AI4Science 论文速递

This paper develops a general transfer learning framework for nonparametric regression with data consisting of multiple groups. Under the assumption that groups share a common structure along with group-specific deviations in additive form, the proposed method employs a two-stage offset learning procedure: the first stage pools data from all groups to estimate an overall mean function, and the second stage estimates offsets for each group, yielding final group-level estimators through additive combination. Upper bounds on the $\mathcal L_2$ error are established for the proposed framework, covering a broad class of nonparametric estimators under mild complexity and noise conditions. When instantiated with deep ReLU networks, explicit convergence rates are derived under hierarchical composition models, demonstrating the ability to overcome the curse of dimensionality. Conditions that enable positive transfer with faster rates are considered, including learning with simpler functions and data augmentation through pooling samples across groups. Various simulations and real-data experiments further validate the effectiveness of the proposed method.

This paper develops a general transfer learning framework for nonparametric regression with data consisting of multiple groups.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in settings where textual summaries, numerical observations, and external tool outputs may provide conflicting evidence. We study how LLMs arbitrate between such sources when they support opposing decisions. To do so, we introduce a controlled synthetic benchmark in which latent risk trajectories generate both numerical time series and natural language summaries, allowing us to construct conflicts where exactly one evidence source is aligned with the ground-truth label. This design lets us independently manipulate modality, temporal recency, source reliability, and evidence provenance. Across open-weight instruction-tuned models, we find that arbitration behaviour is systematic rather than random: models exhibit distinct text-versus-number preferences, follow temporal recency more consistently than explicit reliability cues, and can over-rely on external forecasts even when they conflict with direct contextual evidence. These results suggest that current LLMs often rely on heuristic arbitration strategies when integrating heterogeneous evidence, highlighting a failure mode for tool-augmented decision systems.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in settings where textual summaries, numerical observations, and external tool outputs may provide conflicting evidence.

Watermarking schemes for large language model output are evaluated almost exclusively on English text using each scheme's detection threshold and a narrow set of quality measurements. Multilingual deployment exposes evaluation-design choices that are inconsequential on English but determine conclusions cross-lingually. We propose an evaluation framework with four components: detection thresholds calibrated empirically per deployment context, a threshold-independent companion measurement that distinguishes calibration failures from detection failures, three disjoint quality measurement paradigms (distributional, paired-semantic, and reference-perplexity), and a generalized-entropy decomposition of cross-language disparity over a typological family partition. Applied to six watermarking schemes, three open-weight generators, eleven languages spanning four scripts and eight typological families, and both base and instruction-tuned regimes, the framework reveals failure modes that single-language single-paradigm evaluation cannot surface. Across detection and quality, observed disparity is predominantly between-family on the typological partition, indicating that cross-lingual fairness gaps in watermarking are structural to language properties rather than idiosyncratic to particular languages.

Watermarking schemes for large language model output are evaluated almost exclusively on English text using each scheme's detection threshold and a narrow set of quality measurements.

Existing approaches to anomalous behaviour log detection, such as Wazuh rely primarily on predefined detection rules, while statistical anomaly detection approaches such as OpenSearch identify deviations from previously observed behavioural patterns. Recent research has investigated LLMs for log anomaly detection because of their ability to interpret semantic and contextual information. However, LLM-based approaches can be affected by prompt construction, noisy log data, and reliance on generic datasets that may lack endpoint-specific authentication behaviours. To address these limitations, this study develops a standardised instruction-based LLM classification framework for detecting anomalous authentication behaviours, including borderline cases. A controlled cybersecurity testbed was developed to generate endpoint-specific authentication data, producing a curated dataset comprising normal, borderline, and anomalous behavioural scenarios. Three instruction-tuned LLMs, Meta Llama 3.1 8B Instruct, Qwen 2.5 7B Instruct, and GPT-OSS 20B, were evaluated against Wazuh rule-based detection and OpenSearch Anomaly Detection using a common ground-truth severity framework. Meta Llama 3.1 8B Instruct achieved the strongest overall end-to-end detection performance, with an accuracy of 89.3%, recall of 88.2%, F1-score of 91.8%, and false negative rate of 11.8%. In comparison, Wazuh achieved an accuracy of 52.0% and false negative rate of 68.6%, while OpenSearch achieved an accuracy of 49.3% and false negative rate of 74.5%. Meta Llama also detected 80% of the borderline anomalous scenarios, compared with 20% for Wazuh and 15% for OpenSearch. Qwen achieved lower overall detection performance than Meta Llama but recorded the lowest average inference latency and 100% structured-response validity. GPT-OSS demonstrated strong classification performance when valid responses were produced.

Existing approaches to anomalous behaviour log detection, such as Wazuh rely primarily on predefined detection rules, while statistical anomaly detection approaches such as OpenSearch identify deviations from previously observed behavioural patterns.

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning has significantly improved LLMs' mathematical problem-solving capabilities, but distilling such capabilities into smaller models remains challenging due to the capacity mismatch between verbose teachers and compact students. Directly copying teachers' lengthy reasoning chains causes capacity overload, resulting in truncated outputs or repetitive failure. Existing remedies each sacrifice a critical property of CoT: implicit reasoning methods (e.g., compressing reasoning into hidden states) trade away interpretability and verifiability, while heuristic compression strategies (e.g., random step pruning) destroy logical integrity. To address this, we propose BRIDGE, a curriculum framework that first establishes structural understanding via masked reconstruction, then uses GRPO-based reinforcement learning to guide students in self-discovering the optimal balance between accuracy and brevity, and finally internalizes complex reasoning through teacher-guided rewriting on failure cases. On GSM8K, BRIDGE enables Qwen2.5-3B to achieve 11.29% accuracy improvement and 27.4% token reduction over the original model, outperforming instruction-tuned variants and distillation baselines. Zero-shot transfer experiments on SVAMP and MATH-500 further confirm the generalization of internalized reasoning. Our code and model checkpoints are publicly available at https://github.com/Applied-Machine-Learning-Lab/SDM2026_BRIDGE and https://huggingface.co/bowen0815/BRIDGE.

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning has significantly improved LLMs' mathematical problem-solving capabilities, but distilling such capabilities into smaller models remains challenging due to the capacity mismatch between verbose teachers and compact students.

Proactive interference (PI) is a documented failure mode in large language models in which retrieval of a repeatedly overwritten value degrades as prior overwrites accumulate, mirroring a classical phenomenon in human working memory. Post-training quantization (PTQ) is now the default deployment path for open-weight models, yet its effect on this failure mode has not been tested. We evaluate three precision levels (FP16, INT8, INT4/NF4, via bitsandbytes) across three architecturally distinct instruction-tuned models (Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct, Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.3, Phi-3.5-mini-instruct), holding the retrieval task fixed. INT4 quantization significantly reduces accuracy under high interference in every model (e.g., from 81.0% to 68.3% for Qwen), confirmed by paired McNemar's tests ($p \le 2.6 \times 10^{-6}$) and a mixed-effects regression spanning all interference levels; INT8, often assumed safe, also carries a smaller but real penalty in two of three models. The effect is specific to semantically similar (word-type) distractors and reverses sign under a numeric control condition, and is mechanistically linked to a rise in same-key intrusion errors under INT4 (from 21.5% to 24.6% of trials, $p = 4.8 \times 10^{-7}$). A follow-up ablation shows the effect originates in the quantized transformer backbone rather than the output projection layer. These results suggest that bitsandbytes 4-bit quantization can impose an additional cost on applications relying on long, updatable, semantically dense contexts, even when aggregate benchmark accuracy appears largely unaffected. We release our code and tokenizer-verified vocabulary construction method at https://github.com/ShayanShahrabi/compress-and-forget

Proactive interference (PI) is a documented failure mode in large language models in which retrieval of a repeatedly overwritten value degrades as prior overwrites accumulate, mirroring a classical phenomenon in human working memory.

Specifying a penalty can turn a legal obligation into a cost-benefit calculation that favors violation. We show that this enforcement information paradox occurs in AI agents. Most AI safety evaluations test whether models fail; we ask why, using compliance theory from law and economics as a diagnostic. We evaluate twelve instruction-tuned language models deployed as enterprise procurement chatbots. Each is given an environmental regulation in its system prompt covering large purchases, and a vendor list on which the certified suppliers cost nearly twice what the uncertified ones do. We test the agents against the predictions of deterrence, legitimacy, and expressive law, and find that each theory accounts for part of what we observe. Under identical conditions, compliance spans 46 percentage points across models, and models differ in which pressure breaks them: some treat the regulation as binding however it is worded, while others fail where theory predicts, under low penalties and non-command phrasing. Benchmark scores and developers' own descriptions of post-training do not predict where a model falls. Across all twelve, financial incentives, managerial demands, peer outcomes, and employee pressure each produce large compliance failures. These agents violate regulatory constraints to satisfy local user objectives in ways standard alignment benchmarks do not measure. Embedding the rule in the system prompt is not on its own enough to produce a compliant agent: model selection is itself a governance decision, and benchmark evaluation is not sufficient for compliance-sensitive deployments.

Specifying a penalty can turn a legal obligation into a cost-benefit calculation that favors violation.

Time series forecasting, particularly in few-shot learning scenarios, is challenging due to the limited availability of high-quality training data. To address this, we present a pilot study on using reinforcement learning (RL) for time series data augmentation. Our method, ReAugment, tackles three critical questions: which parts of the training set should be augmented, how the augmentation should be performed, and what advantages RL brings to the process. Specifically, our approach maintains a forecasting model zoo, and by measuring prediction diversity across the models, we identify samples with higher probabilities for overfitting and use them as the anchor points for augmentation. Leveraging RL, our method adaptively transforms the overfit-prone samples into new data that not only enhances training set diversity but also directs the augmented data to target regions where the forecasting models are prone to overfitting. We validate the effectiveness of ReAugment across a wide range of base models, showing its advantages in both standard time series forecasting and few-shot learning tasks.

Time series forecasting, particularly in few-shot learning scenarios, is challenging due to the limited availability of high-quality training data.

Protein generative models have shown remarkable promise in protein design, yet their success rates remain constrained by reliance on curated sequence-structure datasets and by misalignment between supervised objectives and real design goals. We present ProteinZero, an online reinforcement learning framework for inverse folding models that enables scalable, automated, and continuous self-improvement with computationally efficient feedback. ProteinZero employs a reward pipeline that combines structural guidance from ESMFold with a novel self-derived ddG predictor, providing stable multi-objective signals while avoiding the prohibitive cost of physics-based methods. To ensure robustness in online RL, we further introduce a novel embedding-level diversity regularizer that mitigates mode collapse and promotes functionally meaningful sequence variation. Within a general RL formulation balancing multi-reward optimization, KL-divergence from a reference model, and diversity regularization, ProteinZero achieves robust improvements across designability, stability, recovery, and diversity. On the CATH-4.3 benchmark, it consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines including ProteinMPNN, ESM-IF, and InstructPLM, reducing design failure rates by 36-48% and achieving success rates above 90% across diverse folds. Importantly, a complete RL run can be executed on a single 8 X GPU node within three days, including reward computation and data generation. These results indicate that efficient online RL fine-tuning can complement supervised pretraining by allowing protein generative models to evolve continuously from their own outputs and optimize multiple design objectives without labeled data, opening new possibilities for exploring the vast protein design space. Full source code and model checkpoints will be released upon publication.

Protein generative models have shown remarkable promise in protein design, yet their success rates remain constrained by reliance on curated sequence-structure datasets and by misalignment between supervised objectives and real design goals.

Trained transformer models develop privileged bases: coordinate axes whose statistics differ from the rest of the residual stream. But what kind of direction does such a basis select? We investigate the prediction direction, the unembedding direction of the token a model currently predicts, and find that it functions as a content-defined privileged anchor. Measured with respect to this anchor, residual-stream variation is geometrically and behaviorally stratified by proximity to the prediction. The stratification holds in all eighteen models tested (dense and mixture-of-experts, 7B-120B, base and instruction-tuned). A narrow, scale-invariant prediction interface concentrates readout-relevant structure, while the vast prediction-distal complement expands with model scale. Because the prediction direction sits nearly orthogonal to the principal variance axes, variance-based analyses recover this organization only partly, and the shortfall grows with prompt heterogeneity. Anchoring reveals a steep geometric gradient: prediction-proximal regions are highly structured and cluster related prompts, while the complement is flatter and anti-discriminates among prompt groups. The interface is a narrow slice but functionally decisive. Disrupting the variance directions closest to the prediction causes immediate divergence and frequent task-frame shifts; disrupting the next level down delays divergence and preserves framing. The complement is weakly readout-aligned per direction yet causally and temporally load-bearing, and behavior is driven by direction rather than magnitude. These results establish the prediction direction as a privileged anchor distinct from previously described coordinate axes, and give a geometric account of how high-dimensional computation coexists with linear readout.

Trained transformer models develop privileged bases: coordinate axes whose statistics differ from the rest of the residual stream.

Analogical reasoning is a hallmark of human intelligence, enabling us to solve new problems by transferring knowledge from one situation to another. Yet, developing artificial intelligence systems capable of robust human-like analogical reasoning has proven difficult. In this work, we train transformers using Meta-Learning for Compositionality (MLC) on an analogical reasoning task (letter-string analogies) and assess their generalization capabilities. We find that letter-string analogies become learnable when guiding the models to attend to the most informative problem elements, induced by including copy tasks in the training data. Furthermore, generalization to new alphabets improves when models are trained with more heterogeneous datasets. For the best training run, our 3-layer encoder-decoder model performs on par with frontier models on our letter-string analogy datasets. The MLC approach also enables some generalization to compositions of trained transformations, but not to completely novel transformations. To understand how the model solves the analogies, we identify an algorithm for one analogy task that approximates the model's computations. We verify this using interpretability analyses and show that head-level attention weights causally affect model output, allowing steering between different analogy tasks. We discuss the implications of our findings for generalization capabilities of larger models and the parallels to human analogical reasoning.

Analogical reasoning is a hallmark of human intelligence, enabling us to solve new problems by transferring knowledge from one situation to another.

RequestRouter is a lightweight request-boundary controller for reducing the latency and energy cost of single-GPU large language model inference. Rather than serving all requests with one static configuration, the system uses cheap request-level features to select one fixed inference mode per request, including FP16, quantized inference, speculative decoding, prefix caching, continuous batching, and hybrid modes such as GPTQ plus prefix caching and INT8 plus continuous batching. We evaluate RequestRouter using an 8B instruction-tuned language model served through vLLM on NVIDIA A100 GPUs. Across the full-scale A100 evaluation--26,500 fixed-mode evaluations followed by 3,500 online-controller evaluations, for 30,000 measured inference executions in total--the controller achieves a 2.10x mean latency speedup over FP16 and a 0.48x energy ratio on deployment-style workloads. A smaller matched evaluation with repeated measurements provides a controlled statistical check of this result: RequestRouter retains a 1.93x latency speedup (95% CI: 1.88--1.98x) and a 0.523 energy ratio (95% CI: 0.506--0.540), showing that the gains persist under a more tightly controlled protocol. On a separate expanded automatic benchmark evaluation, the routed policy retains 99.6% of FP16 macro accuracy. A 100,000-call CPU microbenchmark measures only 0.00475 ms mean routing overhead (0.00532 ms p99). Thus, simple request-aware routing can recover substantial serving efficiency without retraining or modifying the underlying LLM.

RequestRouter is a lightweight request-boundary controller for reducing the latency and energy cost of single-GPU large language model inference.

Why do multilingual language models sometimes generate in the wrong language, and why is this so hard to fix? We introduce Language Identity Head Ablation (LIHA), a causal intervention that zeros each attention head individually and measures the resulting language switch rate across a parallel dataset of 2,700 prompt-language pairs spanning seven languages. Applied to GPT-2, LIHA identifies a small set of first-token broadcaster heads - led by L6H1 (switch rate 0.32, 3.23 $σ$ above the population mean) - that attend persistently to the first prompt token, propagating its language signal throughout generation. Compensatory redistribution when heads are ablated is statistically significant (p < $10^{-5}$) and follows a directional, hierarchical pattern: compensation always recruits heads in layers above the ablated head, suggesting a feedforward cascade rather than global diffusion. To probe how training regime shapes these circuits, we apply LIHA to a controlled pair - Qwen2.5-1.5B-Base and Qwen2.5-1.5B-Instruct - identical in architecture and size, differing only in training. The base model is nearly flat (max SR=0.016, 200/336 heads at SR=0.0); the instruct model concentrates causal influence sharply at layer 0, led by L0H5 (SR=0.224, 8.93 $σ$ above mean), with all other layers near zero. This controlled comparison provides direct causal evidence that instruction tuning reorganizes language identity circuits toward early-layer localization. Extended experiments with Chinese and Russian confirm that first-token broadcasting is script-specific in GPT-2, with non-Latin languages handled at layer 0 - the same locus as the instruction-tuned model. Code and data will be released upon publication.

Why do multilingual language models sometimes generate in the wrong language, and why is this so hard to fix?

Protein language models are widely used priors for protein sequence design, and a growing body of work controls them at inference time as an alternative to fine-tuning. Such guidance faces a dilemma: mild enough to preserve natural activation statistics, it barely moves the property; strong enough to move it, the generations become progressively harder to fold. We show the failure has a specific and cheaply detectable signature, an off-manifold collapse of the model's own representations. Guided activations fall toward a region statistically indistinguishable from random amino-acid input, and the sequences degenerate to low complexity, yet the property oracle being optimized can still score these generations as a success. The optimized oracle can therefore fail to witness the collapse and, for solubility, can actively reward it, whereas structure and composition expose the failure. Because the failure is already visible in a finished candidate, we detect it at the output rather than modify the generator. We introduce a cheap density prior over natural protein activations and keep only the candidates that remain typical under it, a training-free post-hoc step we call Mahalanobis filtering. At matched guidance settings it improves both the property score and the structural plausibility of the sequences it keeps at negligible cost, without touching the generator, and transfers across different guidance methods. We release the activation statistic at https://huggingface.co/Shuibai12138/off-manifold-collapse-plm

Protein language models are widely used priors for protein sequence design, and a growing body of work controls them at inference time as an alternative to fine-tuning.

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

The remarkable capabilities of large language models (LLMs) are often undermined by their instability.

Construction accident narratives contain rich causal information, but the evidence is often implicit, long-span, and distributed. We introduce ConstructCIE, a manually annotated dataset for Causal Information Extraction from OSHA construction accident reports. The dataset uses a hierarchical schema for accident types, causal factors, sub-causal factors, and supporting evidence spans. We evaluate supervised sequence taggers and instruction-tuned LLMs in an end-to-end hierarchical extraction setting. Results show that most evaluated models achieve strong accident-type prediction and recover broad causal meaning but remain limited in precise span-level extraction. Joint Hierarchical Extraction generally achieves stronger exact and soft matching, while Individual Hierarchical Extraction sometimes achieves higher keyword F1. Error distributions vary by extraction strategy, but evidence-selection and span-boundary errors remain common. These findings show that reliable Causal Information Extraction for construction accidents requires stronger domain grounding and more accurate evidence extraction.

Construction accident narratives contain rich causal information, but the evidence is often implicit, long-span, and distributed.

Estimating the difference of two Stein's score functions is a fundamental problem in generative modeling. In particular, score differences arise naturally in transfer learning, where the score difference provides the mechanism for adapting a pre-trained model to a new target distribution, and in diffusion model-based post-training methods such as discriminator guidance. Existing estimators for score differences in these settings either lack of statistical consistency or are difficult to scale up in high-dimensions. We propose a statistically consistent and scalable estimator for score differences based on Sobolev regularization, which plays a crucial role in ensuring consistency and stablizing the training in the small-sample regime. Mathematically, we establish a convergence rate of $O(n^{-\frac{s-1}{d+2s-2}})$ where $d$ is the dimension and $s$ denotes the smoothness of the underlying densities, and provide a minimax lower bound of $\tildeΩ(n^{-\frac{2(s-1)}{d+2s}})$ (in mean-squared error). Empirically, our estimator exhibits significantly improved stability in small-sample regimes compared to existing methods. We demonstrate its effectiveness on real-world tasks, including transfer learning for ECG signal generation, where it substantially outperforms non-regularized score difference estimators in downstream classification performance.

Estimating the difference of two Stein's score functions is a fundamental problem in generative modeling.

Can a platform tell, before deployment, whether an open-weight checkpoint has had its refusal mechanism stripped? Runtime guards cannot: they score generations, not the artifact. We combine two cheap internal signals, a reference-anchored activation refusal-gap and a weight-recovery energy of the base-to-candidate weight difference, into a threshold-free checkpoint audit. The two are negatively correlated and label-complementary: the gap supplies refusal-specificity and the weight energy supplies recall. On a 273-checkpoint registry spanning Qwen, DeepSeek-distilled Qwen, Llama, and Gemma, their z-sum separates 57 public abliterations from 37 benign fine-tunes, merges, and instruction-tunes at AUROC 0.95, significantly above either signal alone (0.84, 0.90), and a Youden-calibrated threshold transfers to held-out families at balanced accuracy 0.89 (FPR 0.11), missing only 4 of 57. We then map two failures, in order of severity: a spoofed reference evades both axes with no training (ΔW=0, \r{ho}=1 by construction), and a white-box owner trains a checkpoint past the threshold while it stays guard-unsafe and coherent. The audit is effective triage, not tamper-proofing: it presumes an attested reference, and its claims are bounded by the registry we evaluate it on.

Can a platform tell, before deployment, whether an open-weight checkpoint has had its refusal mechanism stripped?

Improving flight safety with flight data requires not only accurate detection of risk events, but more importantly, clear interpretation of their underlying causes at the level of pilot control behavior. Existing explainable AI techniques, such as feature importance maps, often require considerable domain knowledge to translate them into operationally meaningful explanations. Large Language Models (LLMs), which excel at language reasoning, bring a promising solution to this issue. However, applying LLMs in this domain presents key challenges such as modal inconsistency, limited classification ability, scarcity of task-specific data for fine-tuning, and lack of domain knowledge. To overcome these challenges, we propose FlightLLM, a prior-guided semantic LLM-based approach for interpretable flight safety analysis. Specifically, we first perform feature engineering to address modal inconsistency, combining statistical descriptors with physically meaningful flight indicators. This representation is further processed by a Semantic Discretization module, which converts abstract numerical patterns into qualitative descriptions that are more compatible with language reasoning. In addition, since LLMs are not inherently strong classifiers, CatBoost is incorporated as a statistical expert, and its prediction results are injected into the prompt as prior guidance. A contrastive few-shot learning strategy is further adopted to compensate for limited data. Finally, we design structured prompts to embed aviation-specific knowledge into the inference process. Using hard landing, a representative risk event with complex causal mechanisms, as an anchor point, we evaluate FlightLLM on a dataset of 704 real-world A320 flight samples. Experimental results show that the proposed approach achieves competitive classification performance while generating direct and reasonable explanations for event causes.

Improving flight safety with flight data requires not only accurate detection of risk events, but more importantly, clear interpretation of their underlying causes at the level of pilot control behavior.

Background and Context: Question and inquiry are integral parts of knowledge seeking and learning. Despite their importance, students tend not to ask enough questions in the classroom. However, studies have shown that students interact extensively with generative AI systems for learning and problem solving. Objective: In this paper, we seek to better understand the types of questions that students ask AI systems, and how those questions evolve during problem solving and across tasks. Method: We use the Graesser et al. taxonomy to classify students' inquiries into 18 types. We develop a few-shot learning approach to automatically classify students' interactions with AI into these categories. We use this system to analyze 830 interactions of CS2 students across two programming tasks. Findings: Our results suggest that a small subset of question types accounts for the majority of student inquiries, and that the types of questions students ask change substantially as the task progresses.

Background and Context: Question and inquiry are integral parts of knowledge seeking and learning.

Prior work shows that large language models (LLMs) exhibit introspective capability on benign tasks. We extend the question to safety contexts and examine how reliably a model can recognize that its own prior response was elicited by an adversarial prefill attack. Across ten open-weight instruction-tuned LLMs from 3B to 70B and four safety benchmarks, no model reliably recognizes its own compromised outputs, with models claiming intent on prefilled responses at an average rate of 25.3%. Introspective signal stems primarily from reasoning about safety and refusal. Orthogonalizing models' weights against the refusal direction collapses the gap between claim rates on prefilled and natural outputs to near zero, though the direction is not its unique mediator. The signal also depends on the probe: framing the question as internal intention versus external tampering elicits qualitatively different responses on the same models. Training models to mimic correct introspective answers or pursue an introspective objective can improve the accuracy of introspection, but such training does not transfer to the tampering probe and counterintuitively raises attack success rate under adversarial prefill on most models, amounting to a partial mitigation. These findings outline mechanisms underpinning the observed introspective signals in safety contexts and highlight risks in the reliability of LLM self-reports. Our code is available at https://github.com/ngqm/prefill-introspection.

Prior work shows that large language models (LLMs) exhibit introspective capability on benign tasks.

Gender bias or other social biases in large language models (LLMs) are frequently evaluated with question answering or survey benchmarks where the LLM needs to give a response in a predefined answer format. It is well known in survey science that the answer format has a substantial impact on answers, just as LLMs are sensitive to the prompt wording. However, to our knowledge it has not been studied yet how changes in answer format impact the measurement of gender bias in LLMs and their alignment with human response distributions. We evaluate three instruction-tuned models on the BBQ benchmark and OpinionQA survey data across closed-ended, Likert-scaled and open-ended formats, comparing bias measurement and distributional alignment under otherwise identical conditions. We find that answer format does substantially alter measured outcomes, including reversals in order rankings. These differences arise because each format elicits distinct response behaviours, such as forced-choice selection, scale-based distributions and refusal in free-text generation. Our findings highlight the importance of treating answer format as a substantive component of LLM evaluation and motivate multi-format designs for more robust model assessment.

Gender bias or other social biases in large language models (LLMs) are frequently evaluated with question answering or survey benchmarks where the LLM needs to give a response in a predefined answer format.

Multi-objective bilevel optimization has wide applications in the AI area such as automated learning and multi-task meta-learning. Although recently some works have been begun to study the multi-objective bilevel optimization, the proposed methods rely on the (strongly) convex lower level problems. In fact, these multi-objective bilevel learning problems are generally nonconvex, and particularly their lower level problems are nonconvex. To fill this gap, we propose a class of Multi-Objective Moreau Envelope based Hessian-free Algorithms (MOMEHA) to solve the multi-objective bilevel learning problems with nonconvex lower level. Specifically, our method uses the Moreau envelope to convert the original problem into a multi-objective single-level optimization with an envelope constraint. In particular, our method retains computational advantages of being single-loop and Hessian-free in the multi-objective setting by incorporating a smooth weighted Tchebycheff scalarization. Furthermore, we propose a momentum-based variant of MOMEHA (i.e., MB-MOMEHA) method to solve the stochastic multi-objective bilevel learning problems. In theory, we provide the convergence properties of our algorithms under both deterministic and stochastic setting. Some experiments on few-shot meta-learning and neural architecture search demonstrate that our methods outperform the existing approaches in Pareto front, validating its effectiveness and robustness.

Multi-objective bilevel optimization has wide applications in the AI area such as automated learning and multi-task meta-learning.

Muon, a more recently developed optimizer, is useful for matrix-wise models in AI areas. Although many works have studied Muon and its variants, these methods are still not particularly well-suited for hierarchical structured problems. To fill this gap, we propose an effective federated compositional Muon (FedCoMuon) optimizer to solve distributed matrix-wise compositional optimization problems. Specifically, our FedCoMuon optimizer builds on compositional gradient tracking and orthogonalized momentum. Moreover, we propose a variance reduced variant of FedCoMuon (FedCoMuon-VR) based on a momentum-based variance reduced technique. In theory, we analyze the convergence properties of our algorithms under the non-i.i.d. and non-convex settings. In particular, we prove that our FedCoMuon-VR obtains a lower sample complexity of $O(ε^{-3})$ for finding an $ε$-stationary solution than the existing FedMuon algorithms. Extensive numerical experiments on robust federated learning and task-distributed risk-sensitive meta learning show that our proposed methods are competitive with existing compositional baselines and achieve the best reported accuracy in several settings.

Muon, a more recently developed optimizer, is useful for matrix-wise models in AI areas.

While adversarial prompt tuning can enhance robustness of vision-language models efficiently, we find that existing methods aggravate robust generalization overfitting on seen classes, leading to a rapid degradation in performance against adversarial examples of unseen classes as training progresses. We empirically identify that this degradation stems from the tendency of the model to learn pseudo-robust features (i.e., non-generalizable shortcuts). To mitigate this, we propose ADAPT (Adversarial Disentangled Prompt Tuning), a robust prompt tuning framework following the philosophy of ``Learning What Not to Learn''. Specifically, ADAPT uses a dual-prompt mechanism with a target prompt and a pool of decoy prompts. During training, the decoy prompts are guided to entrap diverse pseudo-robust features, while the target prompt is constrained to be orthogonal to the decoys in the embedding space to learn robust features. By disentangling the robust features from the pseudo-robust features, ADAPT effectively prevents robust generalization overfitting. We further provide an analysis showing that the orthogonal loss bounds the effect of shifts in pseudo-robust features on unseen classes, yielding a testing error guarantee. Empirically, extensive experiments demonstrate that ADAPT substantially improves the robustness of the target prompt on unseen classes. The code is available at https://github.com/cheny02/ADAPT-ACMMM2026.

While adversarial prompt tuning can enhance robustness of vision-language models efficiently, we find that existing methods aggravate robust generalization overfitting on seen classes, leading to a rapid degradation in performance against adversarial examples of unseen classes as training progresses.

Genomic language models (GLMs) have emerged as powerful tools for learning representations of DNA sequences, enabling advances in variant prediction, regulatory element identification, and cross-task transfer learning. However, as these models are increasingly trained or fine-tuned on sensitive genomic cohorts, they risk memorizing specific sequences from their training data, raising serious concerns around privacy, data leakage, and regulatory compliance. Despite growing awareness of memorization risks in general-purpose language models, little systematic evaluation exists for these risks in the genomic domain, where data exhibit unique properties such as a fixed nucleotide alphabet, strong biological structure, and individual identifiability. We present a comprehensive, multi-vector privacy evaluation framework designed to quantify memorization risks in GLMs. Our approach integrates three complementary risk assessment methodologies: perplexity-based detection, canary sequence extraction, and membership inference. These are combined into a unified evaluation pipeline that produces a worst-case memorization risk score. To enable controlled evaluation, we plant canary sequences at varying repetition rates into both synthetic and real genomic datasets, allowing precise quantification of how repetition and training dynamics influence memorization. We evaluate our framework across multiple GLM architectures, examining the relationship between sequence repetition, model capacity, and memorization risk. Our results establish that GLMs exhibit measurable memorization and that the degree of memorization varies across architectures and training regimes. These findings reveal that no single attack vector captures the full scope of memorization risk, underscoring the need for multi-vector privacy auditing as a standard practice for genomic AI systems.

Genomic language models (GLMs) have emerged as powerful tools for learning representations of DNA sequences, enabling advances in variant prediction, regulatory element identification, and cross-task transfer learning.

While publicly available electricity market data presents a valuable resource for forecasting research, the field lacks established benchmark datasets for standardized comparison. As a result, many studies have relied on different datasets and metrics to evaluate methods in isolated settings, making it difficult to assess progress and compare state-of-the-art approaches consistently. In this work, we use public data to evaluate deep learning models for electricity price forecasting (EPF) across multiple market settings. Our goal is to establish a reproducible framework that enables a consistent evaluation of forecasting models. Although deep learning has been explored for day-ahead EPF, many prior studies are limited to single-market settings, narrow feature sets, or fixed training regimes. This work presents a comparative evaluation of six deep learning models--covering state-space, MLP, RNN, and Transformer-based architectures--emphasizing generalization across markets. We simulate low-data target-market conditions using zero-shot, one-shot, and few-shot learning. Our test set focuses on the Germany-Luxembourg (DE-LU) bidding zone in 2024 using a standardized dataset with calendar, historical price, and market-derived features. Our findings suggest that N-HiTS and NBEATSx perform competitively in limited-data scenarios, while transformer-based models can reach comparable accuracy but tend to require more adaptation and tuning. Model performance also benefits from careful feature selection and hyperparameter tuning, and we note that the differences between the strongest models are often small.

While publicly available electricity market data presents a valuable resource for forecasting research, the field lacks established benchmark datasets for standardized comparison.

A plethora of protein language models have been released in recent years. Yet comparatively little work has addressed how to best sample from them to optimize desired biological properties. We fill this gap by proposing a flexible, effective sampling method for masked language models (MLMs), and by systematically evaluating models and methods both in silico and in vitro on actual antibody therapeutics campaigns. Firstly, we propose sampling with stochastic beam search, exploiting the fact that MLMs are remarkably efficient at evaluating the pseudo-perplexity of the entire 1-edit neighborhood of a sequence. Reframing generation in terms of entire-sequence evaluation enables flexible guidance with multiple optimization objectives. Secondly, we report results from our extensive in vitro head-to-head evaluation for the antibody engineering setting. This reveals that the choice of sampling method can have a substantial impact, motivating future research into this under-explored area.

A plethora of protein language models have been released in recent years.

Sign language serves as a vital means of communication for individuals with hearing impairments, yet recognition resources for the over 100 distinct sign languages are severely lacking. In response, we present our work on sign language recognition using transfer learning and the domain adaptation method TA3N, which utilizes the Temporal Relational Network (TRN) module for aligning multi-scale temporal relations. Our findings highlight the superior performance of Domain Adaptation to neural network-based transfer learning, particularly in improving recognition of American Sign Language (ASL). Our research also identifies the effectiveness of aligning shorter-term temporal features between source and target domains. In addition to using RGB, we conducted experiments using Optical Flow mode for the sign language samples, ultimately determining that RGB outperforms Optical Flow in the majority of cases. Our work aims to improve accessibility and communication for individuals who rely on sign language as their primary mode of communication.

Sign language serves as a vital means of communication for individuals with hearing impairments, yet recognition resources for the over 100 distinct sign languages are severely lacking.

Natural language explanations (NLEs) are increasingly used as inputs, for example, as few-shot rationales that influence model behavior in in-context learning (ICL). However, it remains unclear how different types of NLEs compare in their effects on downstream model performance in explanation-augmented prompting. Therefore, we provide a comparative evaluation across six benchmarks and four instruction-tuned models, studying how NLE source (human-written when available, self-generated explanations, generated by an external LLM) and NLE selection (random vs faithfulness-based filtering) affect downstream utility of NLEs when used in ICL settings. Our extensive evaluation shows that, on classification-style benchmarks, adding NLEs to few-shot prompts often improves accuracy over few-shot prompting without explanations; among NLE sources, externally generated LLM-NLEs often provide strong downstream utility and remain competitive with human rationales where both are available, whereas self-NLEs are more sensitive to the selection strategy. On math reasoning, the effects are more model- and source-dependent. We further show that faithfulness-based selection of self-NLEs yields small average gains overall, but can improve or reduce performance depending on the metric, task, and model. Different faithfulness metrics can disagree substantially, affecting which self-NLE examples are selected and their downstream predictive utility. Robustness tests with randomly swapped and out-of-distribution rationales indicate partial robustness, suggesting that semantic alignment contributes to performance gains. Overall, our results provide insights for selecting and reporting explanations that influence model behavior in practical prompting pipelines.

Natural language explanations (NLEs) are increasingly used as inputs, for example, as few-shot rationales that influence model behavior in in-context learning (ICL).