments, where users are free to disengage and multi-party participation may arise naturally. In this study, we investigate the automatic estimation of third-party-rated rapport scores using 62 sessions of multimodal recordings collected in a Japanese drugstore. We compare zero-shot LLMs, pretrained text, audio, and visual models, and their prediction-level fusion. The results show that, in real-world HRI, zero-shot LLMs achieve strong performance, while audio and visual models tend to provide complementary information. In particular, Gemini 2.5 Flash performs strongly as a single model, and a fusion model combining Gemini (text) with HuBERT and V-JEPA performs best overall. Further analyses showed that estimation performance varied across interaction-duration and group-size conditions. These findings suggest that rapport estimation in real-world HRI requires evaluation and model design that account for contextual variability beyond that assumed in laboratory settings.

Generative AI is rapidly entering adolescents' everyday lives during a critical period of cognitive, social and emotional development. Yet its adoption is outpacing evidence on how adolescents themselves experience, understand and negotiate its expanding role in their lives. We examined AI-related discourse on r/teenagers from January 2023 to July 2026 using validated keyword-based retrieval and a human-in-the-loop, LLM-assisted thematic analysis. AI-related discussion increased substantially over time, and 11,083 analytically coded posts revealed eight interconnected domains of experience. Everyday and social use was most prevalent (36.8 percent), while discourse increasingly shifted toward authenticity, personal control and safety, and future human roles. Across domains, adolescents questioned when AI should support or substitute for human thinking and creativity, how conversational AI changes relationships and perceptions of agency, what can still be considered authentic, who controls personal information and representation, and what opportunities and roles should remain human. These findings position adolescent AI use not simply as technology adoption, but as an emerging negotiation over AI's place and boundaries in everyday life. Supporting this transition will require developmentally appropriate AI literacy, psychological and social support, and AI systems and policies that protect adolescents' agency, privacy, relationships and opportunities for human development.

A common multi-agent design asks agents to report confidence and lets the highest-scoring agent speak next, implicitly using one scalar both to route the conversation and to estimate uncertainty. We audit this confidence-routed broadcast protocol by separating three trace-level questions: whether it selects the right candidate (routing), whether reported confidence behaves like a probability (calibration), and whether the selected agent publicly states the answer that won the turn (commitment). Our primary study covers 4,181 gpt-oss-120b olympiad-math traces; we repeat the audit on a 2-by-2 actor-by-benchmark grid that adds gemma-4-31B-it and a biology multiple-choice benchmark. In the primary cell, confidence discriminates correct from wrong candidates (AUROC 0.72) but is strongly overconfident (79% mean stated confidence versus 52% accuracy). A cross-fitted, tier-stratified isotonic procedure reduces Expected Calibration Error from 0.278 to 0.008 on held-out candidates, but it does not recover missing discrimination: raw AUROC is only 0.537 and 0.440 in the two Gemma cells. Routing is likewise setting-dependent. Fixed routers differ by at most 1.1 percentage points on gpt-oss/math, whereas raw-confidence argmax performs 5.6 and 11.2 points below random-valid selection in the Gemma cells. Commitment is distinct again: in the primary cell, poll and spoken answers diverge in 20.4% of valid pairs, 62.4% of those revisions are fresh generations, and the unconditional correctness shift is -1.7 points; the other three cells instead range from +0.9 to +12.2 points. The transferable lesson is procedural: routing discrimination, probability calibration, and public commitment must be measured separately before raw confidence is used for deployment decisions.

In statutory question answering, every claim must be traceable to evidence, not merely relevant, since unverifiable labour-rights answers carry serious legal consequences. Current systems fall short: single-pass RAG cannot detect insufficient evidence, while multi-agent legal-debate systems treat grounding as a prompting convention, letting agents cite unretrieved evidence. To address this gap, we introduce LabourCrew, a multi-agent RAG framework built around three grounding mechanisms: StatuteGraph, a graph index that explicitly links chapter, section, proviso, and cross-reference structure rather than fixed-length spans; an Evidence Exchange Protocol that confines advocates and an interpreter to an evidence ledger, making citation to unretrieved text impossible, while a fault-tolerant supervisor board runs advocates in parallel so individual failures degrade rather than crash the system; and a Calibrated Trust Gate that replaces categorical accept/reject decisions with a trust score, thresholded via conformal risk control for a distribution-free bound on the false-accept rate. We evaluate on LabourActQA, a 500-item Bangla question set from the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006, spanning seven reasoning categories and three difficulty tiers. The framework drives the empirical false-accept rate to 0.081, within the target level ($\alpha = 0.10$), achieves the highest Answer Relevancy among HyDE RAG, Graph-RAG, and Hierarchical RAG (0.862 $>$ 0.839, 0.815, 0.828), and degrades gradually rather than catastrophically as question difficulty increases. These results show that calibrated abstention, not retrieval quality alone, is what makes legal question answering auditable in low-resource statutory domains.

Online platforms have become arenas for the public contestation of climate change, shaping how scientific knowledge, denial, and uncertainty are expressed and disputed. Yet longitudinal evidence remains limited for YouTube, especially for Portuguese-language discourse. Addressing this gap, we characterize how climate stances are expressed and contested over time in a large corpus of Portuguese-language YouTube comments retrieved through Brazil-oriented climate-related searches. To support this analysis in a noisy, imbalanced, and low-resource setting, we collect more than 240,000 comments posted between 2014 and 2024 and formulate stance detection as a three-way classification task (Believer, Denier, and Inconclusive). We operationalize stance attribution through a scalable self-training pipeline based on Llama 3.1, using Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) and hybrid instance selection to expand the training set with high-confidence pseudo-labeled examples while preserving class diversity. This approach improves coverage and class balance for minority and rhetorically complex classes, enabling large-scale stance attribution without extensive manual annotation. Our results show that polarisation is marked by interactional asymmetries: denialist comments are less prevalent, but they are associated with a comparatively higher share of cross-stance contestation, while pro-consensus discourse is more strongly reinforced within stance-homogeneous threads.

QMSum provides no scorer, making query-focused meeting summarization results difficult to compare. We rescore or generate 15 systems under one implementation. Through a common inference port, a released 406M Fusion-in-Decoder specialist loses 6.30 ROUGE-1 when moved from capped long input to 2,000-word retrieved spans. Fine-tuning it on this span regime recovers the loss. On test it scores 36.33 ROUGE-1 versus 35.41 for our 1.2B system; the meeting-cluster 95% interval for the difference is [-0.27, +2.22], so QMSum does not statistically separate them. The smaller system uses about one-third as many total parameters and less than half the peak inference memory. Within the fixed 1.2B base, span-regime fine-tuning adds 5.29 [+4.02, +6.56], while replacing the first 4,500 transcript words with 2,000 retrieved words adds 1.55 on test and 0.29 on validation. Separately, under one concise prompt and reference-overlap scorer, a released 406M specialist exceeds five proprietary hosted models by at least 6.2 ROUGE-1, but output length and absent human or factuality evaluation limit this ordering. Conclusions are limited to QMSum and automatic metrics.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to generate user-specific text with high stylistic fidelity. However, the personal data that enables such personalization frequently embeds demographic, cultural, and stylistic markers that raises concerns about stylometric re- identification. This paper investigates whether reducing identifiable stylistic signals affects personalization in text generation by LLMs. We introduce a controlled framework to isolate stylometric signals in LLM personalization using the LaMP-7 Twitter benchmark. Experiments on 250 sampled users compare two settings: paraphrasing conditioned on the original profile and paraphrasing conditioned on an anonymized converted profile in which demographic identifiers, cultural references, personal details, and informal linguistic cues have been systematically neutralized. Outputs are assessed by two independent LLM judges and a complementary human evaluation. Our pairwise evaluation shows that outputs conditioned on original profiles are nearly indistinguishable from human-authored ground truth, indicating that modern LLMs can closely reproduce an author's writing style with sufficient fidelity. In contrast, preference for model outputs with anonymized profiles drops to 13.0% on average, while semantic context preservation remains high at 94.8%. A study with human evaluators confirms the same pattern. These findings reveal a clear privacy-personalization trade-off and highlight the need for privacy-aware personalization methods that retain meaning while suppressing identifying stylistic signals.

Large language model agents are increasingly capable of conducting research autonomously, producing research documents alongside the code and experiments that ostensibly support them. Yet whether the reported findings are consistently supported by corresponding implementations and execution evidence remains largely unexplored: existing review practices primarily assess textual quality and cannot reliably identify inconsistencies such as hard-coded metrics, unimplemented methods, or unsupported experimental results. We present ReAgent, an automated auditing framework for assessing the consistency between agent-generated research documents and their associated repositories. ReAgent constructs structured representations of scientific claims from research documents and uses them to guide repository analysis and evidence collection. Static auditing examines whether claimed methodologies, implementations, and experimental configurations are consistently reflected in the repository, while dynamic auditing executes relevant experiments and collects execution evidence to assess empirical findings. By combining static analysis with dynamic evidence, ReAgent identifies inconsistencies that may remain hidden under either perspective alone, such as experiments that reproduce reported numbers while deviating from the claimed methodology. The collected evidence and audit decisions are organized into a structured repository-level audit report, enabling transparent evidence traceability. We evaluate ReAgent on a manually curated benchmark of agent-generated research document–repository pairs and compare it against representative static and reproduction-based baselines. Experimental results demonstrate that ReAgent effectively identifies inconsistencies between reported research findings and their supporting repository evidence.

Touchpoint selection in conversion attribution, namely identifying meaningful touchpoints contributing to conversions, is essential for e-commerce recommendation and online advertising. Current selection methods rely heavily on collaborative-filtering-based heuristics, which fail to align with user-perceived semantic intent. Through human annotation, we reveal a significant semantic gap: many implicitly-related, semantically relevant touchpoints remain undetected by existing rules. Therefore, we systematically evaluate the capability of Large Language Models (LLMs) in identifying these hidden associations. Our evaluation shows that while LLMs effectively uncover a substantial portion of implicitly-related touchpoints, significant room for improvement remains in their selection performance. Furthermore, we analyze the impact of different prompting strategies and foundation model choices on identification performance, providing valuable insights into their reasoning patterns and effectiveness. These insights offer a new roadmap for transitioning conversion attribution from mechanical rule-matching to human-aligned semantic reasoning. Moreover, we leverage the LLM-attributed conversion labels for enhancing industrial CVR model training and achieve significant offline performance gains, showing the potential of LLMs in conversion attribution.

Fallacies are arguments that employ invalid reasoning, making their automatic detection critical in sensitive contexts such as high-stakes political debates, where public opinion is shaped. Spotting a fallacious argument requires contextual knowledge beyond its pure surface text. This entails world knowledge pertaining to the subject matter under discussion, as well as knowledge of the relationships that exist between arguments within the argumentative discourse. Prior work on fallacy analysis has shown that argumentative discourse structure can beneficially improve classification performance. However, such structure is typically encoded only as static classifier features, limiting its flexibility. Building on this intuition while addressing this limitation, we introduce a guided retrieval-augmented methodology for fallacy detection and classification that leverages argumentative relations of support and attack to dynamically steer the extraction of relevant documents. We evaluate our approach on the ElecDeb60to20 benchmark across 42 retrieval configurations and 14 models, performing retrieval over a 15GB knowledge base of collected political-related documents. Our approach improves macro-F1 up to 0.864 for fallacy detection and up to 0.725 for classification over non-retrieval baselines. These results show that incorporating external knowledge significantly enhances fallacy detection and classification when retrieval is argumentatively guided.

An aggregation pass gives a language model two things: candidate solutions and another chance to answer. We ask whether the candidates improve that attempt, and whether aggregation improves on selecting an existing answer. Our candidate-free control asks the same model to solve the problem again from the problem alone, using the same decoding settings and maximum output-token allowance. On AIME-2025 and HMMT-2025, Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 reaches 15.5% accuracy when all four candidates are wrong, compared with 27.7% for a fresh solve. When at least two candidates are correct, the ordering reverses: 88.7% for aggregation versus 59.7% for a fresh solve. With exactly one correct candidate, the benefit remains unresolved under the specified test. Yet plurality voting reaches 96.0% in the multiple-correct regime without another model generation; its accuracy difference from aggregation is inconclusive (raw $p = 0.180$). The all-wrong accuracy loss and multiple-correct gain survive a statistical correction for adding the second benchmark, developed after data collection, and persist when fresh responses are scored by their final answers. These findings concern one 4B model, two mathematics benchmarks, and a single aggregation pass over candidates truncated at their first answer. All-wrong recovery can arise from solving the problem afresh. The fresh-solve control tests whether candidates improve accuracy. Comparing with selection asks whether the additional generation improves on an existing answer.

Figurative language is deeply culturally embedded; fluent use requires not just linguistic competence but cultural immersion. We ask whether LLMs can learn this link: does fine-tuning on cultural data improve figurative language understanding, and vice versa? We conduct a systematic study across four models (ALLaM-7B, Fanar-1-9B, Qwen3-8B, Llama-3.1-8B) and six Arabic datasets spanning cultural commonsense, proverbs, and poetry across diverse dialects and regions. Fine-tuning on poetry improves idiom comprehension (+2.33%, p<0.05), a gain our ArabicMMLU control does not reproduce, indicating that it stems from figurative content rather than Arabic language adaptation and pointing to a sensitivity to non-literal meaning that transfers across figurative types. Cultural fine-tuning, by contrast, lowers proverb-interpretation accuracy in both Arabic-centric models. Transfer between the two domains is otherwise indistinguishable from noise, with Arabic models frequently regressing after fine-tuning, suggesting prior saturation of relevant knowledge, while multilingual models show greater adaptation headroom. Error analysis further reveals that fine-tuning reinforces experiential cultural knowledge while destabilizing historically grounded factual knowledge. Our findings suggest that the relationship between culture and figurative language, though conceptually natural, is not straightforwardly captured through fine-tuning alone.

Vision-language models (VLMs) have demonstrated remarkable zero-shot capabilities yet remain sensitive to real-world distribution shifts during inference. Although significant efforts are devoted to adapting VLMs at test time, they rely heavily on noisy pseudo-labels predicted directly from raw embedding similarities during inference, which are unreliable under distribution shift and mislead the adaptation. To avoid noise amplification, existing works craft coarse-grained surrogate objectives during adaptation, which fail to explicitly model sample-level relationships across different modalities, creating objective mismatch with inference, thus leading to marginal performance improvement. In this work, we aim to bridge the detached objectives of inference and adaptation for VLMs, and propose a principled VLM TTA method called \algname. For VLM inference, we formulate the zero-shot image classification task as a cross-modal alignment problem encoded via a Wasserstein OT formulation, providing robust pseudo-labels at the sample-level to effectively adapt VLMs. For VLM adaptation, we adopt a soft-label InfoNCE loss to adapt VLMs based on the OT-induced pseudo-labels, leveraging fine-grained supervisions to explicitly model relationships of individual image-text pairs via contrastive learning, which empowers accurate inference at the same granularity. Moreover, we theoretically reveal that the InfoNCE loss can be neatly reformulated as a Wasserstein OT formulation, thereby unifying the objectives of the inference and adaptation of VLMs to achieve their mutual benefits. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of our methods, outperforming the best-performing methods by up to 7% with state-of-the-art efficiency.

Autonomous scientific agents now increasingly propose ideas, write code, run experiments, analyze results, and even draft papers. Observe and audit those agents are necessary but logging every model call is not enough, scientists also need to inspect the artifacts and claims that the systems produced and their relations. This is driven by the fact that failures in scientific agent systems are often distributed across several objects. A manuscript claim may cite the wrong evidence, a search process may select a degenerate candidate, a laboratory novelty claim may depend on an unstated rule, or a multi-agent plan may change without a visible trigger. Existing tracing, experiment tracking, and archival provenance tools are valuable, but their native objects do not make these scientific audit relations first-class. We argue that autonomous scientific systems should emit portable, claim-aware artifact lineage as a minimum audit layer. We propose a compact observability profile organized around individuals, operators, fitness records, lineage, archives, runs, streams, and steering commands. In this profile, scientific claims are ordinary individuals with explicit evidence bindings and verification records. The profile is intended as a semantic layer that complements current telemetry and provenance standards. Execution details can remain in OpenTelemetry. Final packages can export to PROV-O or RO-Crate standards.

Current evaluation of computer-use agents is split between long-horizon workflow benchmarks and atomic GUI-grounding tests. This leaves an under-instrumented middle layer: realistic component-centered interactions (e.g., toggle a button set) that are short enough to diagnose and rich enough to capture the burdens of modern interfaces. We present ComponentBench, a benchmark and diagnostic pipeline for component-level evaluation of computer-use agents on modern web UIs. ComponentBench is organized around a library-agnostic ontology of 97 canonical UI components instantiated as 2,910 programmatically verified tasks across widely used component libraries, paired with cleaned human reference trajectories that enable evaluation of both task success and interaction efficiency. Beyond task collection, we introduce a scalable pipeline for auditing realized structural difficulty after implementation and synthesizing structured failure analyses across tasks and component families. Evaluating seven models – GPT-5.4, Gemini 3 Flash, GPT-5.4 mini, GPT-5 mini, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite, Qwen3-VL-235B, and UI-TARS-1.5-7B – across four observation and action spaces, we show that these design choices critically impact performance. Within a single shared harness, changing only the observation and action space shifts task success by more than 30% for the same model: GPT-5 mini falls from 83.1% with accessibility-tree observations to 48.9% with coordinate-only Pixel control. Moreover, even the fastest configuration takes 3.7x as long as the matched human reference, and spatial manipulations that are trivial for humans continue to challenge current agents.

An increasing number of scholars use AI to measure variables they subsequently include in downstream analyses. Although AI-measured variables are often analyzed as if observed without error, ignoring prediction errors in automated measurement leads to substantial bias and invalid confidence intervals in downstream analyses, even if AI measurement accuracy is high, e.g., above 90%. Existing solutions, such as design-based supervised learning and prediction-powered inference, combine error-prone AI-based measurements with gold-standard labels, which may be costly and difficult to obtain in some application areas. In this paper, we propose debiased inference with multiple imperfect measurements (DMM), a framework that combines multiple error-prone AI measurements to enable valid downstream inference without gold-standard labels. Building on the established results on CP decomposition, DMM assumes that these measurements are independent conditional on the latent true label and observed unit-level features, such as text features represented by embeddings. This framework allows for unknown misclassification rates to vary across annotation methods (e.g., large language models) and across units of annotation (e.g., texts). Under this assumption, we use semiparametric inference theory to prove that the DMM estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal, enabling valid inference for a wide range of downstream statistical analyses common in the social sciences. Our simulation results show that DMM yields valid inference and that adding accurate, though imperfect, measurements can improve efficiency. Focusing on common applications of large language model annotations, we also develop diagnostics to assess the conditional independence assumption.

Background. Advances in agentic systems are simultaneously, and rapidly, saturating benchmarks. Despite this often discussed phenomena, benchmark scores remain difficult to interpret due to the lack of control and characterization of task difficulty. More specifically, we currently have little understanding of what makes one task harder than another, and to what extent task difficulty is predictable from static task properties. Aims. We propose a measurement framework to investigate and systematically quantify what structural properties of software tasks correspond to agent success rates for issue resolution tasks. Method. We conducted a large scale empirical study on CoderForge-Preview, the largest open dataset of coding agent trajectories to date, by extracting features across task patch, repository and prompt. We evaluated the predictive power of each feature against task outcomes using ensemble methods, SHAP attribution, and effect size analysis. Results We found that task difficulty is substantially predictable from static features (AU C = 0.863) and is largely driven by patch fragmentation and repository scale. Prompt linguistic features become visible among top contributors for tasks in the mid-band, revealing a layered structure of difficulty. Conclusion. The difficulty of an issue resolution task is encoded in its structure. This enables static, pre-hoc difficulty estimation and lays the groundwork for difficulty-controlled benchmark construction for evaluation of agents.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are being increasingly used in everyday applications. A major challenge in the context of LLMs or Artificial Intelligence (AI) in general is to ensure privacy when using them, meaning that personally identifiable information (PII) is removed from any text that enters an LLM. These challenges have become more urgent with novel EU legislation. Uncertainty around LLM usage with respect to privacy concerns in EU countries can be a major blocker for the speed of innovation and transfer from research to applications. Here we present Redakto, a tool that can be used for anonymizing text prior to feeding it to an LLM or other downstream text processing. We provide state-of-the-art functionalities for both redaction of PII but also when used for pseudonymization. These functionalities are exposed such that they can easily be used by end-users, through the Redakto web application, and by developers and researchers, via REST APIs and model context protocol (MCP) hooks. The implementation is fully open source, requires modest compute resources, and can be readily deployed on local hardware. In contrast to prior work and in order to better assess the quality of the anonymized texts, we conduct extensive empirical evaluations on textual data from legal and medical domain with respect to both privacy and utility of the redacted texts. Our empirical results demonstrate that the texts anonymized with different redaction strategies achieve utility scores on par with the original texts, suggesting that anonymization with Redakto can be used for LLM tasks without substantial negative impact for the tasks we explored.

Recurrent-depth reasoners aim to solve harder problems by iterating their update longer at test time, but additional iterations can improve, preserve, or degrade an answer. We show that a measurable property of the trained operator, its finite-time dynamical regime (estimated as settling, marginal, or drifting), indicates which of these occurs. We give a sufficient condition for depth-safety: once an operator's per-step displacement is small relative to the decoder margin, the decoded answer cannot change under further iterations. Empirically, on algorithmic tasks trained from $800$ unaugmented examples per difficulty tier, settling operators do not degrade with added depth, and on some tasks convert it into higher accuracy on harder unseen instances (Sudoku, $0.19$ to $0.34$ past the training horizon). A single terminal fixed-point objective moves the regime and the depth behavior together: removing it induces drift and removes the gains, and adding it to a generic recurrence yields depth-safe extrapolation on carry propagation. We give four operational criteria for useful test-time depth, use them to catalogue failure modes, and, as a consistency check, apply the same measurements to Huginn-3.5B, which falls in the non-settling family.

Small NLP models, especially BERT-family encoders, remain important in industrial workloads such as classification, ranking, and retrieval even in the era of large language models. On server CPUs, INT8 quantization offers an attractive latency-throughput-cost trade-off, but users increasingly expect such acceleration to be available directly in the native PyTorch stack. We integrate SmoothQuant into TorchAO and optimize the resulting inference path for Intel Xeon CPUs through graph-level fusion in TorchInductor and efficient INT8 GEMM kernel selection across oneDNN-, AVX512_VNNI-, and AMX-based implementations. Across BERT, DistilBERT, and XLM-RoBERTa benchmarks, the approach delivers up to 5.8x end-to-end throughput speedup with negligible—and in some cases no measurable—accuracy loss relative to the FP32 baseline. We also validated our work by detailed performance analysis with roofline models. The implementation has been upstreamed to PyTorch and TorchAO, enabling out-of-the-box deployment with native PyTorch tooling