Recent text-to-video (T2V) diffusion models have made remarkable progress in generating high-quality videos. However, they often struggle to align with complex text prompts, particularly when multiple objects, attributes, or spatial relations are specified. We introduce VideoRepair, the first self-correcting, training-free, and model-agnostic video refinement framework that automatically detects fine- grained text–video misalignments and performs targeted, localized corrections. Our key insight is that even misaligned videos usually contain correctly generated regions that should be preserved rather than regenerated. Building on this observation, VideoRepair proposes a novel region-preserving refinement strategy with three stages: (i) misalignment detection, where MLLM-based evaluation with automatically generated evaluation questions identifies misaligned regions; (ii) refinement planning, which preserves correctly generated entities, segments their regions across frames, and constructs targeted prompts for misaligned areas; and (iii) localized refinement, which selectively regenerates problematic regions while preserving faithful content through joint optimization of preserved and newly generated areas. On two benchmarks, EvalCrafter and T2V-CompBench with four recent T2V backbones, VideoRepair achieves substantial improvements over recent baselines across diverse alignment metrics. Comprehensive ablations further demonstrate the efficiency, robustness, and interpretability of our framework.
论文检索
输入标题、作者或关键词，从 100,903 篇学术成果中精准定位
Recent advances in autonomous digital agents from industry (e.g., Manus AI and Gemini’s research mode) highlight their potential for structured tasks through autonomous decision-making and task decomposition, but it remains unclear how well such systems support real-world information-intensive workflows. We study this question in journalism, where newswriting requires iterative planning, contextual reasoning, and active discovery of missing background to produce a coherent article. We introduce NEWSAGENT, a benchmark for evaluating how agents search raw materials, select relevant information, and iteratively revise drafts through core journalistic functions. Given a writing instruction and partial firsthand materials, agents must identify narrative perspectives, issue keyword-based queries, retrieve historical context, and generate complete news articles. Unlike typical summarization or retrieval tasks, essential context is not directly available and must be actively discovered, reflecting real-world reporting constraints. NEWSAGENT consists of 6k human-verified examples derived from real news. We evaluate open- and closed-sourced LLMs with commonly-used agentic frameworks on NEWSAGENT, which shows that agents are capable of retrieving relevant facts but struggling with planning and narrative integration. We believe that NEWSAGENT serves a realistic testbed for iterating and evaluating agent capabilities in terms of web data manipulation to real-world productivity. The benchmark resources are publicly available at https://github.com/wywyWang/CoachAI-Projects.
Writing a literature review requires a deep understanding of the relationships among cited papers: how they build on, challenge, or offer alternative perspectives to one another. We present Graph-Reasoning Aided Survey Planning (GRASP), a framework combining LLM planning for related work generation with graph algorithms to extract key relationships among cited papers. Our two-layer graph structure consists of a Graph of Thoughts and an Argument-Counteragument Planning Network, representing the cited papers at different levels of granularity, and we apply topology-aware pruning via a Steiner tree to identify the core inter-paper relationships captured in our graph. Our citation analysis-based evaluation shows that GRASP generates RWS that closely match human-written targets in terms of the discourse roles, intents, and grouping of citations.
RL-based agentic search enables LLMs to solve complex questions via dynamic planning and external search. While this approach significantly enhances accuracy with agent policies optimized via large-scale reinforcement learning, we identify a critical gap in reliability: these agents fail to recognize their reasoning boundaries and rarely admit "I DON’T KNOW" even when evidence is insufficient or reasoning reaches its limit. The lack of reliability often leads to plausible but unreliable answers, introducing significant risks in many real-world scenarios. To this end, we propose Boundary-Aware Policy Optimization (BAPO), a novel RL framework designed to cultivate reliable boundary awareness without compromising accuracy. BAPO introduces two key components: (i) a group-based boundary-aware reward that encourages an IDK response only when the reasoning reaches its limit, and (ii) an adaptive reward modulator that strategically suspends this reward during early exploration, preventing the model from exploiting IDK as a shortcut. Extensive experiments on four benchmarks demonstrate that BAPO substantially enhances the overall reliability of agentic search.
While the automatic evaluation of omni-modal large models (OLMs) is essential, assessing empathy remains a significant challenge due to its inherent affectivity. To investigate this challenge, we introduce AEQ-Bench (Audio Empathy Quotient Benchmark), a novel benchmark to systematically assess two core empathetic capabilities of OLMs: (i) generating empathetic responses by comprehending affective cues from multi-modal inputs (audio + text), and (ii) judging the empathy of audio responses without relying on text transcription. Compared to existing benchmarks, AEQ-Bench incorporates two novel settings that vary in context specificity and speech tone. Comprehensive assessment across linguistic and paralinguistic metrics reveals that (1) OLMs trained with audio output capabilities generally outperformed models with text-only outputs, and (2) while OLMs align with human judgments for coarse-grained quality assessment, they remain unreliable for evaluating fine-grained paralinguistic expressiveness.
Current safety alignment techniques for large language models (LLMs) struggle to balance harmlessness and helpfulness: improving safety often comes at the cost of degraded utility. Our preliminary study shows that guiding unaligned base models with safety-aware reasoning that includes explicit self-reflection can effectively defend jailbreak attacks while preserving response quality. This observation motivates internalizing and strengthening self-reflective reasoning capabilities within LLMs to achieve a better safety–utility trade-off. We propose Safety-aware Reflective Reasoning Optimization (SaRO), a two-stage framework: (1) Reasoning-style Warmup (RW) to internalize self-reflective reasoning, and (2) Self-reflective Reasoning Process Optimization (SRPO) to encourage reflection and correction. Experiments show that SaRO outperforms existing reasoning-based alignment methods, achieving a better balance of safety and helpfulness.
Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have sparked growing interest in building fully autonomous agents. However, fully autonomous LLM-based agents still face significant challenges, including limited reliability due to hallucinations, difficulty in handling complex tasks, and substantial safety and ethical risks, all of which limit their feasibility and trustworthiness in real-world applications. To overcome these limitations, LLM-based human-agent systems (LLM-HAS) incorporate human-provided information, feedback, or control into the agent system to enhance system performance, reliability, and safety. These human-agent collaboration systems enable humans and LLM-based agents to collaborate effectively by leveraging their complementary strengths.This paper provides the first comprehensive and structured survey of LLM-HAS. It clarifies fundamental concepts, systematically presents core components shaping these systems, including environment and profiling, human feedback, interaction types, orchestration, and communication, explores emerging applications, and discusses unique challenges and opportunities arising from human-AI collaboration. By consolidating current knowledge and offering a structured overview, we aim to foster further research and innovation in this rapidly evolving interdisciplinary field. Paper lists and resources are available at https://github.com/HenryPengZou/Awesome-Human-Agent-Collaboration-Interaction-Systems.
Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong performance on mathematical reasoning under well-defined conditions. However, real-world engineering problems involve uncertainty, context, and open-ended settings that extend beyond symbolic computation. Existing benchmarks largely focus on well-defined or abstract reasoning and therefore fail to capture these complexities. We introduce EngiBench, a hierarchical benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs on solving engineering problems. It spans three levels of increasing difficulty (foundational knowledge retrieval, contextual reasoning, and open-ended modeling) and covers diverse engineering subfields. To facilitate a deeper understanding of model performance, we systematically rewrite each problem into three controlled variants (perturbed, knowledge-enhanced, and math abstraction), enabling us to separately evaluate the model’s robustness, domain-specific knowledge, and mathematical reasoning abilities. Experimental results show clear performance stratification across difficulty levels: model accuracy declines with task complexity, degrades under minor perturbations, and remains substantially below human performance on high-level engineering tasks. These findings reveal that current LLMs still lack the high-level reasoning needed for real-world engineering, highlighting the need for future models with deeper and more reliable problem-solving capabilities. Our source code and data are available at https://github.com/AI4Engi/EngiBench.
Speculative decoding (SD) improves LLM inference latency by speculatively generating multiple tokens with a small draft model and verifying them with a larger target model. However, when speculation accuracy is low, the overhead from rejected tokens can negate its benefits, especially at large batch sizes.We propose Speculative Verification (SV), an efficient augmentation to SD that predicts speculation accuracy and dynamically adapts the verification length to maximize throughput. SV introduces a small companion model, similar in size to draft model, to reduce uncertainty in speculation accuracy. By exploiting the information gain from observing the companion distribution, SV reduces wasted verification on rejected tokens and improves decoding efficiency.We evaluate SV across publicly available LLMs on seven NLP tasks using over a hundred combinations of draft, companion, and target models, including 13B–72B target models spanning base, instruction-tuned, and task-specific fine-tuned variants. Compared to target-only decoding, standard SD, and state-of-the-art SD variants, SV consistently delivers higher throughput across batch sizes. SV improves SD performance by up to 1.9\times, with an average 1.4\times speedup at large batch sizes, showing robust and scalable gains for practical LLM inference.
Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have accelerated progress toward artificial general intelligence, yet their potential to generate harmful content poses critical safety challenges. Existing alignment methods often struggle to cover diverse safety scenarios and remain vulnerable to adversarial attacks. In this work, we propose **SAFER**, a framework for **S**afety **A**lignment via e**F**ficient **E**x-Ante **R**easoning. Our approach instantiates structured Ex-Ante reasoning through initial assessment, rule verification, and path calibration, and embeds predefined safety rules to provide transparent and verifiable safety judgments. Specifically, our approach consists of two training stages: (1) supervised fine-tuning with synthetic traces to teach the multi-stage Ex-Ante reasoning, and (2) step-level reasoning preference optimization to jointly enhance safety, utility, and efficiency. Experiments on multiple open-source LLMs demonstrate that SAFER significantly enhances safety performance while maintaining helpfulness and response efficiency.
Take Out Your Calculators: Estimating the Real Difficulty of Question Items with LLM Student Simulations
PDF ↗Standardized math assessments require expensive human pilot studies to establish the difficulty of test items. We investigate the predictive value of open-source large language models (LLMs) for evaluating the difficulty of multiple-choice math questions for real-world students. We show that, while LLMs are poor direct judges of problem difficulty, simulation-based approaches with LLMs yield promising results under the right conditions. Under the proposed approach, we simulate a "classroom" of 4th, 8th, or 12th grade students by prompting the LLM to role-play students of varying proficiency levels. We use the outcomes of these simulations to fit Item Response Theory (IRT) models, comparing learned difficulty parameters for items to their real-world difficulties, as determined by item-level statistics furnished by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). We observe correlations as high as 0.75, 0.76, and 0.82 for grades 4, 8, and 12, respectively. In our simulations, we experiment with different "classroom sizes," showing tradeoffs between computation size and accuracy. We find that role-plays with named students improves predictions (compared to student ids), and stratifying names across gender and race further improves predictions. Our results show that LLMs with relatively weaker mathematical abilities (Gemma) actually yield better real-world difficulty predictions than mathematically stronger models (Llama and Qwen), further underscoring the suitability of open-source models for the task.
PrinciplismQA: A Philosophy-Grounded Approach to Assessing LLM-Human Clinical Medical Ethics Alignment
PDF ↗As medical LLMs transition to clinical deployment, assessing their ethical reasoning capability becomes critical. While achieving high accuracy on knowledge benchmarks, LLMs lack validated assessment for navigating ethical trade-offs in clinical decision-making where multiple valid solutions exist. Existing benchmarks lack systematic approaches to incorporate recognized philosophical frameworks and expert validation for ethical reasoning assessment. We introduce PrinciplismQA, a philosophy-grounded approach to assessing LLM clinical medical ethics alignment. Grounded in Principlism, our approach provides a systematic methodology for incorporating clinical ethics philosophy into LLM assessment design. PrinciplismQA comprises 3,648 expert-validated questions spanning knowledge assessment and clinical reasoning. Our expert-calibrated pipeline enables reproducible evaluation and models ethical biases. Evaluating recent models reveals significant ethical reasoning gaps despite high knowledge accuracy, demonstrating that knowledge-oriented training does not ensure clinical ethical alignment. PrinciplismQA provides a validated tool for assessing clinical AI deployment readiness.
Recent action recognition based on vision–language pretraining and self-supervised video foundation models tends to induce spurious correlations and shortcut learning by relying on action-irrelevant cues, such as backgrounds and object co-occurrences. By contrast, object-detection-based approaches can suppress spurious correlations; however, the loss of input information can limit accuracy. To mitigate this trade-off, we combine these two approaches to learn complementary features that compensate for each other’s shortcomings. Specifically, we leverage the commonsense knowledge of large language models (LLMs) regarding human actions and realize a framework in which an LLM agent integrates the two approaches within an agentic learning paradigm to design motion features tailored to the target actions. The LLM agent uses an open vocabulary object detector to instruct the video foundation model with the target and nontarget objects in the video to make the model attend to objects in a video required for recognizing the target actions. The composition of the detected objects is optimized for the target actions through in-context reinforcement learning (ICRL) using the commonsense knowledge of the LLM. Experiments on multiple public action recognition datasets and an ablation study confirm the robustness of features learned using the proposed method and the effectiveness of ICRL.
AI Agents for the Science of Science: A Survey of Tasks, Architectures, Evaluations, and Challenges
PDF ↗The Science of Science (SciSci) examines how scientific knowledge is generated, evaluated, and transformed by utilizing large-scale scholarly and bibliometric data. As these data grow in scale and complexity, analysis has increasingly relied on statistical, network-based, machine learning methods, and is now seeing growing involvement of AI agents. This emerging class of such agents, ranging from multi-agent simulations of scientific behavior to tool-augmented systems for empirical analysis, is beginning to reshape how SciSci research is conducted. In this survey, we propose a task-centered taxonomy, distinguishing *agents as simulations*, which model citation, collaboration, and community dynamics, from *agents as tools*, which assist empirical analysis and scientific workflows. We review agent architectures, learning mechanisms, evaluation, and SciSci benchmarks, and examine open challenges related to reliability, data quality, and bias. Our survey aims to clarify the landscape of AI agents in SciSci and to support the development of reliable and scientifically useful AI systems for studying science and scientific communities.
This paper proposes a novel in-context learning approach to support low resource machine translation for the Coptic language, using prompts based on Universal Dependencies parses of input sentences. Building on existing work using bilingual dictionaries to support inference for vocabulary items, we add several representations of syntactic analyses to our inputs, specifically exploring the inclusion of raw parser outputs, verbalizations of parses in plain English, and explanations of specific difficult constructions identified in input subgraphs and how they can be translated. Our results show that while syntactic information alone is not as useful as dictionary-based glosses, combining retrieved dictionary items with syntactic information achieves significant gains across model sizes, achieving new state-of-the-art results for the language.
Recent work has increasingly explored neuron-level interpretation in vision-language models (VLMs) to identify neurons critical to final predictions. However, existing neuron analyses generally focus on single tasks, limiting the comparability of neuron importance across tasks. Moreover, ranking strategies tend to score neurons in isolation, overlooking how task-dependent information pathways shape the write-in effects of feed-forward network (FFN) neurons. This oversight can exacerbate neuron polysemanticity in multi-task settings, introducing noise into the identification and intervention of task-critical neurons. In this study, we propose HONES (**H**ead-**O**riented **N**euron **E**xplanation **S**teering), a gradient-free framework for task-aware neuron attribution and steering in multi-task VLMs. HONES ranks FFN neurons by their causal write-in contributions conditioned on task-relevant attention heads, and further modulates salient neurons via lightweight scaling. Experiments on four diverse multimodal tasks and two popular VLMs show that HONES outperforms existing methods in identifying task-critical neurons and improves model performance after steering. Our source code is released at: https://github.com/petergit1/HONES.
We present **ViLegalLM**, comprising **ViLegalBERT** and **ViLegalQwen**, the first suite of Vietnamese pretrained language models for legal text understanding and generation. It includes one encoder-only model (ViLegalBERT, 135M parameters) and two decoder-only models (ViLegalQwen2.5-1.5B-Base and ViLegalQwen3-1.7B-Base), all continually pretrained on a newly curated 16GB Vietnamese legal corpus, significantly larger than previous work. To mitigate data scarcity, we construct three synthetic datasets using LLM-based generation and hard negative mining for True/False QA, Multiple Choice QA, and Natural Language Inference. We establish state-of-the-art results among open-source models on four main Vietnamese legal downstream tasks spanning ten benchmarks, demonstrating that continual pretraining from base models consistently outperforms instruction-tuned adaptation. Source codes, corpus, datasets, and model checkpoints are publicly available at https://github.com/ntphuc149/ViLegalLM.
We reformulate explanation quality assessment as a ranking problem rather than a generation problem. Instead of optimizing models to produce a single “best” explanation token-by-token, we train reward models to discriminate among multiple candidate explanations and learn their relative quality. Concretely, we construct per-instance candidate sets with graded quality levels and train listwise and pairwise ranking models (ListNet, LambdaRank, RankNet) to preserve ordinal structure and avoid score compression typical of pointwise regression or binary preference objectives. We observe three findings: First, ranking losses consistently outperform regression on score separation across all domains tested. Second, the optimal ranking loss depends on data characteristics: listwise objectives excel with well-separated quality tiers, while pairwise methods are more robust to noisy natural annotations. Third, when trained on carefully curated and well-structured data, small encoder models can match models that are orders of magnitude larger, suggesting that data quality matters more than model scale. Finally, when used as rewards in policy optimization, ranking-based scores enable stable convergence in settings where regression-based rewards fail entirely. Code and data are available at: https://github.com/Tankiit/PPO_Learning_to_rank
Do LLM Agents Really Mimic Humans? Diagnosing and Aligning Microeconomic Behaviors in Macro-ABMs
PDF ↗Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted in macroeconomic agent-based modeling(ABM). However, existing research focuses on replicating macro-level stylized facts while often neglecting verification of micro-level decision-making. We investigate this gap by comparing LLM agents to human responses from the Survey of Consumer Expectations (SCE) dataset. Our empirical analysis identifies specific limitations: weak trend responsiveness, mode collapse, and a potential data leakage. We propose the Heterogeneous Shock-Response Causal Transmission Framework to tackle these issues. To ensure theoretical consistency, we use LLMs to build a literature-verified causal graph in which macroeconomic shocks influence decisions via generated mediator nodes, while agent profiles serve as edge moderators. Building on this, during inference, we perform a path search to retrieve relevant causal chains and inject them as an explicit Chain-of-Thought(CoT), prioritizing mechanistic logic over statistical pattern matching. To evaluate the effectiveness of our inference approach, we validate it via a two-stage process that combines micro-level dataset testing and macro-level simulation in the EconAgent system. Results from these experiments indicate that our framework improves alignment with human trends and effectively captures behavioral heterogeneity. Overall, this work contributes to the development of reliable and grounded economic simulations.
Large language models are increasingly used in inventive problem-solving, but effective support requires more than open-ended idea generation. Inventive problem-solving requires improving one aspect of a technical system without unintentionally worsening another. TRIZ (Theory of Inventive Problem Solving) provides a unique and structured framework for this setting by representing engineering trade-offs as contradictions and linking them to standardized inventive principles. However, prior TRIZ–LLM evaluations are typically small-scale, case studies in focused areas of technology, and rarely grounded in patent text, which makes it difficult to assess structured reasoning at scale. We introduce TRIZBench, a dataset and benchmark for TRIZ reasoning grounded in open technical sources and U.S. patents. TRIZBench evaluates the core TRIZ workflow through three tasks: contradiction prediction, inventive principle prediction, and grounded TRIZ reasoning. Experiments with multiple LLM baselines show that detecting contradictions is easier than recovering correct trade-off pairs, while principle prediction benefits from explicitly exploiting TRIZ structure. Our findings further underscore the importance of grounding. We show that semantic retrieval enables evidence-based justifications and helps explain why LLMs fail. Dataset and code are available at https://github.com/ellenzhuwang/trizbench.