2026-09-16 | | Total: 109
Large language models can produce fluent answers when their factual support is weak. This paper introduces Chain-of-Self-Questioning (CoSQ), a prompt-only framework that makes answer commitment conditional on an explicit assessment of the information required to answer a question. We evaluate three CoSQ variants under seventeen conditions on the 817-item TruthfulQA multiple-choice validation set using eleven open-weight and hosted model families. In the final balanced-option protocol, Grounded-CoSQ at τ=0.90 reduces the mean unconditional wrong-commitment rate from 13.1% under chain-of-thought prompting to 8.9%, a 32.1% relative reduction, while increasing answered accuracy from 86.9% to 89.7% and answering 87.6% of questions. Both improvements hold for all eleven models and at every evaluated threshold. Critical-CoSQ and Adaptive-CoSQ provide neighboring operating points with 88.6% and 86.5% coverage, respectively, while remaining more reliable than the baseline. A secondary Natural Questions Short-Answer evaluation provides convergent open-form evidence. These findings show that self-assessment can support explicit, tunable answer-or-abstain decisions when an unsupported commitment is more costly than referral or review.
Pruning can reduce the deployment cost of large language models (LLMs), but its impact on context-grounded tool calling remains poorly understood. We systematically study pruning-induced degradation in smart-home tool calling across four LLMs spanning dense Transformer, dense hybrid, and mixture-of-experts (MoE) architectures, together with depth, width, hybrid, and expert pruning methods. After post-pruning supervised fine-tuning (SFT), we evaluate more than 19,500 instances from three smart-home datasets. Beyond aggregate task accuracy, we characterize degradation along two dimensions: action components (i.e., operation, device, argument, and value) and task complexity. Our results show that dense models have narrow safe pruning regions followed by sharp degradation, while MoE models tolerate substantially more pruning. Pruning degrades grounded specificity before schema-level intent, and aggressive dense pruning can induce systematic over-refusal. These findings highlight the importance of evaluating pruning beyond aggregate accuracy when selecting pruned LLMs for reliable tool execution.
We submit MéTRON-FR, a 125M GPT-2 pretrained on 92.47M words of French, to the BabyLM 2026 Strict track. It scores 85.97 +/- 0.17% on QFrBLiMP (a native Quebec-French benchmark of grammatical minimal pairs) and 62.80% on the BabyLM-weighted leaderboard. A cross-lingual GLUE (General Language Understanding Evaluation) protocol that combines French task-data translation with rank-16 LoRA (Low-Rank Adaptation) produces a sharp task-type gradient: relational tasks gain measurably, while world-knowledge tasks regress. Bilingual Lexicon Induction aligns the French embeddings to GPT-2 at p@1 = 68.84 +/- 8.61%, 18X above chance, suggesting cross-lingual alignment tracks acquired grammatical competence rather than training duration. An ablation study shows that single-token zero-shot scoring is dominated by tokenizer and template artifacts at the child scale, motivating tokenizer-swap sensitivity, placebo-controlled prompting, and native-language minimal-pair benchmarks as standard diagnostics.
This paper addresses the challenge of making complex healthcare information more accessible through automated Plain Language Adaptation (PLA). PLA aims to simplify technical medical language, bridging a critical gap between the complexity of healthcare texts and patients' reading comprehension. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs), such as GPT and BART, have opened new possibilities for PLA, especially in zero-shot and few-shot learning contexts where task-specific data is limited. In this work, we leverage the capabilities of LLMs such as GPT-4o-mini, Gemini-1.5-pro, and LLaMA for text simplification. Additionally, we incorporate Mixture-of-Agents (MoA) techniques to enhance adaptability and robustness in PLA tasks. Key contributions include a comparative analysis of prompting strategies, finetuning with QLoRA on different LLMs, and the integration of MoA technique. Our findings demonstrate the effectiveness of LLM-driven PLA, showcasing its potential in making healthcare information more comprehensible while preserving essential content.
Full-duplex spoken dialogue systems must distinguish interruptions that require yielding the floor from backchannels that permit continued speaking. Existing benchmarks typically evaluate events independently and may therefore reward fixed action preferences rather than context-sensitive decisions. We introduce ECHO, a paired diagnostic benchmark for Chinese full-duplex turn-taking. ECHO pairs examples with the same overlap transcript but contrasting preceding multi-turn dialogue contexts, with one requiring Yield and the other Keep. It additionally includes off-talk examples for diagnosing unnecessary yielding. We introduce pair accuracy, which requires correct decisions on both members of a pair and assigns no credit to constant-action policies. Experiments on multiple full-duplex systems show that most exhibit a pronounced bias toward \textsc{Yield}, performing substantially better on interruptions than on backchannels, while another system remains comparatively balanced. These findings demonstrate that interruption-only evaluation can overestimate practical turn-taking reliability. ECHO and its metadata will be publicly released.
To answer questions outside of their pre-training data, large language models (LLMs) need access to new information, which can be presented in the context window as documents, encoded into the model's parameters, or injected as latent representations. However, each of these methods comes with different efficiency, cost, and performance trade-offs, with no single winner. We present a controlled comparison of representation-based (KV-cache based) and parametric (fine-tuning-based) adaptation methods on five knowledge-intensive benchmarks. We show that in the oracle setting, Cartridges (KV) are the most accurate injection method at nearly every storage budget, outperforming parametric methods by 10 points. Compaction (KV) matches Cartridges only at low compression rates, lagging behind the parametric methods by 10 points at rates higher than $50\times$. In the more realistic multi-document retrieval scenario, Cartridges are the only method that matches in-context learning (ICL), leading the parametric methods by 29 points and Compaction by 15 points. Nonetheless, Cartridges are also the only method, besides full fine-tuning and large MLP adapters, that suffers from catastrophic forgetting, i.e., a 6% performance degradation on control benchmarks, with 13% in coding.
This paper describes our submission to the SHROOM-Visions shared task on detecting and classifying hallucinated character spans in vision-language model outputs across four languages. We employ several fine-tuned vision-language models as independent annotators and combine their span predictions through character-level majority voting, and additionally explore activation probes. The approach ranks first in three of four languages and places on the podium in every language and metric. Our analysis indicates that disagreement among diverse models tracks disagreement among human annotators.
The use of LLMs to complete online surveys impacts the validity of survey-based research, but detecting such usage remains underexplored. We introduce an initial benchmark dataset, namely ASURRE, for AI-assisted survey participation to capture usage strategies ranging from full generation and revision to persona-grounded agentic completion. Controlled by these strategies, LLM-assisted survey responses are generated using multiple LLMs on three real-world surveys in different disciplines, paired with genuine human responses. Our evaluation of existing machine-generated text (MGT) detectors shows that naive AI usage is readily detectable, whereas persona-grounded agents that mimic entire respondents push detector performance toward chance. We further show that agentic completion cannot fully replicate respondent-level behaviour and leaves distinctive behavioural traces. While individual cues can be circumvented by targeted prompting, a simple few-shot, training-free aggregator over these cues improves mean AUROC by +0.14 over the best existing detector across agentic settings. Our project is available at https://github.com/mike-qz-wang/ASURRE.
This study investigates the zero-shot ability of large language models (LLMs) to identify and classify hidden narratives in social messages. Our research hypothesis is that LLMs' extensive contextual knowledge allows them to interpret messages on a deeper, pragmatic level, going beyond basic sentiment or topic analysis. Experiments on the Dipromats and SemEval datasets show that providing models with human-written narrative descriptions significantly improves performance, without the need of training examples. In contrast, automatically generated descriptions or the use of few examples (few-shot) often degrade accuracy due to subtle shifts in framing. The study also finds that ensemble methods, particularly majority voting, enhance robustness and that larger models perform best while also being less sensitive to prompt variations. The findings validate that LLMs can effectively detect strategic narratives in a zero-shot setting, and when combined with simple ensembling and human-written descriptions, they can rival supervised systems, offering a scalable solution for narrative detection, specially when there is no training data for the vast majority of domains.
Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) operate through a continuous sense-compute-act loop within an open context environment, making it impossible to anticipate all the situations the system will face. To cope with this openness, stakeholders rely on assumptions, formalized into design models. However, these assumptions may no longer hold once the system is confronted with runtime reality, resulting in a discrepancy between expected and observed behaviour known in literature as the reality gap. Existing approaches mainly focus on reducing or overcoming it by making simulations more faithful to reality, with no unified methodology to structure and exploit invalidated assumptions that give rise to this gap as reusable design knowledge. We refer to the persistent reliance on invalidated assumptions -and the resulting false confidence in the design model's operational validity -as design illusions, and argue that they need to be made explicit, structured, and exploited as knowledge to support better design decisions. We propose a conceptual pipeline for illusions-awareness that identifies, classifies, characterizes, and leverages illusions to transform them into actionable design knowledge.
We introduce a simple architectural modification to decoder-only transformers: a persistent recurrent state that observes hidden representations via cross-attention, updates itself through a GRU, and modulates subsequent processing via gated addition. Inserted between the lower and upper halves of a 6-layer transformer, this module adds only 3.7\% additional parameters while reducing evaluation loss from $2.438 \pm 0.004$ to $1.743 \pm 0.018$, corresponding to a 28.5\% reduction on held-out language modeling data. The improvement is statistically significant across 5 random seeds ($p < 0.01$) and corresponds to reduced overfitting (generalization gap 0.12 vs 0.26). Through controlled ablations, we demonstrate that the improvement stems entirely from the persistent memory topology, not from auxiliary self-prediction objectives. A model with identical topology but no auxiliary loss performs equivalently, while a random auxiliary loss provides no benefit. Representation probing reveals that the persistent state encodes narrative position (52\% vs 33\% chance level)---information that standard attention maintains less efficiently. Our results suggest that bridging transformer layers with a lightweight recurrent memory is a simple, effective approach to improving generalization in small-scale language models.
While draft-model-free speculative decoding offers a promising path to efficient LLM inference, it is frequently constrained by stale draft candidates and the high computational cost of the verification. To address these challenges, we propose ECHO, a hierarchical dual-loop framework that exploits the functional asymmetry between LLM layers. Leveraging the high discriminative efficiency of early layers and the authoritative distribution of final layers, ECHO bifurcates inference into a high-frequency inner loop and a low-frequency outer loop. Within the inner loop, early-layer bonus logits drive rapid, multi-step draft-tree exploration at a minimal cost. Simultaneously, the outer loop performs authoritative full-model verification through a state-reuse mechanism. Crucially, the outer loop also utilizes final-layer bonus logits to correct existing paths and supplement the tree with high-confidence candidates for subsequent cycles. Experimental results across diverse benchmarks demonstrate that ECHO significantly boosts mean accepted tokens and achieves a 2.4$\times$ to 2.9$\times$ speedup, outperforming existing state-of-the-art baselines with negligible engineering overhead and no extra deployment parameters, albeit with a one-shot fine-tuning dependency for optimal acceleration. The code is available at https://github.com/whucs21Mzy/ECHO.
Metaphor research has gained increasing attention due to its relevance to linguistic creativity, language use, cognitive processes, and related areas. While many efforts have been devoted to metaphor identification and annotation in English and other languages, Arabic remains under-resourced in this area. In this work, we propose the Arabic Metaphor Identification Procedure (AraMIP), a novel guideline for Arabic metaphor annotation. AraMIP builds on the widely used Metaphor Identification Procedure Vrije Universiteit (MIPVU) framework, incorporating adaptations that accounts for the language-specific properties of Arabic. We distinguish three major types of Arabic figurative language: Isti'ara (metaphor), kinaya (metonymy/indirect expression), and tashbih (simile), and annotate a pilot dataset of 300 sentences (5277 words). Our analysis reveals key challenges specific to Arabic, including morphological complexity, inconsistencies in dictionary sense ordering, and the absence of standardized contextual materials for annotators. This work contributes a first step toward standardized Arabic figurative instances and facilitates the development of larger annotated resources, thereby supporting future research on figurative language in Arabic.
Cultural upheavals impact many aspects of social life, and many studies have investigated their impact on language patterns. However, few investigations have isolated the impact of upheavals on individuals at scale in popular media. The current work evaluated millions of song lyrics spanning more than a century in search of within-artist and between-artist signals of distress from the Vietnam War, the terrorist attacks of 9/11, and COVID-19. Compared to a five-year baseline, rates of self-references - a marker of psychological distancing - were significantly reduced after the Vietnam War and September 11th. Cognitive processing terms were elevated post-upheaval vs. pre-upheaval, which indicated artists' increased attempts to make meaning from such massive disruptions. Content patterns corroborated these findings as artists wrote more about "life and freedom" (societal conditions) and less about "courtship and nightlife" (interpersonal connection) following the upheavals. Cultural upheavals modify individual and collective verbal behavior, demonstrating their far-reaching impact on society.
Large language models can easily generate explanations for their own outputs, but such self-explanations are not necessarily faithful to the model's behavior. We study this issue through counterfactual self-explanations, where a model minimally edits an input so that its own prediction changes. Across sentiment analysis and natural language inference, we evaluate ten instruction-tuned models from the LLaMA-3 and Qwen-2.5 families, measuring faithfulness, minimality, and alignment with human-annotated rationales. Our results show that model scale is the strongest determinant of explanation quality: larger models are substantially more likely to generate counterfactuals that flip their own predictions and target decision-relevant evidence. In contrast, the rationale-guided condition produces edit-minimal counterfactuals that are also more human-aligned. However, it does not consistently improve faithfulness. Overall, counterfactual self-explanations can provide useful behavioral evidence about model decisions, but their reliability depends strongly on model capacity and should be empirically validated rather than assumed.
Grounded language-model systems are often evaluated by final answer accuracy, yet a correct answer can be unsupported, drawn from the wrong source, or produced when evidence is insufficient or contradictory. We introduce EviScope, a paired counterfactual benchmark that holds the question fixed while adding, removing, distracting, or contradicting its evidence. EviScope-v1.1 contains 40 four-condition quartets with repaired counterfactual claims and span-level support labels for automatic evaluation. Across 960 gold-blind generations from Qwen2.5-7B, Llama 3.1 8B, and Gemini 3.5 Flash, paired metrics expose model-dependent grounding behavior that answer accuracy hides. On two local open models, an explicit evidence-action gate underperforms vanilla RAG on QCS: 0.15 vs. 0.50 for Qwen and 0.10 vs. 0.375 for Llama. Gemini reaches 0.944 joint success under both prompts, yet still answers 5% of conflict cases after contradiction insertion. EviScope therefore distinguishes unsupported answering, conflict blindness, and wrong non-answer actions rather than scoring answers alone.
Multi-hop question answering requires combining information from multiple documents to answer complex questions. These systems have grown increasingly capable, yet when they fail, the error is typically attributed to not finding the right documents. Whether this holds at the level of individual reasoning steps remains largely unexamined. We investigate this across three standard multi-hop QA benchmarks and find that failures decompose into two distinct modes: retrieval failures, where the needed passage was not retrieved, and extraction failures, where the passage was retrieved but the needed fact could not be extracted - a phenomenon we term the fact-grounding gap. Extraction failures account for nearly half of all per-hop deficiencies and are invisible to standard retrieval metrics. They remain unresolved by every retrieval intervention we test, establishing a ceiling for retrieval-only improvements. The gap's severity varies across benchmarks and question types, but extraction failures appear on every dataset we measure. Our findings reveal that retrieval failures and extraction failures are fundamentally different bottlenecks requiring different solutions - a distinction absent from current evaluation practice.
Crisis sentiment analysis is especially challenging for low-resource languages such as Bangla, where language, context, and public reaction shift rapidly. We introduce UNRESTSENT200K, a Bangla crisis sentiment dataset with approximately 200K Facebook and YouTube comments from the July-August 2024 Bangladesh uprising. The dataset covers five event-aligned phases, from early escalation and internet blackout to regime transition and a later flood crisis. Each comment is linked to its parent post, enabling evaluation with and without discourse context. All comments are annotated through a fully human process involving 14 native Bangla-speaking annotators and senior validation, achieving substantial agreement (kappa = 0.73, alpha = 0.71) and 94.2% blind-audit agreement. We benchmark fine-tuned encoders, prompted LLMs, and LoRA-tuned LLMs. Results show that parent-post context consistently improves performance, while temporal shift across phases causes large performance drops. Strong LLMs perform well, but still struggle with sarcasm, implicit political references, and phase-dependent meaning. UNRESTSENT200K provides a benchmark for studying context-aware and temporally robust sentiment analysis in low-resource crisis discourse. UNRESTSENT200K is available at https://sami0055.github.io/UNRESTSENT200K/
Autoresearch agents are reshaping the research ecosystem, but they can also let flawed claims enter the literature at scale. Human advisors catch such issues in drafts through careful, traceable feedback, yet advisor-style assessment requires extensive manual effort and does not scale. To shift automated paper assessment from a judge to a diagnostician, we introduce PaperDoctor, an agent framework for pre-submission feedback with three key innovations. First, a holistic hierarchical framework evaluates writing, layout, references, code, theory, prior work, and experiments through three layers: L1 surface screening, L2 typed verifiers that route each claim to the appropriate evidence, and L3 reproducers that rerun experiments by priority. Second, each finding contains an observation, a pointer to specific evidence such as a sentence, equation, or code line, and a revision suggestion, making critiques auditable and actionable. Third, PaperDoctor selectively rebuilds and reruns experiments based on claim importance and compute budget, surfacing reproducibility gaps and quantitative limitations that are invisible from the manuscript alone. We evaluate PaperDoctor on 30 in-progress papers, yielding 70.6% agreement and all positive holistic scores, and on 40 manuscripts across machine learning, natural science, and social science, covering human- and AI-authored papers with code. Overall, PaperDoctor produces more auditable feedback than human and other agentic reviewers, pairs critiques with concrete suggestions by design, and complements dimensions often overlooked by human reviewers. We also develop an interactive interface that lets authors browse findings grounded in their paper. PaperDoctor reframes automated paper assessment as diagnosis rather than verdict, taking a concrete step toward AI advisors for more rigorous AI-assisted scientific discovery.
Large Language Models are now common in student assessment, but we know little about how student demographics affect their use. Sometimes, considering student demographics may be necessary -- for example, to improve readability for users with lower educational levels. However, it also risks being a cause of discrimination, e.g., when assigning lower scores to students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. We set up controlled prompts to test 1) explicit demographic effects, where we mention demographic details directly, and 2) implicit effects, where we use conversation history as a demographic signal. We test these settings in three tasks: Automated Essay Scoring, Formative Feedback, and Metalinguistic Question Answering. We test six state-of-the-art LLMs on these tasks. In both explicit and implicit cases, the models pick up on demographic cues and can change their scoring, feedback, and answers accordingly. We find that LLMs frequently adjust the readability of feedback to education levels when these are explicitly mentioned. On the other hand, implicit conditions produce unpredictable biases, such as in question answering, where responses from lower-education levels receive lower sentiment scores. Our results provide clear evidence of demographic sensitivity in LLMs for educational assessment tasks.
Natural language arguments are compelling before they are formally explicit. A premise supports a claim through defeasible warrants, background commitments, and exception conditions that the text leaves implicit. However, formal verification requires the opposite. Making such arguments machine-checkable requires constructing the missing commitments, not only translating given sentences into logic. Construction, however, carries a risk that translation does not: a system free to add premises can make any claim provable, and a formally valid proof may assert the claim outright, prove it without the original premise, or establish more than the claim itself. We address this problem by formulating autoformalization for argumentative material inference as guard completion, in which non-monotonic material support is turned into monotonic formal inference relative to an explicitly constructed guard set. A completion is accepted only when its proof both passes the theorem prover and survives contrastive tests of premise dependence and claim selectivity. We implement this formulation in GUARD, a neuro-symbolic framework in which LLMs construct and formalize candidate guards, Isabelle/HOL verifies the resulting theories and returns step-level feedback for iterative refinement, and the system abstains when no faithful completion can be reached. Our empirical results on Debatepedia and ARCT using different LLMs demonstrate that GUARD yields significant improvements in verified-faithful (+35.3, +32.9 points) and substantial reductions in leakage (-25.9, -21.9 points) over the state-of-the-art LLM-driven theorem proving approach. Moreover, we show that the symbolic soft critique and the explicit assumption layer account for most of these gains, with the soft critique also improving the initial validity of the elicited context and reducing the number of iterations required for successful verification.
Open-weight language models publish the strings their chat templates use to mark turns, roles and tool results, which the tokenizer maps back to the reserved identifiers the model obeys. Anyone who controls text in a prompt can therefore write a turn boundary indistinguishable from one the serving stack wrote. We audit 256 deployed chat tokenizers. All are forgeable, and the flag usually recommended as a fix leaves 56.6% forgeable because it misses the tool and reasoning markers agent systems rely on. We propose nameless tokenization, which leaves the control entries with a reserved identifier and no surface string, so the content encoder cannot emit one and message content reaches the model unaltered. Across five tokenizer families it reproduces the standard token stream exactly on attack-free data and lifts accuracy on a probe of delimiter-bearing text from 8.5% to 59.9%, where sanitizers lose it. Separating a delimiter's appearance from its identifier shows the identifier matters little against a bare task instruction, but carries most of a forged tool result and most of any forged turn once the system message tells the model to treat user content as data.
Ensuring that multilingual language models generate coherent text in a specific target language is a major issue in multilingual language modeling. We develop an optimal control method for target-language text generation as well as a framework for evaluating the quality of generated text in terms of language adherence, linguistic coherence, and semantic coherence. We find that the proposed method performs at least as well as the prominent difference-in-means activation steering method for the majority of models tested, with substantially less hyperparameter tuning required.
Rapid extraction of structured information from social media is important for humanitarian response, yet existing disaster tweet resources mainly provide document-level category labels without span-level entity annotations. We introduce HUMAID-NER, the first named entity recognition dataset built on the HumAID benchmark, containing 60,000 English disaster tweets annotated in BIO format across ten operationally motivated entity types and yielding approximately 175,000 labelled entity spans. Annotations are generated through a reproducible three-stage hybrid pipeline combining a spaCy transformer model, disaster-domain EntityRuler patterns, and structured regular expressions with priority-based overlap resolution. We also propose a joint multitask learning framework that performs disaster-specific named entity recognition and humanitarian event classification using a shared RoBERTa-large encoder. To reduce task conflict during joint training, the model uses homoscedastic uncertainty weighting with learnable task parameters and a two-stage training schedule that freezes the lower 18 of 24 encoder layers in the second stage. On the HUMAID-NER validation set, the proposed system achieves NER span micro-F1 of 0.841 and classification macro-F1 of 0.761 simultaneously. A real-time web dashboard demonstrates end-to-end deployment. The dataset, models, and pipeline code are released to support reproducibility and future crisis informatics research.
We describe tus-nlp's Lit3R (Retrieve-Relate-Read) system for LitTraceQA, a shared task for literature-grounded question answering that requires systems to retrieve relevant papers, identify supporting evidence, and generate answers. Lit3R combines off-the-shelf retrieval, reranking, and large language model (LLM) components without task-specific training. The retriever iteratively combines BM25-based sparse and dense retrieval, cross-encoder reranking, and LLM-based verification, and complements retrieval based on the question with paper-to-paper expansion. The reader first identifies supporting evidence within individual papers and then synthesizes evidence across papers to produce the final answer and evidence trace. On the official test set, our system ranked 4th on the leaderboard. Our code is available at https://github.com/tus-ist-nlp/littraceqa.