llm - 2025_10
Navigation
- Part 1
- Part 2
- Part 3
- Part 4
- Part 5
- Part 6
- Part 7
- Part 8
- Part 9
- Part 10
- Part 11
- Part 12
- Part 13
- Part 14
- Part 15
- Part 16
- Part 17
- Part 18
Papers
Diagrams play a central role in research papers for conveying ideas, yet they are often notoriously complex and labor-intensive to create. Although diagrams are presented as images, standard image generative models struggle to produce clear diagrams with well-defined structure. We argue that a promising direction is to generate demonstration diagrams directly in textual form as SVGs, which can leverage recent advances in large language models (LLMs). However, due to the complexity of components and the multimodal nature of diagrams, sufficiently discriminative and explainable metrics for evaluating the quality of LLM-generated diagrams remain lacking. In this paper, we propose DiagramEval, a novel evaluation metric designed to assess demonstration diagrams generated by LLMs. Specifically, DiagramEval conceptualizes diagrams as graphs, treating text elements as nodes and their connections as directed edges, and evaluates diagram quality using two new groups of metrics: node alignment and path alignment. For the first time, we effectively evaluate diagrams produced by state-of-the-art LLMs on recent research literature, quantitatively demonstrating the validity of our metrics. Furthermore, we show how the enhanced explainability of our proposed metrics offers valuable insights into the characteristics of LLM-generated diagrams. Code: https://github.com/ulab-uiuc/diagram-eval.
Unlearning in large language models (LLMs) is crucial for managing sensitive data and correcting misinformation, yet evaluating its effectiveness remains an open problem. We investigate whether persuasive prompting can recall factual knowledge from deliberately unlearned LLMs across models ranging from 2.7B to 13B parameters (OPT-2.7B, LLaMA-2-7B, LLaMA-3.1-8B, LLaMA-2-13B). Drawing from ACT-R and Hebbian theory (spreading activation theories), as well as communication principles, we introduce Stimulus-Knowledge Entanglement-Behavior Framework (SKeB), which models information entanglement via domain graphs and tests whether factual recall in unlearned models is correlated with persuasive framing. We develop entanglement metrics to quantify knowledge activation patterns and evaluate factuality, non-factuality, and hallucination in outputs. Our results show persuasive prompts substantially enhance factual knowledge recall (14.8% baseline vs. 24.5% with authority framing), with effectiveness inversely correlated to model size (128% recovery in 2.7B vs. 15% in 13B). SKeB provides a foundation for assessing unlearning completeness, robustness, and overall behavior in LLMs.
In-context learning (ICL) enables large language models (LLMs) to perform new tasks using only a few demonstrations. However, in Named Entity Recognition (NER), existing ICL methods typically rely on task-agnostic semantic similarity for demonstration retrieval, which often yields less relevant examples and leads to inferior results. We introduce DEER, a training-free ICL approach that enables LLMs to make more informed entity predictions through the use of label-grounded statistics. DEER leverages token-level statistics from training labels to identify tokens most informative for entity recognition, enabling entity-focused demonstrations. It further uses these statistics to detect and refine error-prone tokens through a targeted reflection step. Evaluated on five NER datasets across four LLMs, DEER consistently outperforms existing ICL methods and achieves performance comparable to supervised fine-tuning. Further analyses demonstrate that DEER improves example retrieval, remains effective on both seen and unseen entities, and exhibits strong robustness in low-resource settings.
Interpreting LLMs as Credit Risk Classifiers: Do Their Feature Explanations Align with Classical ML?
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly explored as flexible alternatives to classical machine learning models for classification tasks through zero-shot prompting. However, their suitability for structured tabular data remains underexplored, especially in high-stakes financial applications such as financial risk assessment. This study conducts a systematic comparison between zero-shot LLM-based classifiers and LightGBM, a state-of-the-art gradient-boosting model, on a real-world loan default prediction task. We evaluate their predictive performance, analyze feature attributions using SHAP, and assess the reliability of LLM-generated self-explanations. While LLMs are able to identify key financial risk indicators, their feature importance rankings diverge notably from LightGBM, and their self-explanations often fail to align with empirical SHAP attributions. These findings highlight the limitations of LLMs as standalone models for structured financial risk prediction and raise concerns about the trustworthiness of their self-generated explanations. Our results underscore the need for explainability audits, baseline comparisons with interpretable models, and human-in-the-loop oversight when deploying LLMs in risk-sensitive financial environments.
Programming assistants powered by large language models (LLMs) have become widely available, with conversational assistants like ChatGPT proving particularly accessible to less experienced programmers. However, the varied capabilities of these tools across model versions and the mixed availability of extensions that enable web search, code execution, or retrieval-augmented generation create opportunities for user misconceptions about what systems can and cannot do. Such misconceptions may lead to over-reliance, unproductive practices, or insufficient quality control in LLM-assisted programming. Here, we aim to characterize misconceptions that users of conversational LLM-based assistants may have in programming contexts. Using a two-phase approach, we first brainstorm and catalog user misconceptions that may occur, and then conduct a qualitative analysis to examine whether these conceptual issues surface in naturalistic Python-programming conversations with an LLM-based chatbot drawn from an openly available dataset. Indeed, we see evidence that some users have misplaced expectations about the availability of LLM-based chatbot features like web access, code execution, or non-text output generation. We also see potential evidence for deeper conceptual issues around the scope of information required to debug, validate, and optimize programs. Our findings reinforce the need for designing LLM-based tools that more clearly communicate their programming capabilities to users.
The complexity and interconnectivity of entities involved in money laundering demand investigative reasoning over graph-structured data. This paper explores the use of large language models (LLMs) as reasoning engines over localized subgraphs extracted from a financial knowledge graph. We propose a lightweight pipeline that retrieves k-hop neighborhoods around entities of interest, serializes them into structured text, and prompts an LLM via few-shot in-context learning to assess suspiciousness and generate justifications. Using synthetic anti-money laundering (AML) scenarios that reflect common laundering behaviors, we show that LLMs can emulate analyst-style logic, highlight red flags, and provide coherent explanations. While this study is exploratory, it illustrates the potential of LLM-based graph reasoning in AML and lays groundwork for explainable, language-driven financial crime analytics.
Traditional LLM alignment methods are vulnerable to heterogeneity in human preferences. Fitting a na\"ive probabilistic model to pairwise comparison data (say over prompt-completion pairs) yields an inconsistent estimate of the population-average utility -a canonical measure of social welfare. We propose a new method, dubbed the sign estimator, that provides a simple, provably consistent, and efficient estimator by replacing cross-entropy with binary classification loss in the aggregation step. This simple modification recovers consistent ordinal alignment under mild assumptions and achieves the first polynomial finite-sample error bounds in this setting. In realistic simulations of LLM alignment using digital twins, the sign estimator substantially reduces preference distortion over a panel of simulated personas, cutting (angular) estimation error by nearly 35% and decreasing disagreement with true population preferences from 12% to 8% compared to standard RLHF. Our method also compares favorably to panel data heuristics that explicitly model user heterogeneity and require tracking individual-level preference data-all while maintaining the implementation simplicity of existing LLM alignment pipelines.
While Large Language Model (LLM) agents are often approached from the angle of action planning/generation to accomplish a goal (e.g., given by language descriptions), their abilities to collaborate with each other to achieve a joint goal are not well explored. To address this limitation, this paper studies LLM agents in task collaboration, particularly under the condition of information asymmetry, where agents have disparities in their knowledge and skills and need to work together to complete a shared task. We extend Einstein Puzzles, a classical symbolic puzzle, to a table-top game. In this game, two LLM agents must reason, communicate, and act to satisfy spatial and relational constraints required to solve the puzzle. We apply a fine-tuning-plus-verifier framework in which LLM agents are equipped with various communication strategies and verification signals from the environment. Empirical results highlight the critical importance of aligned communication, especially when agents possess both information-seeking and -providing capabilities. Interestingly, agents without communication can still achieve high task performance; however, further analysis reveals a lack of true rule understanding and lower trust from human evaluators. Instead, by integrating an environment-based verifier, we enhance agents' ability to comprehend task rules and complete tasks, promoting both safer and more interpretable collaboration in AI systems. https://github.com/Roihn/EinsteinPuzzles
Large language models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated strong potential for sequential recommendation. However, current LLM-based approaches face critical limitations in modeling users' long-term and diverse interests. First, due to inference latency and feature fetching bandwidth constraints, existing methods typically truncate user behavior sequences to include only the most recent interactions, resulting in the loss of valuable long-range preference signals. Second, most current methods rely on next-item prediction with a single predicted embedding, overlooking the multifaceted nature of user interests and limiting recommendation diversity. To address these challenges, we propose HyMiRec, a hybrid multi-interest sequential recommendation framework, which leverages a lightweight recommender to extracts coarse interest embeddings from long user sequences and an LLM-based recommender to captures refined interest embeddings. To alleviate the overhead of fetching features, we introduce a residual codebook based on cosine similarity, enabling efficient compression and reuse of user history embeddings. To model the diverse preferences of users, we design a disentangled multi-interest learning module, which leverages multiple interest queries to learn disentangles multiple interest signals adaptively, allowing the model to capture different facets of user intent. Extensive experiments are conducted on both benchmark datasets and a collected industrial dataset, demonstrating our effectiveness over existing state-of-the-art methods. Furthermore, online A/B testing shows that HyMiRec brings consistent improvements in real-world recommendation systems. Code is available at https://github.com/FireRedTeam/FireRedSeqRec.
The diagnosis of most mental disorders, including psychiatric evaluations, primarily depends on dialogues between psychiatrists and patients. This subjective process can lead to variability in diagnoses across clinicians and patients, resulting in inconsistencies and challenges in achieving reliable outcomes. To address these issues and standardize psychiatric diagnoses, we propose a Fine-Tuned Large Language Model (LLM) Consortium and OpenAI-gpt-oss Reasoning LLM-enabled Decision Support System for the clinical diagnosis of mental disorders. Our approach leverages fine-tuned LLMs trained on conversational datasets involving psychiatrist-patient interactions focused on mental health conditions (e.g., depression). The diagnostic predictions from individual models are aggregated through a consensus-based decision-making process, refined by the OpenAI-gpt-oss reasoning LLM. We propose a novel method for deploying LLM agents that orchestrate communication between the LLM consortium and the reasoning LLM, ensuring transparency, reliability, and responsible AI across the entire diagnostic workflow. Experimental results demonstrate the transformative potential of combining fine-tuned LLMs with a reasoning model to create a robust and highly accurate diagnostic system for mental health assessment. A prototype of the proposed platform, integrating three fine-tuned LLMs with the OpenAI-gpt-oss reasoning LLM, was developed in collaboration with the U.S. Army Medical Research Team in Norfolk, Virginia, USA. To the best of our knowledge, this work represents the first application of a fine-tuned LLM consortium integrated with a reasoning LLM for clinical mental health diagnosis paving the way for next-generation AI-powered eHealth systems aimed at standardizing psychiatric diagnoses.
Recommender systems filter contents/items valuable to users by inferring preferences from user features and historical behaviors. Mainstream approaches follow the learning-to-rank paradigm, which focus on discovering and modeling item topics (e.g., categories), and capturing user preferences on these topics based on historical interactions. However, this paradigm often neglects the modeling of user characteristics and their social roles, which are logical confounders influencing the correlated interest and user preference transition. To bridge this gap, we introduce the user role identification task and the behavioral logic modeling task that aim to explicitly model user roles and learn the logical relations between item topics and user social roles. We show that it is possible to explicitly solve these tasks through an efficient integration framework of Large Language Model (LLM) and recommendation systems, for which we propose TagCF. On the one hand, TagCF exploits the (Multi-modal) LLM's world knowledge and logic inference ability to extract realistic tag-based virtual logic graphs that reveal dynamic and expressive knowledge of users, refining our understanding of user behaviors. On the other hand, TagCF presents empirically effective integration modules that take advantage of the extracted tag-logic information, augmenting the recommendation performance. We conduct both online experiments and offline experiments with industrial and public datasets as verification of TagCF's effectiveness, and we empirically show that the user role modeling strategy is potentially a better choice than the modeling of item topics. Additionally, we provide evidence that the extracted logic graphs are empirically a general and transferable knowledge that can benefit a wide range of recommendation tasks. Our code is available in https://github.com/Code2Q/TagCF.
We propose Collab-REC, a multi-agent framework designed to counteract popularity bias and enhance diversity in tourism recommendations. In our setting, three LLM-based agents -- Personalization, Popularity, and Sustainability generate city suggestions from complementary perspectives. A non-LLM moderator then merges and refines these proposals via multi-round negotiation, ensuring each agent's viewpoint is incorporated while penalizing spurious or repeated responses. Experiments on European city queries show that Collab-REC improves diversity and overall relevance compared to a single-agent baseline, surfacing lesser-visited locales that often remain overlooked. This balanced, context-aware approach addresses over-tourism and better aligns with constraints provided by the user, highlighting the promise of multi-stakeholder collaboration in LLM-driven recommender systems.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are exhibiting emergent human-like abilities and are increasingly envisioned as the foundation for simulating an individual's communication style, behavioral tendencies, and personality traits. However, current evaluations of LLM-based persona simulation remain limited: most rely on synthetic dialogues, lack systematic frameworks, and lack analysis of the capability requirement. To address these limitations, we introduce TwinVoice, a comprehensive benchmark for assessing persona simulation across diverse real-world contexts. TwinVoice encompasses three dimensions: Social Persona (public social interactions), Interpersonal Persona (private dialogues), and Narrative Persona (role-based expression). It further decomposes the evaluation of LLM performance into six fundamental capabilities, including opinion consistency, memory recall, logical reasoning, lexical fidelity, persona tone, and syntactic style. Experimental results reveal that while advanced models achieve moderate accuracy in persona simulation, they still fall short of capabilities such as syntactic style and memory recall. Consequently, the average performance achieved by LLMs remains considerably below the human baseline.
Moral judgment is integral to large language models' (LLMs) social reasoning. As multi-agent systems gain prominence, it becomes crucial to understand how LLMs function when collaborating compared to operating as individual agents. In human moral judgment, group deliberation leads to a Utilitarian Boost: a tendency to endorse norm violations that inflict harm but maximize benefits for the greatest number of people. We study whether a similar dynamic emerges in multi-agent LLM systems. We test six models on well-established sets of moral dilemmas across two conditions: (1) Solo, where models reason independently, and (2) Group, where they engage in multi-turn discussions in pairs or triads. In personal dilemmas, where agents decide whether to directly harm an individual for the benefit of others, all models rated moral violations as more acceptable when part of a group, demonstrating a Utilitarian Boost similar to that observed in humans. However, the mechanism for the Boost in LLMs differed: While humans in groups become more utilitarian due to heightened sensitivity to decision outcomes, LLM groups showed either reduced sensitivity to norms or enhanced impartiality. We report model differences in when and how strongly the Boost manifests. We also discuss prompt and agent compositions that enhance or mitigate the effect. We end with a discussion of the implications for AI alignment, multi-agent design, and artificial moral reasoning. Code available at: https://github.com/baltaci-r/MoralAgents
Large Language Models have gained remarkable interest in industry and academia. The increasing interest in LLMs in academia is also reflected in the number of publications on this topic over the last years. For instance, alone 78 of the around 425 publications at ICSE 2024 performed experiments with LLMs. Conducting empirical studies with LLMs remains challenging and raises questions on how to achieve reproducible results, for both other researchers and practitioners. One important step towards excelling in empirical research on LLMs and their application is to first understand to what extent current research results are eventually reproducible and what factors may impede reproducibility. This investigation is within the scope of our work. We contribute an analysis of the reproducibility of LLM-centric studies, provide insights into the factors impeding reproducibility, and discuss suggestions on how to improve the current state. In particular, we studied the 86 articles describing LLM-centric studies, published at ICSE 2024 and ASE 2024. Of the 86 articles, 18 provided research artefacts and used OpenAI models. We attempted to replicate those 18 studies. Of the 18 studies, only five were fit for reproduction. For none of the five studies, we were able to fully reproduce the results. Two studies seemed to be partially reproducible, and three studies did not seem to be reproducible. Our results highlight not only the need for stricter research artefact evaluations but also for more robust study designs to ensure the reproducible value of future publications.
Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate human-like disinformation, yet their ability to personalise such content across languages and demographics remains underexplored. This study presents the first large-scale, multilingual analysis of persona-targeted disinformation generation by LLMs. Employing a red teaming methodology, we prompt eight state-of-the-art LLMs with 324 false narratives and 150 demographic personas (combinations of country, generation, and political orientation) across four languages--English, Russian, Portuguese, and Hindi--resulting in AI-TRAITS, a comprehensive dataset of 1.6 million personalised disinformation texts. Results show that the use of even simple personalisation prompts significantly increases the likelihood of jailbreaks across all studied LLMs, up to 10 percentage points, and alters linguistic and rhetorical patterns that enhance narrative persuasiveness. Models such as Grok and GPT exhibited jailbreak rates and personalisation scores both exceeding 85%. These insights expose critical vulnerabilities in current state-of-the-art LLMs and offer a foundation for improving safety alignment and detection strategies in multilingual and cross-demographic contexts.
In the rapidly expanding landscape of Large Language Model (LLM) applications, real-time output streaming has become the dominant interaction paradigm. While this enhances user experience, recent research reveals that it exposes a non-trivial attack surface through network side-channels. Adversaries can exploit patterns in encrypted traffic to infer sensitive information and reconstruct private conversations. In response, LLM providers and third-party services are deploying defenses such as traffic padding and obfuscation to mitigate these vulnerabilities. This paper starts by presenting a systematic analysis of contemporary side-channel defenses in mainstream LLM applications, with a focus on services from vendors like OpenAI and DeepSeek. We identify and examine seven representative deployment scenarios, each incorporating active/passive mitigation techniques. Despite these enhanced security measures, our investigation uncovers significant residual information that remains vulnerable to leakage within the network traffic. Building on this discovery, we introduce NetEcho, a novel, LLM-based framework that comprehensively unleashes the network side-channel risks of today's LLM applications. NetEcho is designed to recover entire conversations -- including both user prompts and LLM responses -- directly from encrypted network traffic. It features a deliberate design that ensures high-fidelity text recovery, transferability across different deployment scenarios, and moderate operational cost. In our evaluations on medical and legal applications built upon leading models like DeepSeek-v3 and GPT-4o, NetEcho can recover avg $\sim$70\% information of each conversation, demonstrating a critical limitation in current defense mechanisms. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings and proposing future directions for augmenting network traffic security.
Large Language Models (LLMs) excel as passive responders, but teaching them to be proactive, goal-oriented partners, a critical capability in high-stakes domains, remains a major challenge. Current paradigms either myopically optimize single-turn attributes or rely on brittle, high-cost user simulators, creating a persistent ``reality gap''. To bridge this gap, we introduce \texttt{Learn-to-Ask}, a general, simulator-free framework for learning and deploying proactive dialogue agents \textit{directly from offline expert data}, bypassing the need to model complex user dynamics. Our key insight is to reframe the offline policy learning problem by leveraging the \textbf{observed future} of each expert trajectory. This allows us to infer a dense, turn-by-turn reward signal grounded in the expert's revealed strategy, decomposing the intractable long-horizon problem into a series of supervised learning tasks, and training a policy to output a structured \texttt{(action, state_assessment)} tuple, governing both \textbf{what to ask} and, crucially, \textbf{when to stop}. To ensure reward fidelity, our Automated Grader Calibration pipeline systematically purges noise from the LLM-based reward model with minimal human supervision. Empirically, we demonstrate the efficacy of \texttt{Learn-to-Ask} in a real-world medical dataset, using LLMs of varying sizes up to 32B. Our approach culminates in the successful deployment of LLMs into a live, large-scale online AI service. In rigorous in-house evaluations, our model was launched and achieved performance even superior to human experts, proving our framework's ability to translate offline data into tangible, real-world impact. We hope this work provides a practical and economically viable blueprint for transforming passive LLMs into proactive, goal-oriented LLM applications.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly utilized by researchers across a wide range of domains, and qualitative social science is no exception; however, this adoption faces persistent challenges, including interpretive bias, low reliability, and weak auditability. We introduce a framework that situates LLM usage along two dimensions, interpretive depth and autonomy, thereby offering a straightforward way to classify LLM applications in qualitative research and to derive practical design recommendations. We present the state of the literature with respect to these two dimensions, based on all published social science papers available on Web of Science that use LLMs as a tool and not strictly as the subject of study. Rather than granting models expansive freedom, our approach encourages researchers to decompose tasks into manageable segments, much as they would when delegating work to capable undergraduate research assistants. By maintaining low levels of autonomy and selectively increasing interpretive depth only where warranted and under supervision, one can plausibly reap the benefits of LLMs while preserving transparency and reliability.
The rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs) is positioning language at the core of human-computer interaction (HCI). We argue that advancing HCI requires attention to the linguistic foundations of interaction, particularly implicature (meaning conveyed beyond explicit statements through shared context) which is essential for human-AI (HAI) alignment. This study examines LLMs' ability to infer user intent embedded in context-driven prompts and whether understanding implicature improves response generation. Results show that larger models approximate human interpretations more closely, while smaller models struggle with implicature inference. Furthermore, implicature-based prompts significantly enhance the perceived relevance and quality of responses across models, with notable gains in smaller models. Overall, 67.6% of participants preferred responses with implicature-embedded prompts to literal ones, highlighting a clear preference for contextually nuanced communication. Our work contributes to understanding how linguistic theory can be used to address the alignment problem by making HAI interaction more natural and contextually grounded.
Passive fatigue during conditional automated driving can compromise driver readiness and safety. This paper presents findings from a test-track study with 40 participants in a real-world rural automated driving scenario. In this scenario, a Large Language Model (LLM) based conversational agent (CA) was designed to check in with drivers and re-engage them with their surroundings. Drawing on in-car video recordings, sleepiness ratings and interviews, we analysed how drivers interacted with the agent and how these interactions shaped alertness. Users found the CA helpful for supporting vigilance during passive fatigue. Thematic analysis of acceptability further revealed three user preference profiles that implicate future intention to use CAs. Positioning empirically observed profiles within existing CA archetype frameworks highlights the need for adaptive design sensitive to diverse user groups. This work underscores the potential of CAs as proactive Human-Machine Interface (HMI) interventions, demonstrating how natural language can support context-aware interaction during automated driving.
Global optimization of expensive, derivative-free black-box functions demands extreme sample efficiency. Classical methods such as Bayesian Optimization (BO) can be effective, but they often require careful parameter tuning to each application domain. At the same time, Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown broad capabilities, yet state-of-the-art models remain limited in solving continuous black-box optimization tasks. We introduce GPTOpt, an LLM-based optimization method that equips LLMs with continuous black-box optimization capabilities. By fine-tuning large language models on extensive synthetic datasets derived from diverse BO parameterizations, GPTOpt leverages LLM pre-training to generalize across optimization tasks. On a variety of black-box optimization benchmarks, GPTOpt surpasses traditional optimizers, highlighting the capacity of LLMs for advanced numerical reasoning and introducing a flexible framework for global optimization without parameter tuning.
Forecasting transformative technologies remains a critical but challenging task, particularly in fast-evolving domains such as Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). Traditional expert-based methods struggle to keep pace with short innovation cycles and ambiguous early-stage terminology. In this work, we propose a novel, data-driven pipeline to monitor the emergence of transformative technologies by identifying patterns of technological convergence. Our approach leverages advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) to extract semantic triples from unstructured text and construct a large-scale graph of technology-related entities and relations. We introduce a new method for grouping semantically similar technology terms (noun stapling) and develop graph-based metrics to detect convergence signals. The pipeline includes multi-stage filtering, domain-specific keyword clustering, and a temporal trend analysis of topic co-occurence. We validate our methodology on two complementary datasets: 278,625 arXiv preprints (2017--2024) to capture early scientific signals, and 9,793 USPTO patent applications (2018-2024) to track downstream commercial developments. Our results demonstrate that the proposed pipeline can identify both established and emerging convergence patterns, offering a scalable and generalizable framework for technology forecasting grounded in full-text analysis.
Legal interpretation frequently involves assessing how a legal text, as understood by an 'ordinary' speaker of the language, applies to the set of facts characterizing a legal dispute in the U.S. judicial system. Recent scholarship has proposed that legal practitioners add large language models (LLMs) to their interpretive toolkit. This work offers an empirical argument against LLM interpretation as recently practiced by legal scholars and federal judges. Our investigation in English shows that models do not provide stable interpretive judgments: varying the question format can lead the model to wildly different conclusions. Moreover, the models show weak to moderate correlation with human judgment, with large variance across model and question variant, suggesting that it is dangerous to give much credence to the conclusions produced by generative AI.
As Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly generate code in software development, ensuring the quality of LLM-generated code has become important. Traditional testing approaches using Example-based Testing (EBT) often miss edge cases -- defects that occur at boundary values, special input patterns, or extreme conditions. This research investigates the characteristics of LLM-generated Property-based Testing (PBT) compared to EBT for exploring edge cases. We analyze 16 HumanEval problems where standard solutions failed on extended test cases, generating both PBT and EBT test codes using Claude-4-sonnet. Our experimental results reveal that while each method individually achieved a 68.75\% bug detection rate, combining both approaches improved detection to 81.25\%. The analysis demonstrates complementary characteristics: PBT effectively detects performance issues and edge cases through extensive input space exploration, while EBT effectively detects specific boundary conditions and special patterns. These findings suggest that a hybrid approach leveraging both testing methods can improve the reliability of LLM-generated code, providing guidance for test generation strategies in LLM-based code generation.
In recent years, integrating large language models (LLMs) into recommender systems has created new opportunities for improving recommendation quality. However, a comprehensive benchmark is needed to thoroughly evaluate and compare the recommendation capabilities of LLMs with traditional recommender systems. In this paper, we introduce RecBench, which systematically investigates various item representation forms (including unique identifier, text, semantic embedding, and semantic identifier) and evaluates two primary recommendation tasks, i.e., click-through rate prediction (CTR) and sequential recommendation (SeqRec). Our extensive experiments cover up to 17 large models and are conducted across five diverse datasets from fashion, news, video, books, and music domains. Our findings indicate that LLM-based recommenders outperform conventional recommenders, achieving up to a 5% AUC improvement in the CTR scenario and up to a 170% NDCG@10 improvement in the SeqRec scenario. However, these substantial performance gains come at the expense of significantly reduced inference efficiency, rendering the LLM-as-RS paradigm impractical for real-time recommendation environments. We aim for our findings to inspire future research, including recommendation-specific model acceleration methods. We will release our code, data, configurations, and platform to enable other researchers to reproduce and build upon our experimental results.
The widespread adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) raises critical concerns about the factual accuracy of their outputs, especially in high-risk domains such as biomedicine, law, and education. Existing evaluation methods for short texts often fail on long-form content due to complex reasoning chains, intertwined perspectives, and cumulative information. To address this, we propose a systematic approach integrating large-scale long-form datasets, multi-agent verification mechanisms, and weighted evaluation metrics. We construct LongHalluQA, a Chinese long-form factuality dataset; and develop MAD-Fact, a debate-based multi-agent verification system. We introduce a fact importance hierarchy to capture the varying significance of claims in long-form texts. Experiments on two benchmarks show that larger LLMs generally maintain higher factual consistency, while domestic models excel on Chinese content. Our work provides a structured framework for evaluating and enhancing factual reliability in long-form LLM outputs, guiding their safe deployment in sensitive domains.
In this paper, we present WEST(WE Speech Toolkit), a speech toolkit based on a large language model (LLM) for speech understanding, generation, and interaction. There are three key features of WEST: 1) Fully LLM-based: Standing on the shoulders of giants by reusing mature architectures, ecosystems (e.g., Hugging Face), and methods (e.g., sequence packing) from large models. 2) Full-stack: Supports tasks such as recognition, synthesis, understanding, dialogue, and multimodal capabilities, with extensibility to incorporate open-source models. 3) Simple and Stupid: A simple and stupid speech toolkit that everyone can Touch. In addition, WEST provides two types of recipes, models, and experimental results. The first is entirely based on open-source models and open-source data, allowing users to fully reproduce the experiments in this paper and serving as a verification system or minimal system baseline. The second is trained on massive data, offering superior performance so the user can directly apply it out of the box. WEST is publicly avilable at https://github.com/wenet-e2e/west/
This study proposes augmenting dialog data with think-aloud utterances (TAUs) for modeling individual personalities in text chat by LLM. TAU is a verbalization of a speaker's thought before articulating the utterance. We expect "persona LLMs" trained with TAU-augmented data can mimic the speaker's personality trait better. We tested whether the trained persona LLMs obtain the human personality with respect to Big Five, a framework characterizing human personality traits from five aspects. The results showed that LLMs trained with TAU-augmented data more closely align to the speakers' Agreeableness and Neuroticism of Big Five than those trained with original dialog data. We also found that the quality of TAU-augmentation impacts persona LLM's performance.
The emergence of agentic reinforcement learning (Agentic RL) marks a paradigm shift from conventional reinforcement learning applied to large language models (LLM RL), reframing LLMs from passive sequence generators into autonomous, decision-making agents embedded in complex, dynamic worlds. This survey formalizes this conceptual shift by contrasting the degenerate single-step Markov Decision Processes (MDPs) of LLM-RL with the temporally extended, partially observable Markov decision processes (POMDPs) that define Agentic RL. Building on this foundation, we propose a comprehensive twofold taxonomy: one organized around core agentic capabilities, including planning, tool use, memory, reasoning, self-improvement, and perception, and the other around their applications across diverse task domains. Central to our thesis is that reinforcement learning serves as the critical mechanism for transforming these capabilities from static, heuristic modules into adaptive, robust agentic behavior. To support and accelerate future research, we consolidate the landscape of open-source environments, benchmarks, and frameworks into a practical compendium. By synthesizing over five hundred recent works, this survey charts the contours of this rapidly evolving field and highlights the opportunities and challenges that will shape the development of scalable, general-purpose AI agents.
Fine-tuning pre-trained large language models (LLMs) presents a dual challenge of balancing parameter efficiency and model capacity. Existing methods like low-rank adaptations (LoRA) are efficient but lack flexibility, while Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) enhance model capacity at the cost of more & under-utilized parameters. To address these limitations, we propose Structural Mixture of Residual Experts (S'MoRE), a novel framework that seamlessly integrates the efficiency of LoRA with the flexibility of MoE. Conceptually, S'MoRE employs hierarchical low-rank decomposition of expert weights, yielding residuals of varying orders interconnected in a multi-layer structure. By routing input tokens through sub-trees of residuals, S'MoRE emulates the capacity of numerous experts by instantiating and assembling just a few low-rank matrices. We craft the inter-layer propagation of S'MoRE's residuals as a special type of Graph Neural Network (GNN), and prove that under similar parameter budget, S'MoRE improves structural flexibility of traditional MoE (or Mixture-of-LoRA) by exponential order. Comprehensive theoretical analysis and empirical results demonstrate that S'MoRE achieves superior fine-tuning performance, offering a transformative approach for efficient LLM adaptation. Our implementation is available at: https://github.com/ZimpleX/SMoRE-LLM.
While large language models are trained on massive datasets, this data is heavily skewed towards English. Does their impressive performance reflect genuine ability or just this data advantage? To find out, we tested them in a setting where they could not rely on data abundance: low-resource languages. Building on prior work Agarwal et al. (2025) that used Next Sentence Prediction (NSP) as a test, we created a large-scale benchmark with 10,000 questions each for English (a high-resource language), Swahili (medium-resource), and Hausa (low-resource). We then tested several top models, including GPT-4 Turbo, Gemini 1.5 Flash, and LLaMA 3 70B, to see how their performance holds up. The results painted a clear picture of how levels of language resources impact outcomes. While all models excelled in English, their accuracy dropped in Swahili and fell sharply in Hausa, with LLaMA 3 struggling the most. The story became even more interesting when we introduced Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting. For the struggling LLaMA 3, CoT acted as a helpful guide, significantly boosting its accuracy. However, for the more capable GPT-4 and Gemini, the same technique often backfired, leading to a kind of "overthinking" that hurt their results in the cross-lingual context. This reveals that Chain-of-Thought is not a universal solution; its effectiveness depends heavily on the model's baseline capability and the specific context of the task. Our framework pinpoints LLM weaknesses, highlights when CoT helps or hinders cross-lingual NSP performance, and factors influencing their decisions.
Many evaluations of large language models (LLMs) in text annotation focus primarily on the correctness of the output, typically comparing model-generated labels to human-annotated ``ground truth'' using standard performance metrics. In contrast, our study moves beyond effectiveness alone. We aim to explore how labeling decisions -- by both humans and LLMs -- can be statistically evaluated across individuals. Rather than treating LLMs purely as annotation systems, we approach LLMs as an alternative annotation mechanism that may be capable of mimicking the subjective judgments made by humans. To assess this, we develop a statistical evaluation method based on Krippendorff's $\alpha$, paired bootstrapping, and the Two One-Sided t-Tests (TOST) equivalence test procedure. This evaluation method tests whether an LLM can blend into a group of human annotators without being distinguishable. We apply this approach to two datasets -- MovieLens 100K and PolitiFact -- and find that the LLM is statistically indistinguishable from a human annotator in the former ($p = 0.004$), but not in the latter ($p = 0.155$), highlighting task-dependent differences. It also enables early evaluation on a small sample of human data to inform whether LLMs are suitable for large-scale annotation in a given application.
Although large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing capabilities, their practical implementation as autonomous multi-agent systems (MAS) for industrial problem-solving encounters persistent barriers. Conventional MAS architectures are fundamentally restricted by inflexible, hand-crafted graph topologies that lack contextual responsiveness, resulting in diminished efficacy across varied academic and commercial workloads. To surmount these constraints, we introduce AMAS, a paradigm-shifting framework that redefines LLM-based MAS through a novel dynamic graph designer. This component autonomously identifies task-specific optimal graph configurations via lightweight LLM adaptation, eliminating the reliance on monolithic, universally applied structural templates. Instead, AMAS exploits the intrinsic properties of individual inputs to intelligently direct query trajectories through task-optimized agent pathways. Rigorous validation across question answering, mathematical deduction, and code generation benchmarks confirms that AMAS systematically exceeds state-of-the-art single-agent and multi-agent approaches across diverse LLM architectures. Our investigation establishes that context-sensitive structural adaptability constitutes a foundational requirement for high-performance LLM MAS deployments.
Heterogeneous Large Language Model (LLM) fusion integrates the strengths of multiple source LLMs with different architectures into a target LLM with low computational overhead. While promising, existing methods suffer from two major limitations: 1) reliance on real data from limited domain for knowledge fusion, preventing the target LLM from fully acquiring knowledge across diverse domains, and 2) fixed data allocation proportions across domains, failing to dynamically adjust according to the target LLM's varying capabilities across domains, leading to a capability imbalance. To overcome these limitations, we propose Bohdi, a synthetic-data-only heterogeneous LLM fusion framework. Through the organization of knowledge domains into a hierarchical tree structure, Bohdi enables automatic domain exploration and multi-domain data generation through multi-model collaboration, thereby comprehensively extracting knowledge from source LLMs. By formalizing domain expansion and data sampling proportion allocation on the knowledge tree as a Hierarchical Multi-Armed Bandit problem, Bohdi leverages the designed DynaBranches mechanism to adaptively adjust sampling proportions based on the target LLM's performance feedback across domains. Integrated with our proposed Introspection-Rebirth (IR) mechanism, DynaBranches dynamically tracks capability shifts during target LLM's updates via Sliding Window Binomial Likelihood Ratio Testing (SWBLRT), further enhancing its online adaptation capability. Comparative experimental results on a comprehensive suite of benchmarks demonstrate that Bohdi significantly outperforms existing baselines on multiple target LLMs, exhibits higher data efficiency, and virtually eliminates the imbalance in the target LLM's capabilities. Our code is available at https://github.com/gjq100/Bohdi.git.
Accurately modeling opinion change through social interactions is crucial for addressing issues like misinformation and polarization. While role-playing large language models (LLMs) offer a promising way to simulate human-like interactions, existing research shows that single-agent alignment does not guarantee authentic multi-agent group dynamics. Current LLM role-play setups often produce unnatural dynamics (e.g., premature convergence), without an empirical benchmark to measure authentic human opinion trajectories. To bridge this gap, we introduce DEBATE, the first large-scale empirical benchmark explicitly designed to evaluate the authenticity of the interaction between multi-agent role-playing LLMs. DEBATE contains 29,417 messages from multi-round debate conversations among over 2,792 U.S.-based participants discussing 107 controversial topics, capturing both publicly-expressed messages and privately-reported opinions. Using DEBATE, we systematically evaluate and identify critical discrepancies between simulated and authentic group dynamics. We further demonstrate DEBATE's utility for aligning LLMs with human behavior through supervised fine-tuning, achieving improvements in surface-level metrics (e.g., ROUGE-L and message length) while highlighting limitations in deeper semantic alignment (e.g., semantic similarity). Our findings highlight both the potential and current limitations of role-playing LLM agents for realistically simulating human-like social dynamics.
Formal verification via theorem proving enables the expressive specification and rigorous proof of software correctness, but it is difficult to scale due to the significant manual effort and expertise required. While Large Language Models (LLMs) show potential in proof generation, they frequently produce incorrect proofs on the first attempt and require additional strategies for iterative refinement. However, existing approaches employ fixed refinement strategies and cannot dynamically choose an effective strategy based on the particular issues in a generated proof, which limits their performance. To overcome this limitation, we introduce Adapt, a novel proof refinement framework that leverages an LLM-guided decision-maker to dynamically select a suitable refinement strategy according to the state of the proof assistant and available context of an incorrect proof. We evaluate Adapt on two benchmarks against four existing methods and find that it significantly outperforms the best baseline on both by proving 16.63% and 18.58% more theorems, respectively. Furthermore, we demonstrate Adapt's generalizability by evaluating it across five different LLMs. We also conduct ablation studies to measure the contribution of each component and compare the trade-offs of alternative decision-maker designs.
While large language models (LLMs) achieve strong performance in recommendation, they face challenges in continual learning as users, items, and user preferences evolve over time. Existing LoRA-based continual methods primarily focus on preserving performance on previous tasks, but this overlooks the unique nature of recommendation: the goal is not to predict past preferences, and outdated preferences can even harm performance when current interests shift significantly. To address this, we propose PESO (Proximally rEgularized Single evolving lOra, a continual adaptation method for LoRA in recommendation. PESO introduces a proximal regularizer that anchors the current adapter to its most recent frozen state, enabling the model to flexibly balance adaptation and preservation, and to better capture recent user behaviors. Theoretically, we show that this proximal design provides data-aware, direction-wise guidance in the LoRA subspace. Empirically, PESO consistently outperforms existing LoRA-based continual learning methods.
Recent advances in text-only large language models (LLMs), such as DeepSeek-R1, demonstrate remarkable reasoning ability. However, these models remain fragile or entirely incapable when extended to multi-modal tasks. Existing approaches largely rely on single-form captions, which lack diversity and often fail to adapt across different types of Visual Question Answering (VQA) benchmarks. As a result, they provide no principled or efficient channel for transmitting fine-grained visual information. We introduce Seeing Eye, a modular framework that unlocks multimodal reasoning in text-only LLMs through an agent-based small VLM translator. This translator acts as a perception agent: it can invoke specialized tools (e.g., OCR and crop) and iteratively distill multimodal inputs into structured intermediate representations (SIRs) tailored to the question. These SIRs are then passed to the text-only LLM, which serves as a reasoning agent. Crucially, the translator and reasoner engage in multi-round feedback and interaction, enabling the extraction of targeted visual details and yielding more confident answers. Experiments on knowledge-intensive VQA benchmarks, including MMMU and MIA-Bench, demonstrate that Seeing Eye not only reduces inference cost but also surpasses much larger end-to-end VLMs. For example, an instantiation combining a 3B-parameter vision translator with an 8B-parameter language reasoner outperforms a monolithic 32B VLM on challenging knowledge-based questions. Our results highlight that decoupling perception from reasoning via agent information flow offers a scalable and plug-and-play pathway to multimodal reasoning, allowing strong text-only LLMs to fully leverage their reasoning capabilities. Code is available at: https://github.com/ulab-uiuc/SeeingEye
Stock movement prediction remains fundamentally challenging due to complex temporal dependencies, heterogeneous modalities, and dynamically evolving inter-stock relationships. Existing approaches often fail to unify structural, semantic, and regime-adaptive modeling within a scalable framework. This work introduces H3M-SSMoEs, a novel Hypergraph-based MultiModal architecture with LLM reasoning and Style-Structured Mixture of Experts, integrating three key innovations: (1) a Multi-Context Multimodal Hypergraph that hierarchically captures fine-grained spatiotemporal dynamics via a Local Context Hypergraph (LCH) and persistent inter-stock dependencies through a Global Context Hypergraph (GCH), employing shared cross-modal hyperedges and Jensen-Shannon Divergence weighting mechanism for adaptive relational learning and cross-modal alignment; (2) a LLM-enhanced reasoning module, which leverages a frozen large language model with lightweight adapters to semantically fuse and align quantitative and textual modalities, enriching representations with domain-specific financial knowledge; and (3) a Style-Structured Mixture of Experts (SSMoEs) that combines shared market experts and industry-specialized experts, each parameterized by learnable style vectors enabling regime-aware specialization under sparse activation. Extensive experiments on three major stock markets demonstrate that H3M-SSMoEs surpasses state-of-the-art methods in both superior predictive accuracy and investment performance, while exhibiting effective risk control. Datasets, source code, and model weights are available at our GitHub repository: https://github.com/PeilinTime/H3M-SSMoEs.
Coreference resolution in biomedical texts presents unique challenges due to complex domain-specific terminology, high ambiguity in mention forms, and long-distance dependencies between coreferring expressions. In this work, we present a comprehensive evaluation of generative large language models (LLMs) for coreference resolution in the biomedical domain. Using the CRAFT corpus as our benchmark, we assess the LLMs' performance with four prompting experiments that vary in their use of local, contextual enrichment, and domain-specific cues such as abbreviations and entity dictionaries. We benchmark these approaches against a discriminative span-based encoder, SpanBERT, to compare the efficacy of generative versus discriminative methods. Our results demonstrate that while LLMs exhibit strong surface-level coreference capabilities, especially when supplemented with domain-grounding prompts, their performance remains sensitive to long-range context and mentions ambiguity. Notably, the LLaMA 8B and 17B models show superior precision and F1 scores under entity-augmented prompting, highlighting the potential of lightweight prompt engineering for enhancing LLM utility in biomedical NLP tasks.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to automate classification tasks in business, such as analyzing customer satisfaction from text. However, the inherent stochasticity of LLMs, in terms of their tendency to produce different outputs for the same input, creates a significant measurement error problem that is often neglected with a single round of output, or addressed with ad-hoc methods like majority voting. Such naive approaches fail to quantify uncertainty and can produce biased estimates of population-level metrics. In this paper, we propose a principled solution by reframing LLM variability as a statistical measurement error problem and introducing a Bayesian latent state model to address it. Our model treats the true classification (e.g., customer dissatisfaction) as an unobserved latent variable and the multiple LLM ratings as noisy measurements of this state. This framework allows for the simultaneous estimation of the LLM's false positive and false negative error rates, the underlying base rate of the phenomenon in the population, the posterior probability of the true state for each individual observation, and the causal impact of a business intervention, if any, on the latent state. Through simulation studies, we demonstrate that our model accurately recovers true parameters where naive methods fail. We conclude that this methodology provides a general and reliable framework for converting noisy, probabilistic outputs from LLMs into accurate and actionable insights for scientific and business applications.
The emerging large language model role-playing agents (LLM RPAs) aim to simulate individual human behaviors, but the persona fidelity is often undermined by manually-created profiles (e.g., cherry-picked information and personality characteristics) without validating the alignment with the target individuals. To address this limitation, our work introduces the Dynamic Persona Refinement Framework (DPRF). DPRF aims to optimize the alignment of LLM RPAs' behaviors with those of target individuals by iteratively identifying the cognitive divergence, either through free-form or theory-grounded, structured analysis, between generated behaviors and human ground truth, and refining the persona profile to mitigate these divergences. We evaluate DPRF with five LLMs on four diverse behavior-prediction scenarios: formal debates, social media posts with mental health issues, public interviews, and movie reviews. DPRF can consistently improve behavioral alignment considerably over baseline personas and generalizes across models and scenarios. Our work provides a robust methodology for creating high-fidelity persona profiles and enhancing the validity of downstream applications, such as user simulation, social studies, and personalized AI.
Estimating the cognitive complexity of reading comprehension (RC) items is crucial for assessing item difficulty before it is administered to learners. Unlike syntactic and semantic features, such as passage length or semantic similarity between options, cognitive features that arise during answer reasoning are not readily extractable using existing NLP tools and have traditionally relied on human annotation. In this study, we examine whether large language models (LLMs) can estimate the cognitive complexity of RC items by focusing on two dimensions-Evidence Scope and Transformation Level-that indicate the degree of cognitive burden involved in reasoning about the answer. Our experimental results demonstrate that LLMs can approximate the cognitive complexity of items, indicating their potential as tools for prior difficulty analysis. Further analysis reveals a gap between LLMs' reasoning ability and their metacognitive awareness: even when they produce correct answers, they sometimes fail to correctly identify the features underlying their own reasoning process.
Is an LLM telling you different facts than it's telling me? This paper introduces ConsistencyAI, an independent benchmark for measuring the factual consistency of large language models (LLMs) for different personas. ConsistencyAI tests whether, when users of different demographics ask identical questions, the model responds with factually inconsistent answers. Designed without involvement from LLM providers, this benchmark offers impartial evaluation and accountability. In our experiment, we queried 19 LLMs with prompts that requested 5 facts for each of 15 topics. We repeated this query 100 times for each LLM, each time adding prompt context from a different persona selected from a subset of personas modeling the general population. We processed the responses into sentence embeddings, computed cross-persona cosine similarity, and computed the weighted average of cross-persona cosine similarity to calculate factual consistency scores. In 100-persona experiments, scores ranged from 0.9065 to 0.7896, and the mean was 0.8656, which we adopt as a benchmark threshold. xAI's Grok-3 is most consistent, while several lightweight models rank lowest. Consistency varies by topic: the job market is least consistent, G7 world leaders most consistent, and issues like vaccines or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict diverge by provider. These results show that both the provider and the topic shape the factual consistency. We release our code and interactive demo to support reproducible evaluation and encourage persona-invariant prompting strategies.
Virtual Reality (VR) games require players to translate high-level semantic actions into precise device manipulations using controllers and head-mounted displays (HMDs). While humans intuitively perform this translation based on common sense and embodied understanding, whether Large Language Models (LLMs) can effectively replicate this ability remains underexplored. This paper introduces a benchmark, ComboBench, evaluating LLMs' capability to translate semantic actions into VR device manipulation sequences across 262 scenarios from four popular VR games: Half-Life: Alyx, Into the Radius, Moss: Book II, and Vivecraft. We evaluate seven LLMs, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, GPT-4o, Gemini-1.5-Pro, LLaMA-3-8B, Mixtral-8x7B, and GLM-4-Flash, compared against annotated ground truth and human performance. Our results reveal that while top-performing models like Gemini-1.5-Pro demonstrate strong task decomposition capabilities, they still struggle with procedural reasoning and spatial understanding compared to humans. Performance varies significantly across games, suggesting sensitivity to interaction complexity. Few-shot examples substantially improve performance, indicating potential for targeted enhancement of LLMs' VR manipulation capabilities. We release all materials at https://sites.google.com/view/combobench.
Training large language model agents on tasks at the frontier of their capabilities is key to unlocking advanced reasoning. We introduce a data synthesis approach inspired by the educational theory of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), which defines this frontier as tasks an LLM cannot solve alone but can master with guidance. To operationalize this, we present the AgentFrontier Engine, an automated pipeline that synthesizes high-quality, multidisciplinary data situated precisely within the LLM's ZPD. This engine supports both continued pre-training with knowledge-intensive data and targeted post-training on complex reasoning tasks. From the same framework, we derive the ZPD Exam, a dynamic and automated benchmark designed to evaluate agent capabilities on these frontier tasks. We train AgentFrontier-30B-A3B model on our synthesized data, which achieves state-of-the-art results on demanding benchmarks like Humanity's Last Exam, even surpassing some leading proprietary agents. Our work demonstrates that a ZPD-guided approach to data synthesis offers a scalable and effective path toward building more capable LLM agents.
Large language models (LLMs) have gained significant traction in medical decision support systems, particularly in the context of medical question answering and role-playing simulations. A common practice, Prompt-Based Role Playing (PBRP), instructs models to adopt different clinical roles (e.g., medical students, residents, attending physicians) to simulate varied professional behaviors. However, the impact of such role prompts on model reasoning capabilities remains unclear. This study introduces the RP-Neuron-Activated Evaluation Framework(RPNA) to evaluate whether role prompts induce distinct, role-specific cognitive processes in LLMs or merely modify linguistic style. We test this framework on three medical QA datasets, employing neuron ablation and representation analysis techniques to assess changes in reasoning pathways. Our results demonstrate that role prompts do not significantly enhance the medical reasoning abilities of LLMs. Instead, they primarily affect surface-level linguistic features, with no evidence of distinct reasoning pathways or cognitive differentiation across clinical roles. Despite superficial stylistic changes, the core decision-making mechanisms of LLMs remain uniform across roles, indicating that current PBRP methods fail to replicate the cognitive complexity found in real-world medical practice. This highlights the limitations of role-playing in medical AI and emphasizes the need for models that simulate genuine cognitive processes rather than linguistic imitation.We have released the related code in the following repository:https: //github.com/IAAR-Shanghai/RolePlay_LLMDoctor
The quadratic cost of attention hinders the scalability of long-context LLMs, especially in resource-constrained settings. Existing static sparse methods such as sliding windows or global tokens utilizes the sparsity of attention to reduce the cost of attention, but poorly adapts to the content-dependent variations in attention due to their staticity. While previous work has proposed several dynamic approaches to improve flexibility, they still depend on predefined templates or heuristic mechanisms. Such strategies reduce generality and prune tokens that remain contextually important, limiting their accuracy across diverse tasks. To tackle these bottlenecks of existing methods for long-context modeling, we introduce Dynamic Hierarchical Sparse Attention (DHSA), a data-driven framework that dynamically predicts attention sparsity online without retraining. Our proposed DHSA adaptively segments sequences into variable-length chunks, then computes chunk representations by aggregating the token embeddings within each chunk. To avoid the bias introduced by varying chunk lengths, we apply length-normalized aggregation that scales the averaged embeddings by the square root of the chunk size. Finally, DHSA upsamples the chunk-level similarity scores to token level similarities to calculate importance scores that determine which token-level interactions should be preserved. Our experiments on Gemma2 with Needle-in-a-Haystack Test and LongBench show that DHSA matches dense attention in accuracy, while reducing prefill latency by 20-60% and peak memory usage by 35%. Compared to other representative baselines such as block sparse attention, DHSA achieves consistently higher accuracy (6-18% relative gains) with comparable or lower cost, offering an efficient and adaptable solution for long-context on-device LLMs.
Diffusion-based large language models (dLLMs) have exhibited substantial potential for parallel text generation, which may enable more efficient generation compared to autoregressive models. However, current dLLMs suffer from fixed generation lengths, which indicates the generation lengths of dLLMs have to be determined before decoding as a hyper-parameter, leading to issues in efficiency and flexibility. To solve these problems, in this work, we propose to train a diffusion LLM with native variable generation lengths, abbreviated as dLLM-Var. Concretely, we aim to train a model to accurately predict the [EOS] token in the generated text, which makes a dLLM be able to natively infer in a block diffusion manner, while still maintaining the ability of global bi-directional (full) attention and high parallelism. Experiments on standard benchmarks demonstrate that our method achieves a 30.1x speedup over traditional dLLM inference paradigms and a 2.4x speedup relative to autoregressive models such as Qwen and Llama. Our method achieves higher accuracy and faster inference, elevating dLLMs beyond mere academic novelty and supporting their practical use in real-world applications. Codes and models have been released.
Ask your chatbot to impersonate an expert from Russia and an expert from US and query it on Chinese politics. How might the outputs differ? Or, to prepare ourselves for the worse, how might they converge? Scholars have raised concerns LLM based applications can homogenize cultures and flatten perspectives. But exactly how much does LLM generated outputs converge despite explicit different role assignment? This study provides empirical evidence to the above question. The critique centres on pretrained models regurgitating ossified political jargons used in the Western world when speaking about China, Iran, Russian, and US politics, despite changes in these countries happening daily or hourly. The experiments combine role-prompting and similarity metrics. The results show that AI generated discourses from four models about Iran and China are the most homogeneous and unchanging across all four models, including OpenAI GPT, Google Gemini, Anthropic Claude, and DeepSeek, despite the prompted perspective change and the actual changes in real life. This study does not engage with history, politics, or literature as traditional disciplinary approaches would; instead, it takes cues from international and area studies and offers insight on the future trajectory of shifting political discourse in a digital space increasingly cannibalised by AI.
Accurate confidence calibration in Large Language Models (LLMs) is critical for safe use in high-stakes domains, where clear verbalized confidence enhances user trust. Traditional methods that mimic reference confidence expressions often fail to capture the reasoning needed for accurate confidence assessment. We propose natural language critiques as a solution, ideally suited for confidence calibration, as precise gold confidence labels are hard to obtain and often require multiple generations. This paper studies how natural language critiques can enhance verbalized confidence, addressing: (1) What to critique: uncertainty (question-focused) or confidence (answer-specific)? Analysis shows confidence suits multiple-choice tasks, while uncertainty excels in open-ended scenarios. (2) How to critique: self-critique or critique calibration training? We propose Self-Critique, enabling LLMs to critique and optimize their confidence beyond mere accuracy, and CritiCal, a novel Critique Calibration training method that leverages natural language critiques to improve confidence calibration, moving beyond direct numerical optimization. Experiments show that CritiCal significantly outperforms Self-Critique and other competitive baselines, even surpassing its teacher model, GPT-4o, in complex reasoning tasks. CritiCal also shows robust generalization in out-of-distribution settings, advancing LLM's reliability.
Recent advances in group-based reinforcement learning (RL) have driven frontier large language models (LLMs) in single-turn tasks like mathematical reasoning. However, their scalability to multi-turn LLM agent training remains limited. Unlike static tasks, agent-environment interactions unfold over many steps and often yield sparse or delayed rewards, making credit assignment across individual steps significantly more challenging. In this work, we propose Group-in-Group Policy Optimization (GiGPO), a novel RL algorithm that achieves fine-grained credit assignment for LLM agents while preserving the appealing properties of group-based RL: critic-free, low memory, and stable convergence. GiGPO introduces a two-level structure for estimating relative advantage: (i) At the episode-level, GiGPO computes macro relative advantages based on groups of complete trajectories; (ii) At the step-level, GiGPO introduces an anchor state grouping mechanism that retroactively constructs step-level groups by identifying repeated environment states across trajectories. Actions stemming from the same state are grouped together, enabling micro relative advantage estimation. This hierarchical structure effectively captures both global trajectory quality and local step effectiveness without relying on auxiliary models or additional rollouts. We evaluate GiGPO on challenging agent benchmarks, including ALFWorld and WebShop, as well as tool-integrated reasoning on search-augmented QA tasks, using Qwen2.5-1.5B/3B/7B-Instruct. Crucially, GiGPO delivers fine-grained per-step credit signals, achieves performance gains of > 12% on ALFWorld and > 9% on WebShop over GRPO, and obtains superior performance on QA tasks (42.1% on 3B and 47.2% on 7B): all while maintaining the same GPU memory overhead, identical LLM rollout, and incurring little to no additional time cost.
As Large language models (LLMs) become increasingly integrated into our lives, their inherent social biases remain a pressing concern. Detecting and evaluating these biases can be challenging because they are often implicit rather than explicit in nature, so developing evaluation methods that assess the implicit knowledge representations of LLMs is essential. We present a novel word association network methodology for evaluating implicit biases in LLMs based on simulating semantic priming within LLM-generated word association networks. Our prompt-based approach taps into the implicit relational structures encoded in LLMs, providing both quantitative and qualitative assessments of bias. Unlike most prompt-based evaluation methods, our method enables direct comparisons between various LLMs and humans, providing a valuable point of reference and offering new insights into the alignment of LLMs with human cognition. To demonstrate the utility of our methodology, we apply it to both humans and several widely used LLMs to investigate social biases related to gender, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and political party. Our results reveal both convergences and divergences between LLM and human biases, providing new perspectives on the potential risks of using LLMs. Our methodology contributes to a systematic, scalable, and generalizable framework for evaluating and comparing biases across multiple LLMs and humans, advancing the goal of transparent and socially responsible language technologies.
Hallucination remains one of the key obstacles to the reliable deployment of large language models (LLMs), particularly in real-world applications. Among various mitigation strategies, Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and reasoning enhancement have emerged as two of the most effective and widely adopted approaches, marking a shift from merely suppressing hallucinations to balancing creativity and reliability. However, their synergistic potential and underlying mechanisms for hallucination mitigation have not yet been systematically examined. This survey adopts an application-oriented perspective of capability enhancement to analyze how RAG, reasoning enhancement, and their integration in Agentic Systems mitigate hallucinations. We propose a taxonomy distinguishing knowledge-based and logic-based hallucinations, systematically examine how RAG and reasoning address each, and present a unified framework supported by real-world applications, evaluations, and benchmarks.
Personalized text generation requires models not only to produce coherent text but also to align with a target user's style, tone, and topical focus. Existing retrieval-augmented approaches such as LaMP and PGraphRAG enrich profiles with user and neighbor histories, but they stop at generation and often yield outputs that drift in tone, topic, or style. We present PerFine, a unified, training-free critique-refine framework that enhances personalization through iterative, profile-grounded feedback. In each iteration, an LLM generator produces a draft conditioned on the retrieved profile, and a critic LLM - also conditioned on the same profile - provides structured feedback on tone, vocabulary, sentence structure, and topicality. The generator then revises, while a novel knockout strategy retains the stronger draft across iterations. We further study additional inference-time strategies such as Best-of-N and Topic Extraction to balance quality and efficiency. Across Yelp, Goodreads, and Amazon datasets, PerFine consistently improves personalization over PGraphRAG, with GEval gains of +7-13%, steady improvements over 3-5 refinement iterations, and scalability with increasing critic size. These results highlight that post-hoc, profile-aware feedback offers a powerful paradigm for personalized LLM generation that is both training-free and model-agnostic.
While new benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) are being developed continuously to catch up with the growing capabilities of new models and AI in general, using and evaluating LLMs in non-English languages remains a little-charted landscape. We give a concise overview of recent developments in LLM benchmarking, and then propose a new taxonomy for the categorization of benchmarks that is tailored to multilingual or non-English use scenarios. We further propose a set of best practices and quality standards that could lead to a more coordinated development of benchmarks for European languages. Among other recommendations, we advocate for a higher language and culture sensitivity of evaluation methods.
Since real-world legal experiments are often costly or infeasible, simulating legal societies with Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems provides an effective alternative for verifying and developing legal theory, as well as supporting legal administration. Large Language Models (LLMs), with their world knowledge and role-playing capabilities, are strong candidates to serve as the foundation for legal society simulation. However, the application of LLMs to simulate legal systems remains underexplored. In this work, we introduce Law in Silico, an LLM-based agent framework for simulating legal scenarios with individual decision-making and institutional mechanisms of legislation, adjudication, and enforcement. Our experiments, which compare simulated crime rates with real-world data, demonstrate that LLM-based agents can largely reproduce macro-level crime trends and provide insights that align with real-world observations. At the same time, micro-level simulations reveal that a well-functioning, transparent, and adaptive legal system offers better protection of the rights of vulnerable individuals.
Most recommender systems treat timestamps as numeric or cyclical values, overlooking real-world context such as holidays, events, and seasonal patterns. We propose a scalable framework that uses large language models (LLMs) to generate geo-temporal embeddings from only a timestamp and coarse location, capturing holidays, seasonal trends, and local/global events. We then introduce a geo-temporal embedding informativeness test as a lightweight diagnostic, demonstrating on MovieLens, LastFM, and a production dataset that these embeddings provide predictive signal consistent with the outcomes of full model integrations. Geo-temporal embeddings are incorporated into sequential models through (1) direct feature fusion with metadata embeddings or (2) an auxiliary loss that enforces semantic and geo-temporal alignment. Our findings highlight the need for adaptive or hybrid recommendation strategies, and we release a context-enriched MovieLens dataset to support future research.
As the core of the Internet infrastructure, the TCP/IP protocol stack undertakes the task of network data transmission. However, due to the complexity of the protocol and the uncertainty of cross-layer interaction, there are often inconsistencies between the implementation of the protocol stack code and the RFC standard. This inconsistency may not only lead to differences in protocol functions but also cause serious security vulnerabilities. At present, with the continuous expansion of protocol stack functions and the rapid iteration of RFC documents, it is increasingly important to detect and fix these inconsistencies. With the rise of large language models, researchers have begun to explore how to extract protocol specifications from RFC documents through these models, including protocol stack modeling, state machine extraction, text ambiguity analysis, and other related content. However, existing methods rely on predefined patterns or rule-based approaches that fail to generalize across different protocol specifications. Automated and scalable detection of these inconsistencies remains a significant challenge. In this study, we propose an automated analysis framework based on LLM and differential models. By modeling the iterative relationship of the protocol and based on the iterative update relationship of the RFC standard, we perform incremental code function analysis on different versions of kernel code implementations to automatically perform code detection and vulnerability analysis. We conduct extensive evaluations to validate the effectiveness of our framework, demonstrating its effectiveness in identifying potential vulnerabilities caused by RFC code inconsistencies.
With the rapid development of LLM-based agents, there is a growing trend to incorporate agent-specific data into the pre-training stage of LLMs, aiming to better align LLMs with real-world autonomous task execution. However, current pre-training benchmarks primarily focus on isolated and static skills, e.g., common knowledge or mathematical/code reasoning, and fail to reflect model's agentic capabilities. On the other hand, agent benchmarks are typically designed for post-trained models, requiring multi-turn task execution abilities that base models struggle to support. Thus, there is a compelling need for a benchmark that can evaluate agentic potentials during pre-training and guide the model training more effectively. To address this gap, we propose APTBench, a framework that converts real-world agent tasks and successful trajectories into multiple-choice or text completion questions tailored for base models. It focuses on core agentic abilities, e.g., planning and action, and covers key agent scenarios, software engineering and deep research. Compared to existing general-purpose benchmarks, APTBench offers a more predictive signal of a model's downstream performance as an agent, while remaining significantly more lightweight and cost-effective than full-scale, end-to-end agent evaluations after post-training.
The integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into real-time Web applications, such as AI-powered search and conversational agents, presents a fundamental Web infrastructure challenge: reconciling the demand for high-quality, complex reasoning with the stringent low-latency and high-throughput requirements of interactive services. Current LLM reasoning, hindered by computationally inefficient sequential generation and rigid reasoning strategies, creates a critical bottleneck for the Web services. Existing approaches typically optimize the LLM reasoning for either efficiency or quality but struggle to achieve both, and thus fail to meet the dual requirements of modern Web platforms. To overcome these limitations, we propose Orion, a novel and efficient reasoning framework that enables dependency-aware query decomposition and logic-parallel content expansion. Concretely, Orion decomposes a single query reasoning process into two synergistic phases: (1) \textit{key point generation}, which distills logically structured key points through retrieval-augmented few-shot prompting, and (2) \textit{content parallel expansion}, which concurrently elaborates on these points based on a dependency graph to ensure logical consistency. Furthermore, Orion introduces a pipeline scheduling mechanism that exploits the complementary computational characteristics of the two phases (generation imposes pressure on GPU computing and expansion stresses on GPU memory) across multiple queries, enabling cross-query parallelism and dramatically improving reasoning performance (\ie, efficiency and quality). Experiments on diverse benchmarks show that Orion not only delivers up to 4.33x higher token generation speed and 3.42x lower answer latency over the baselines but also improves reasoning quality by up to 18.75% through explicitly modeling inter-point dependencies.
The rapid integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into software engineering (SE) has revolutionized tasks like code generation, producing a massive volume of software artifacts. This surge has exposed a critical bottleneck: the lack of scalable, reliable methods to evaluate these outputs. Human evaluation is costly and time-consuming, while traditional automated metrics like BLEU fail to capture nuanced quality aspects. In response, the LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm - using LLMs for automated evaluation - has emerged. This approach leverages the advanced reasoning of LLMs, offering a path toward human-like nuance at automated scale. However, LLM-as-a-Judge research in SE is still in its early stages. This forward-looking SE 2030 paper aims to steer the community toward advancing LLM-as-a-Judge for evaluating LLM-generated software artifacts. We provide a literature review of existing SE studies, analyze their limitations, identify key research gaps, and outline a detailed roadmap. We envision these frameworks as reliable, robust, and scalable human surrogates capable of consistent, multi-faceted artifact evaluation by 2030. Our work aims to foster research and adoption of LLM-as-a-Judge frameworks, ultimately improving the scalability of software artifact evaluation.
N-Version Programming is a well-known methodology for developing fault-tolerant systems. It achieves fault detection and correction at runtime by adding diverse redundancy into programs, minimizing fault mode overlap between redundant program variants. In this work, we propose the automated generation of program variants using large language models. We design, develop and evaluate Gal\'apagos: a tool for generating program variants using LLMs, validating their correctness and equivalence, and using them to assemble N-Version binaries. We evaluate Gal\'apagos by creating N-Version components of real-world C code. Our original results show that Gal\'apagos can produce program variants that are proven to be functionally equivalent, even when the variants are written in a different programming language. Our systematic diversity measurement indicates that functionally equivalent variants produced by Gal\'apagos, are statically different after compilation, and present diverging internal behavior at runtime. We demonstrate that the variants produced by Gal\'apagos can protect C code against real miscompilation bugs which affect the Clang compiler. Overall, our paper shows that producing N-Version software can be drastically automated by advanced usage of practical formal verification and generative language models.
Recent advances in code agents have enabled automated software development at the project level, supported by large language models (LLMs) and widely adopted tools. However, existing benchmarks for code agent evaluation face two major limitations: high annotation cost and expertise requirements, and rigid evaluation metrics that rely primarily on unit tests. To address these challenges, we propose an agent-driven benchmark construction pipeline that leverages human supervision to efficiently generate diverse and challenging project-level tasks. Based on this approach, we introduce PRDBench, a novel benchmark comprising 50 real-world Python projects across 20 domains, each with structured Product Requirement Document (PRD) requirements, comprehensive evaluation criteria, and reference implementations. PRDBench features rich data sources, high task complexity, and flexible metrics. We further employ an Agent-as-a-Judge paradigm to score agent outputs, enabling the evaluation of various test types beyond unit tests. Extensive experiments on PRDBench demonstrate its effectiveness in assessing the capabilities of both code agents and evaluation agents, providing a scalable and robust framework for annotation and evaluation.
Judgmental forecasting is the task of making predictions about future events based on human judgment. This task can be seen as a form of claim verification, where the claim corresponds to a future event and the task is to assess the plausibility of that event. In this paper, we propose a novel multi-agent framework for claim verification, whereby different agents may disagree on claim veracity and bring specific evidence for and against the claims, represented as quantitative bipolar argumentation frameworks (QBAFs). We then instantiate the framework for supporting claim verification, with a variety of agents realised with Large Language Models (LLMs): (1) ArgLLM agents, an existing approach for claim verification that generates and evaluates QBAFs; (2) RbAM agents, whereby LLM-empowered Relation-based Argument Mining (RbAM) from external sources is used to generate QBAFs; (3) RAG-ArgLLM agents, extending ArgLLM agents with a form of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) of arguments from external sources. Finally, we conduct experiments with two standard judgmental forecasting datasets, with instances of our framework with two or three agents, empowered by six different base LLMs. We observe that combining evidence from agents can improve forecasting accuracy, especially in the case of three agents, while providing an explainable combination of evidence for claim verification.
Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly rely on external tools to perform complex, realistic tasks, yet their ability to utilize the rapidly expanding Model Contextual Protocol (MCP) ecosystem remains limited. Existing MCP research covers few servers, depends on costly manual curation, and lacks training support, hindering progress toward real-world deployment. To overcome these limitations, we introduce MCP-Flow, an automated web-agent-driven pipeline for large-scale server discovery, data synthesis, and model training. MCP-Flow collects and filters data from 1166 servers and 11536 tools, producing 68733 high-quality instruction-function call pairs and 6439 trajectories, far exceeding prior work in scale and diversity. Extensive experiments demonstrate MCP-Flow's effectiveness in driving superior MCP tool selection, function-call generation, and enhanced agentic task performance. MCP-Flow thus provides a scalable foundation for advancing LLM agents' proficiency in real-world MCP environments. MCP-Flow is publicly available at \href{https://github.com/wwh0411/MCP-Flow}{https://github.com/wwh0411/MCP-Flow}.
Emergent symbolic representations are critical for enabling developmental learning agents to plan and generalize across tasks. In this work, we investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can translate human natural language instructions into the internal symbolic representations that emerge during hierarchical reinforcement learning. We apply a structured evaluation framework to measure the translation performance of commonly seen LLMs -- GPT, Claude, Deepseek and Grok -- across different internal symbolic partitions generated by a hierarchical reinforcement learning algorithm in the Ant Maze and Ant Fall environments. Our findings reveal that although LLMs demonstrate some ability to translate natural language into a symbolic representation of the environment dynamics, their performance is highly sensitive to partition granularity and task complexity. The results expose limitations in current LLMs capacity for representation alignment, highlighting the need for further research on robust alignment between language and internal agent representations.
Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in simulating human-like social behaviors. Social graphs provide high-quality supervision signals that encode both local interactions and global network structure, yet they remain underutilized for LLM training. To address this gap, we propose Graphia, the first general LLM-based social graph simulation framework that leverages graph data as supervision for LLM post-training via reinforcement learning. With GNN-based structural rewards, Graphia trains specialized agents to predict whom to interact with (destination selection) and how to interact (edge generation), followed by designed graph generation pipelines. We evaluate Graphia under two settings: Transductive Dynamic Graph Generation (TDGG), a micro-level task with our proposed node-wise interaction alignment metrics; and Inductive Dynamic Graph Generation (IDGG), a macro-level task with our proposed metrics for aligning emergent network properties. On three real-world networks, Graphia improves micro-level alignment by 6.1% in the composite destination selection score, 12% in edge classification accuracy, and 27.9% in edge content BERTScore over the strongest baseline. For macro-level alignment, it achieves 41.11% higher structural similarity and 32.98% better replication of social phenomena such as power laws and echo chambers. Graphia also supports counterfactual simulation, generating plausible behavioral shifts under platform incentives. Our results show that social graphs can serve as high-quality supervision signals for LLM post-training, closing the gap between agent behaviors and network dynamics for LLM-based simulation. Code is available at https://github.com/Ji-Cather/Graphia.git.
Large Language Models (LLMs), predominantly trained on adult conversational data, face significant challenges when generating authentic, child-like dialogue for specialized applications. We present a comparative study evaluating five different LLMs (GPT-4, RUTER-LLAMA-2-13b, GPTSW, NorMistral-7b, and NorBloom-7b) to generate age-appropriate Norwegian conversations for children aged 5 and 9 years. Through a blind evaluation by eleven education professionals using both real child interview data and LLM-generated text samples, we assessed authenticity and developmental appropriateness. Our results show that evaluators achieved strong inter-rater reliability (ICC=0.75) and demonstrated higher accuracy in age prediction for younger children (5-year-olds) compared to older children (9-year-olds). While GPT-4 and NorBloom-7b performed relatively well, most models generated language perceived as more linguistically advanced than the target age groups. These findings highlight critical data-related challenges in developing LLM systems for specialized applications involving children, particularly in low-resource languages where comprehensive age-appropriate lexical resources are scarce.
Despite recent efforts in Large Language Model (LLM) safety and alignment, current adversarial attacks on frontier LLMs can still consistently force harmful generations. Although adversarial training has been widely studied and shown to significantly improve the robustness of traditional machine learning models, its strengths and weaknesses in the context of LLMs are less understood. Specifically, while existing discrete adversarial attacks are effective at producing harmful content, training LLMs with concrete adversarial prompts is often computationally expensive, leading to reliance on continuous relaxations. At the same time, despite their effectiveness and generalization capabilities, training with continuous perturbations does not always capture the full spectrum of vulnerabilities exploited by discrete attacks. In this work, we aim to bridge this gap by introducing MixAT, a novel method that combines stronger discrete and faster continuous attacks during training. We rigorously evaluate MixAT across a wide spectrum of state-of-the-art attacks, proposing the At Least One Attack Success Rate (ALO-ASR) metric to capture the worst-case vulnerability of models. We show MixAT achieves substantially better robustness (ALO-ASR < 20%) compared to prior defenses (ALO-ASR > 50%), while maintaining a runtime comparable to methods based on continuous relaxations. We further analyze MixAT in realistic deployment settings, exploring how chat templates, quantization, low-rank adapters, and temperature affect both adversarial training and evaluation, revealing additional blind spots in current methodologies. Our results demonstrate that MixAT's discrete-continuous defense offers a principled and superior robustness-accuracy tradeoff with minimal computational overhead, highlighting its promise for building safer LLMs. We provide our code and models at https://github.com/insait-institute/MixAT.
Automatically generated software, especially code produced by Large Language Models (LLMs), is increasingly adopted to accelerate development and reduce manual effort. However, little is known about the long-term reliability of such systems under sustained execution. In this paper, we experimentally investigate the phenomenon of software aging in applications generated by LLM-based tools. Using the Bolt platform and standardized prompts from Baxbench, we generated four service-oriented applications and subjected them to 50-hour load tests. Resource usage, response time, and throughput were continuously monitored to detect degradation patterns. The results reveal significant evidence of software aging, including progressive memory growth, increased response time, and performance instability across all applications. Statistical analyzes confirm these trends and highlight variability in the severity of aging according to the type of application. Our findings show the need to consider aging in automatically generated software and provide a foundation for future studies on mitigation strategies and long-term reliability evaluation.
Despite a potential plateau in ML advancement, the societal impact of large language models lies not in approaching superintelligence but in generating text surfaces indistinguishable from human writing. While Critical AI Studies provides essential material and socio-technical critique, it risks overlooking how LLMs phenomenologically reshape meaning-making. This paper proposes a semiotics of "surface integrity" as attending to the immediate plane where LLMs inscribe themselves into human communication. I distinguish three knowledge interests in ML research (epistemology, epist\=em\=e, and epistemics) and argue for integrating surface-level stylistic analysis alongside depth-oriented critique. Through two case studies examining stylistic markers of synthetic text, I argue how attending to style as a semiotic phenomenon reveals LLMs as cultural actors that transform the conditions of meaning emergence and circulation in contemporary discourse, independent of questions about machine consciousness.
The rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs) has marked a significant breakthrough in Artificial Intelligence (AI), ushering in a new era of Human-centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI). HAI aims to better serve human welfare and needs, thereby placing higher demands on the intelligence level of robots, particularly in aspects such as natural language interaction, complex task planning, and execution. Intelligent agents powered by LLMs have opened up new pathways for realizing HAI. However, existing LLM-based embodied agents often lack the ability to plan and execute complex natural language control tasks online. This paper explores the implementation of intelligent robotic manipulating agents based on Vision-Language Models (VLMs) in the physical world. We propose a novel embodied agent framework for robots, which comprises a human-robot voice interaction module, a vision-language agent module and an action execution module. The vision-language agent itself includes a vision-based task planner, a natural language instruction converter, and a task performance feedback evaluator. Experimental results demonstrate that our agent achieves a 28\% higher average task success rate in both simulated and real environments compared to approaches relying solely on LLM+CLIP, significantly improving the execution success rate of high-level natural language instruction tasks.
This paper presents MathBode, a dynamic diagnostic for mathematical reasoning in large language models (LLMs). Instead of one-shot accuracy, MathBode treats each parametric problem as a system: we drive a single parameter sinusoidally and fit first-harmonic responses of model outputs and exact solutions. This yields interpretable, frequency-resolved metrics -- gain (amplitude tracking) and phase (lag) -- that form Bode-style fingerprints. Across five closed-form families (linear solve, ratio/saturation, compound interest, 2x2 linear systems, similar triangles), the diagnostic surfaces systematic low-pass behavior and growing phase lag that accuracy alone obscures. We compare several models against a symbolic baseline that calibrates the instrument ($G \approx 1$, $\phi \approx 0$). Results separate frontier from mid-tier models on dynamics, providing a compact, reproducible protocol that complements standard benchmarks with actionable measurements of reasoning fidelity and consistency. We open-source the dataset and code to enable further research and adoption.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have advanced machine translation but remain vulnerable to hallucinations. Unfortunately, existing MT benchmarks are not capable of exposing failures in multilingual LLMs. To disclose hallucination in multilingual LLMs, we introduce a diagnostic framework with a taxonomy that separates Instruction Detachment from Source Detachment. Guided by this taxonomy, we create HalloMTBench, a multilingual, human-verified benchmark across 11 English-to-X directions. We employed 4 frontier LLMs to generate candidates and scrutinize these candidates with an ensemble of LLM judges, and expert validation. In this way, we curate 5,435 high-quality instances. We have evaluated 17 LLMs on HalloMTBench. Results reveal distinct ``hallucination triggers'' -- unique failure patterns reflecting model scale, source length sensitivity, linguistic biases, and Reinforcement-Learning (RL) amplified language mixing. HalloMTBench offers a forward-looking testbed for diagnosing LLM translation failures. HalloMTBench is available in https://huggingface.co/collections/AIDC-AI/marco-mt.
We present PEARL (Peer-Enhanced Adaptive Radio via On-Device LLM), a framework for cooperative cross-layer optimization in device-to-device (D2D) communication. Building on our previous work on single-device on-device LLMs, PEARL extends the paradigm by leveraging both publisher and subscriber states to guide Wi-Fi Aware (WA) parameter selection. A context-aware reward, which normalizes latency by application tolerances and modulates energy by device battery states, provides richer supervision for KL-based finetuning. We study two lightweight variants: PEARL (Head + Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA)) achieves the best overall performance, while PEARL-Lite (Head-only) delivers sub-20 ms inference at near-identical objective scores. Across synthetic scenarios grounded in real measurements, PEARL improves objective scores over heuristic and compact model baselines and reduces energy by up to 16% in cooperative low-battery cases. These results demonstrate that peer-aware context, reward-aligned training, and head-based efficiency make LLMs practical for always-on, on-device cross-layer control. Code, real-world demo, and dataset are available at https://github.com/abman23/pearl
Video large language models (Video-LLMs) have made significant progress in understanding videos. However, processing multiple frames leads to lengthy visual token sequences, presenting challenges such as the limited context length cannot accommodate the entire video, and the inclusion of irrelevant frames hinders visual perception. Hence, effective frame selection is crucial. This paper emphasizes that frame selection should follow three key principles: query relevance, list-wise diversity, and sequentiality. Existing methods, such as uniform frame sampling and query-frame matching, do not capture all of these principles. Thus, we propose Markov decision determinantal point process with dynamic programming (MDP3) for frame selection, a training-free and model-agnostic method that can be seamlessly integrated into existing Video-LLMs. Our method first estimates frame similarities conditioned on the query using a conditional Gaussian kernel within the reproducing kernel Hilbert space~(RKHS). We then apply the determinantal point process~(DPP) to the similarity matrix to capture both query relevance and list-wise diversity. To incorporate sequentiality, we segment the video and apply DPP within each segment, conditioned on the preceding segment selection, modeled as a Markov decision process~(MDP) for allocating selection sizes across segments. Theoretically, MDP3 provides a \((1 - 1/e)\)-approximate solution to the NP-hard list-wise frame selection problem with pseudo-polynomial time complexity, demonstrating its efficiency. Empirically, MDP3 significantly outperforms existing methods, verifying its effectiveness and robustness.
Trajectory modeling, which includes research on trajectory data pattern mining and future prediction, has widespread applications in areas such as life services, urban transportation, and public administration. Numerous methods have been proposed to address specific problems within trajectory modeling. However, the heterogeneity of data and the diversity of trajectory tasks make effective and reliable trajectory modeling an important yet highly challenging endeavor, even for domain experts. In this paper, we propose TrajAgent, an agent framework powered by large language models, designed to facilitate robust and efficient trajectory modeling through automation modeling. This framework leverages and optimizes diverse specialized models to address various trajectory modeling tasks across different datasets effectively. In TrajAgent, we first develop UniEnv, an execution environment with a unified data and model interface, to support the execution and training of various models. Building on UniEnv, we introduce an agentic workflow designed for automatic trajectory modeling across various trajectory tasks and data. Furthermore, we introduce collaborative learning schema between LLM-based agents and small speciallized models, to enhance the performance of the whole framework effectively. Extensive experiments on five tasks using four real-world datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of TrajAgent in automated trajectory modeling, achieving a performance improvement of 2.38%-69.91% over baseline methods. The codes and data can be accessed via https://github.com/tsinghua-fib-lab/TrajAgent.
Emerging large language model (LLM) applications involve diverse reasoning strategies and agentic workflows, straining the capabilities of existing serving systems built on a monolithic token generation loop. This paper introduces Pie, a programmable LLM serving system designed for flexibility and efficiency. Pie decomposes the traditional generation loop into fine-grained service handlers exposed via an API and delegates control of the generation process to user-provided programs, called inferlets. This enables applications to implement new KV cache strategies, bespoke generation logic, and seamlessly integrate computation and I/O-entirely within the application, without requiring modifications to the serving system. Pie executes inferlets using WebAssembly, benefiting from its lightweight sandboxing. Our evaluation shows Pie matches state-of-the-art performance on standard tasks (3-12% latency overhead) while significantly improving latency and throughput (1.3x-3.4x higher) on agentic workflows by enabling application-specific optimizations.
Scaling up data, parameters, and test-time computation has been the mainstream methods to improve LLM systems (LLMsys), but their upper bounds are almost reached due to the gradual depletion of high-quality data and marginal gains obtained from larger computational resource consumption. Inspired by the abilities of human and traditional AI systems in learning from practice, constructing memory and continual learning frameworks for LLMsys has become an important and popular research direction in recent literature. Yet, existing benchmarks for LLM memory often focus on evaluating the system on homogeneous reading comprehension tasks with long-form inputs rather than testing their abilities to learn from accumulated user feedback in service time. Therefore, we propose a user feedback simulation framework and a comprehensive benchmark covering multiple domains, languages, and types of tasks to evaluate the continual learning abilities of LLMsys. Experiments show that the effectiveness and efficiency of state-of-the-art baselines are far from satisfying, and we hope this benchmark could pave the way for future studies on LLM memory and optimization algorithms.
Reinforcement learning (RL) has become an effective approach for fine-tuning large language models (LLMs), particularly to enhance their reasoning capabilities. However, RL fine-tuning remains highly resource-intensive, and existing work has largely overlooked the problem of data efficiency. In this paper, we propose two techniques to improve data efficiency in LLM RL fine-tuning: difficulty-targeted online data selection and rollout replay. We introduce the notion of adaptive difficulty to guide online data selection, prioritizing questions of moderate difficulty that are more likely to yield informative learning signals. To estimate adaptive difficulty efficiently, we develop an attention-based framework that requires rollouts for only a small reference set of questions. The adaptive difficulty of the remaining questions is then estimated based on their similarity to this set. To further reduce rollout cost, we introduce a rollout replay mechanism inspired by experience replay in traditional RL. This technique reuses recent rollouts, lowering per-step computation while maintaining stable updates. Experiments across 6 LLM-dataset combinations show that our method reduces RL fine-tuning time by 23% to 62% while reaching the same level of performance as the original GRPO algorithm. Our code is available at https://github.com/ASTRAL-Group/data-efficient-llm-rl.
Despite rapid advancements in text-to-image (T2I) models, their safety mechanisms are vulnerable to adversarial prompts, which maliciously generate unsafe images. Current red-teaming methods for proactively assessing such vulnerabilities usually require white-box access to T2I models, and rely on inefficient per-prompt optimization, as well as inevitably generate semantically meaningless prompts easily blocked by filters. In this paper, we propose APT (AutoPrompT), a black-box framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) to automatically generate human-readable adversarial suffixes for benign prompts. We first introduce an alternating optimization-finetuning pipeline between adversarial suffix optimization and fine-tuning the LLM utilizing the optimized suffix. Furthermore, we integrates a dual-evasion strategy in optimization phase, enabling the bypass of both perplexity-based filter and blacklist word filter: (1) we constrain the LLM generating human-readable prompts through an auxiliary LLM perplexity scoring, which starkly contrasts with prior token-level gibberish, and (2) we also introduce banned-token penalties to suppress the explicit generation of banned-tokens in blacklist. Extensive experiments demonstrate the excellent red-teaming performance of our human-readable, filter-resistant adversarial prompts, as well as superior zero-shot transferability which enables instant adaptation to unseen prompts and exposes critical vulnerabilities even in commercial APIs (e.g., Leonardo.Ai.).
Reinforcement Learning (RL) has demonstrated significant potential in enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). However, the success of RL for LLMs heavily relies on human-curated datasets and verifiable rewards, which limit their scalability and generality. Recent Self-Play RL methods, inspired by the success of the paradigm in games and Go, aim to enhance LLM reasoning capabilities without human-annotated data. However, their methods primarily depend on a grounded environment for feedback (e.g., a Python interpreter or a game engine); extending them to general domains remains challenging. To address these challenges, we propose Multi-Agent Evolve (MAE), a framework that enables LLMs to self-evolve in solving diverse tasks, including mathematics, reasoning, and general knowledge Q&A. The core design of MAE is based on a triplet of interacting agents (Proposer, Solver, Judge) that are instantiated from a single LLM, and applies reinforcement learning to optimize their behaviors. The Proposer generates questions, the Solver attempts solutions, and the Judge evaluates both while co-evolving. Experiments on Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct demonstrate that MAE achieves an average improvement of 4.54% on multiple benchmarks. These results highlight MAE as a scalable, data-efficient method for enhancing the general reasoning abilities of LLMs with minimal reliance on human-curated supervision.
Knowledge Distillation (KD) has become a cornerstone technique for compressing Large Language Models (LLMs) into smaller, more efficient student models. However, conventional KD approaches typically apply the distillation loss uniformly across all tokens, regardless of the teacher's confidence. This indiscriminate mimicry can introduce noise, as the student is forced to learn from the teacher's uncertain or high-entropy predictions, which may ultimately harm student performance-especially when the teacher is much larger and more powerful. To address this, we propose Speculative Knowledge Distillation (SpecKD), a novel, plug-and-play framework that introduces a dynamic, token-level gating mechanism inspired by the "propose-and-verify" paradigm of speculative decoding. At each step, the student's token proposal is verified against the teacher's distribution; the distillation loss is selectively applied only to "accepted" tokens, while "rejected" tokens are masked out. Extensive experiments on diverse text generation tasks show that SpecKD consistently and significantly outperforms strong KD baselines, leading to more stable training and more capable student models, and achieving state-of-the-art results.
Mitigating hallucinations in Large Language Models (LLMs) is critical for their reliable deployment. Existing methods typically fine-tune LLMs to abstain from answering questions beyond their knowledge scope. However, these methods often rely on coarse-grained signals to guide LLMs to abstain, such as overall confidence or uncertainty scores on multiple sampled answers, which may result in an imprecise awareness of the model's own knowledge boundaries. To this end, we propose a novel reinforcement learning framework built on $\textbf{\underline{Fi}ne-grained \underline{S}emantic \underline{Co}nfidence \underline{Re}ward (\Ours)}$, which guides LLMs to abstain via sample-specific confidence. Specifically, our method operates by sampling multiple candidate answers and conducting semantic clustering, then training the LLM to retain answers within high-confidence clusters and discard those within low-confidence ones, thereby promoting accurate post-hoc abstention. Additionally, we propose a new metric for evaluating the reliability of abstention fine-tuning tasks more comprehensively. Our method significantly enhances reliability in both in-domain and out-of-distribution benchmarks.
Recent progress in large language models (LLMs) has advanced automatic code generation, yet most approaches rely on direct, single-step translation from problem descriptions to code, disregarding structured software engineering practices. We introduce a lifecycle-aware framework that systematically incorporates intermediate artifacts such as requirements analysis, state machine modeling, and pseudocode into both the training and inference stages. This design aligns code generation with standard software development phases and enables more structured reasoning. Experiments show that lifecycle-level fine-tuning improves code correctness by up to 75% over the same model before fine-tuning, with performance gains compounding across intermediate stages. Multi-step inference consistently surpasses single-step generation, demonstrating the effectiveness of intermediate scaffolding. Notably, open-source LLMs, once fine-tuned under our framework, match or slightly outperform models pretrained on code. When applied to DeepSeek-Coder-1.3B, our framework yields relative CodeBLEU improvements of 34.3%, 20.0%, 11.2%, and 22.3% over ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4o-mini, DeepSeek-R1, and LLaMA-8B, respectively. Our pipeline also proves robust with up to 80\% less training data, confirming its resilience. Ablation studies further reveal that each intermediate artifact contributes distinctly to final code quality, with state machine modeling yielding the most substantial impact. Our source code and detailed experimental data are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/Lifecycle-Aware-3CCB.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are being applied in a wide array of settings, well beyond the typical language-oriented use cases. In particular, LLMs are increasingly used as a plug-and-play method for fitting data and generating predictions. Prior work has shown that LLMs, via in-context learning or supervised fine-tuning, can perform competitively with many tabular supervised learning techniques in terms of predictive performance. However, we identify a critical vulnerability of using LLMs for data fitting -- making changes to data representation that are completely irrelevant to the underlying learning task can drastically alter LLMs' predictions on the same data. For example, simply changing variable names can sway the size of prediction error by as much as 82% in certain settings. Such prediction sensitivity with respect to task-irrelevant variations manifests under both in-context learning and supervised fine-tuning, for both close-weight and open-weight general-purpose LLMs. Moreover, by examining the attention scores of an open-weight LLM, we discover a non-uniform attention pattern: training examples and variable names/values which happen to occupy certain positions in the prompt receive more attention when output tokens are generated, even though different positions are expected to receive roughly the same attention. This partially explains the sensitivity in the presence of task-irrelevant variations. We also consider a state-of-the-art tabular foundation model (TabPFN) trained specifically for data fitting. Despite being explicitly designed to achieve prediction robustness, TabPFN is still not immune to task-irrelevant variations. Overall, despite LLMs' impressive predictive capabilities, currently they lack even the basic level of robustness to be used as a principled data-fitting tool.
Our study contributes to the scheduling and combinatorial optimization literature with new heuristics discovered by leveraging the power of Large Language Models (LLMs). We focus on the single-machine total tardiness (SMTT) problem, which aims to minimize total tardiness by sequencing n jobs on a single processor without preemption, given processing times and due dates. We develop and benchmark two novel LLM-discovered heuristics, the EDD Challenger (EDDC) and MDD Challenger (MDDC), inspired by the well-known Earliest Due Date (EDD) and Modified Due Date (MDD) rules. In contrast to prior studies that employed simpler rule-based heuristics, we evaluate our LLM-discovered algorithms using rigorous criteria, including optimality gaps and solution time derived from a mixed-integer programming (MIP) formulation of SMTT. We compare their performance against state-of-the-art heuristics and exact methods across various job sizes (20, 100, 200, and 500 jobs). For instances with more than 100 jobs, exact methods such as MIP and dynamic programming become computationally intractable. Up to 500 jobs, EDDC improves upon the classic EDD rule and another widely used algorithm in the literature. MDDC consistently outperforms traditional heuristics and remains competitive with exact approaches, particularly on larger and more complex instances. This study shows that human-LLM collaboration can produce scalable, high-performing heuristics for NP-hard constrained combinatorial optimization, even under limited resources when effectively configured.
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated promising performance in generating diagnostic conclusions from imaging findings, thereby supporting radiology reporting, trainee education, and quality control. However, systematic guidance on how to optimize prompt design across different clinical contexts remains underexplored. Moreover, a comprehensive and standardized framework for assessing the trustworthiness of LLM-generated radiology reports is yet to be established. This study aims to enhance the trustworthiness of LLM-generated liver MRI reports by introducing a Multi-Dimensional Credibility Assessment (MDCA) framework and providing guidance on institution-specific prompt optimization. The proposed framework is applied to evaluate and compare the performance of several advanced LLMs, including Kimi-K2-Instruct-0905, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507, DeepSeek-V3, and ByteDance-Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct, using the SiliconFlow platform.
Resource-Efficient LLM Application for Structured Transformation of Unstructured Financial Contracts
The transformation of unstructured legal contracts into standardized, machine-readable formats is essential for automating financial workflows. The Common Domain Model (CDM) provides a standardized framework for this purpose, but converting complex legal documents like Credit Support Annexes (CSAs) into CDM representations remains a significant challenge. In this paper, we present an extension of the CDMizer framework, a template-driven solution that ensures syntactic correctness and adherence to the CDM schema during contract-to-CDM conversion. We apply this extended framework to a real-world task, comparing its performance with a benchmark developed by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) for CSA clause extraction. Our results show that CDMizer, when integrated with a significantly smaller, open-source Large Language Model (LLM), achieves competitive performance in terms of accuracy and efficiency against larger, proprietary models. This work underscores the potential of resource-efficient solutions to automate legal contract transformation, offering a cost-effective and scalable approach that can meet the needs of financial institutions with constrained resources or strict data privacy requirements.
Traditional LLM alignment methods are vulnerable to heterogeneity in human preferences. Fitting a na\"ive probabilistic model to pairwise comparison data (say over prompt-completion pairs) yields an inconsistent estimate of the population-average utility -a canonical measure of social welfare. We propose a new method, dubbed the sign estimator, that provides a simple, provably consistent, and efficient estimator by replacing cross-entropy with binary classification loss in the aggregation step. This simple modification recovers consistent ordinal alignment under mild assumptions and achieves the first polynomial finite-sample error bounds in this setting. In realistic simulations of LLM alignment using digital twins, the sign estimator substantially reduces preference distortion over a panel of simulated personas, cutting (angular) estimation error by nearly 35% and decreasing disagreement with true population preferences from 12% to 8% compared to standard RLHF. Our method also compares favorably to panel data heuristics that explicitly model user heterogeneity and require tracking individual-level preference data-all while maintaining the implementation simplicity of existing LLM alignment pipelines.
Uncovering the Potential Risks in Unlearning: Danger of English-only Unlearning in Multilingual LLMs
There have been a couple of studies showing that attempting to erase multilingual knowledge using only English data is insufficient for multilingual LLMs. However, their analyses remain highly performance-oriented. In this paper, we switch the point of view to evaluation, and address an additional blind spot which reveals itself when the multilingual LLM is fully finetuned with parallel multilingual dataset before unlearning. Here, language confusion occurs whereby a model responds in language different from that of the input prompt. Language confusion is a problematic phenomenon in unlearning, causing the standard reference-based metrics to fail. We tackle this phenomenon in three steps: (1) introduce N-gram-based Language-Mix (N-Mix) score to quantitatively show the language confusion is pervasive and consistent in multilingual LLMs, (2) demonstrate that reference-based metrics result in false negatives when N-Mix score is high, and(3) suggest the need of new type of unlearning evaluation that can directly assess the content of the generated sentences. We call this type of metrics as semantic-based metric.
LLM-powered multimodal systems are increasingly used to interpret human social behavior, yet how researchers apply the models' 'social competence' remains poorly understood. This paper presents a systematic literature review of 176 publications across different application domains (e.g., healthcare, education, and entertainment). Using a four-dimensional coding framework (application, technical, evaluative, and ethical), we find (1) frequent use of pattern recognition and information extraction from multimodal sources, but limited support for adaptive, interactive reasoning; (2) a dominant 'modality-to-text' pipeline that privileges language over rich audiovisual cues, striping away nuanced social cues; (3) evaluation practices reliant on static benchmarks, with socially grounded, human-centered assessments rare; and (4) Ethical discussions focused mainly on legal and rights-related risks (e.g., privacy), leaving societal risks (e.g., deception) overlooked--or at best acknowledged but left unaddressed. We outline a research agenda for evaluating socially competent, ethically informed, and interaction-aware multi-modal systems.
This study presents a benchmarking analysis of the Qualcomm Cloud AI 100 Ultra (QAic) accelerator for large language model (LLM) inference, evaluating its energy efficiency (throughput per watt), performance, and hardware scalability against NVIDIA A100 GPUs (in 4x and 8x configurations) within the National Research Platform (NRP) ecosystem. A total of 12 open-source LLMs, ranging from 124 million to 70 billion parameters, are served using the vLLM framework. Our analysis reveals that QAic achieves competitive energy efficiency with advantages on specific models while enabling more granular hardware allocation: some 70B models operate on as few as 1 QAic card versus 8 A100 GPUs required, with 20x lower power consumption (148W vs 2,983W). For smaller models, single QAic devices achieve up to 35x lower power consumption compared to our 4-GPU A100 configuration (36W vs 1,246W). The findings offer insights into the potential of the Qualcomm Cloud AI 100 Ultra for energy-constrained and resource-efficient HPC deployments within the National Research Platform (NRP).
Automatically configuring storage systems is hard: parameter spaces are large and conditions vary across workloads, deployments, and versions. Heuristic and ML tuners are often system specific, require manual glue, and degrade under changes. Recent LLM-based approaches help but usually treat tuning as a single-shot, system-specific task, which limits cross-system reuse, constrains exploration, and weakens validation. We present StorageXTuner, an LLM agent-driven auto-tuning framework for heterogeneous storage engines. StorageXTuner separates concerns across four agents - Executor (sandboxed benchmarking), Extractor (performance digest), Searcher (insight-guided configuration exploration), and Reflector (insight generation and management). The design couples an insight-driven tree search with layered memory that promotes empirically validated insights and employs lightweight checkers to guard against unsafe actions. We implement a prototype and evaluate it on RocksDB, LevelDB, CacheLib, and MySQL InnoDB with YCSB, MixGraph, and TPC-H/C. Relative to out-of-the-box settings and to ELMo-Tune, StorageXTuner reaches up to 575% and 111% higher throughput, reduces p99 latency by as much as 88% and 56%, and converges with fewer trials.
The increased use of large language models (LLMs) across a variety of real-world applications calls for mechanisms to verify the factual accuracy of their outputs. Difficulties lie in assessing the factuality of free-form responses in open domains. Also, different papers use disparate evaluation benchmarks and measurements, which renders them hard to compare and hampers future progress. To mitigate these issues, we propose OpenFactCheck, a unified framework for building customized automatic fact-checking systems, benchmarking their accuracy, evaluating factuality of LLMs, and verifying claims in a document. OpenFactCheck consists of three modules: (i) CUSTCHECKER allows users to easily customize an automatic fact-checker and verify the factual correctness of documents and claims, (ii) LLMEVAL, a unified evaluation framework assesses LLM's factuality ability from various perspectives fairly, and (iii) CHECKEREVAL is an extensible solution for gauging the reliability of automatic fact-checkers' verification results using human-annotated datasets. Data and code are publicly available at https://github.com/yuxiaw/openfactcheck.
The increased use of large language models (LLMs) across a variety of real-world applications calls for automatic tools to check the factual accuracy of their outputs, as LLMs often hallucinate. This is difficult as it requires assessing the factuality of free-form open-domain responses. While there has been a lot of research on this topic, different papers use different evaluation benchmarks and measures, which makes them hard to compare and hampers future progress. To mitigate these issues, we developed OpenFactCheck, a unified framework, with three modules: (i) RESPONSEEVAL, which allows users to easily customize an automatic fact-checking system and to assess the factuality of all claims in an input document using that system, (ii) LLMEVAL, which assesses the overall factuality of an LLM, and (iii) CHECKEREVAL, a module to evaluate automatic fact-checking systems. OpenFactCheck is open-sourced (https://github.com/mbzuai-nlp/openfactcheck) and publicly released as a Python library (https://pypi.org/project/openfactcheck/) and also as a web service (http://app.openfactcheck.com). A video describing the system is available at https://youtu.be/-i9VKL0HleI.
Obtaining high-quality outputs from Large Language Models (LLMs) often depends upon the choice of a sampling-based decoding strategy to probabilistically choose the next token at each generation step. While a variety of such sampling methods have been proposed, their performance can be sensitive to the selection of hyperparameters which may require different settings depending upon the generation task and temperature configuration. In this work, we introduce $p$-less sampling: an information-theoretic approach to sampling which dynamically sets a truncation threshold at each decoding step based on the entire token probability distribution. Unlike existing methods, $p$-less sampling has no hyperparameters and consistently produces high-quality outputs as temperature increases. We provide theoretical perspectives on $p$-less sampling to ground our proposed method and conduct experiments to empirically validate its effectiveness across a range of math, logical reasoning, and creative writing tasks. Our results demonstrate how $p$-less sampling consistently outperforms existing sampling approaches while exhibiting much less degradation in text quality at higher temperature values. We further show how $p$-less achieves greater inference-time efficiency than alternative methods through lower average token sampling times and shorter generation lengths, without sacrificing accuracy. Finally, we provide analyses to highlight the benefits of $p$-less through qualitative examples, case studies, and diversity assessments. The code is available at https://github.com/ryttry/p-less .
The assurance of mobile app GUIs has become increasingly important, as the GUI serves as the primary medium of interaction between users and apps. Although numerous automated GUI testing approaches have been developed with diverse strategies, a substantial gap remains between these approaches and the underlying app business logic. Most existing approaches focus on general exploration rather than the completion of specific testing scenarios, often missing critical functionalities. Inspired by manual testing, which treats business logic-driven scenarios as the fundamental unit of testing, this paper introduces an approach that leverages large language models to comprehend GUI semantics and contextual relevance to given scenarios. Building on this capability, we propose ScenGen, an LLM-guided scenario-based GUI testing framework employing multi-agent collaboration to simulate and automate manual testing phases. Specifically, ScenGen integrates five agents: the Observer, Decider, Executor, Supervisor, and Recorder. The Observer perceives the app GUI state by extracting and structuring GUI widgets and layouts, interpreting semantic information. This is passed to the Decider, which makes scenario-driven decisions with LLM guidance to identify target widgets and determine actions toward fulfilling specific goals. The Executor performs these operations, while the Supervisor verifies alignment with intended scenario completion, ensuring traceability and consistency. Finally, the Recorder logs GUI operations into context memory as a knowledge base for subsequent decision-making and monitors runtime bugs. Comprehensive evaluations demonstrate that ScenGen effectively generates scenario-based GUI tests guided by LLM collaboration, achieving higher relevance to business logic and improving the completeness of automated GUI testing.