Reading stories evokes rich interpretive, affective, and evaluative responses, such as inferences about narrative intent or judgments about characters. Yet, computational models of reader response are limited, preventing nuanced analyses. To address this gap, we introduce SocialStoryFrames, a formalism for distilling plausible inferences about reader response, such as perceived author intent, explanatory and predictive reasoning, affective responses, and value judgments, using conversational context and a taxonomy grounded in narrative theory, linguistic pragmatics, and psychology. We develop two models, SSF-Generator and SSF-Classifier, validated through human surveys (N=382 participants) and expert annotations, respectively. We conduct pilot analyses to showcase the utility of the formalism for studying storytelling at scale. Specifically, applying our models to SSF-Corpus, a curated dataset of 6,140 social media stories from diverse contexts, we characterize the frequency and interdependence of storytelling intents, and we compare and contrast narrative practices (and their diversity) across communities. By linking fine-grained, context-sensitive modeling with a generic taxonomy of reader responses, SocialStoryFrames enable new research into storytelling in online communities.
论文检索
输入标题、作者或关键词，从 7,537 篇学术成果中精准定位
Large language models often display heterogeneous moral preferences across settings. We study inference-time steering toward a desired ethical framework while preserving general competence. We present Convergent-Divergent Routing, which traces and edits minimal branch points inside transformer blocks where ethical-framework-related pathways first converge and then diverge. Gating non-target branches at these loci blocks the downstream propagation while leaving upstream computations intact. We find that this intervention alone increases targeted ethical-framework reasoning. To achieve fine-grained control, we adapt Common Spatial Patterns to the residual stream and extract, for each branch-point layer, a pair of directions that discriminate between utilitarian and deontological frameworks. We then introduce Dual Logit Calibration, a closed-form, minimum-\ell_2-norm update that moves the residual within this two-dimensional subspace so the resulting directional projections align with user-specified preference weights. Experiments on real-life moral dilemmas show that our method reliably achieves preference calibration and largely preserves general capabilities, outperforming recent baselines while providing an interpretable mechanism.
Who Plays Which Role When? Communication Role Dynamics for Peer Recognition and Team Performance Prediction
PDF ↗Team roles offer an interpretable lens on collaboration, yet computational studies of roles often rely on domain-specific personas or data-driven clustering rather than theory-grounded taxonomies. We operationalize a taxonomy of eight communication roles grounded in education literature and annotate a corpus of 6,307 Slack messages from 55 students across 18 teams in a semester-long computer science course project. We evaluate whether LLMs can approximate expert labels, enabling scalable, taxonomy-driven role annotation. Using these role labels, we characterize role dynamics over teams’ lifecycles, finding that different roles peak at different moments and that students enact a more diverse set of roles as projects progress. To evaluate the utility of our role constructs, we use them to predict peer recognition, outperforming lexical, conversational, and LLM-prompting baselines. To assess generalizability beyond the educational context, we apply the same role constructs to a public dataset (DeliData) to predict team performance improvement after deliberation, again exceeding prior performance.
Self-report questionnaires remain the default tool for probing the psychological characteristics of Large Language Model (LLM) agents, yet classical instruments (BFI, BDI, MBTI, BSS) inherit three well-known threats under LLMs: contamination from training corpora, directional bias under social-desirability framing, and limited responsiveness to context beyond the item text. We ask whether a *projective* paradigm can be adapted into a usable psychometric tool for LLM agents. We introduce **GenPT** (Generative Projective Testing), which reformulates TAT, Rorschach, and SCT with newly generated stimuli and organises assessment as a three-stage pipeline (Behavior Collection \to Interpretation \to Diagnosis) grounded in SCORS-G and a Simplified Rorschach Analysis System. On personality traits (Big Five, MBTI) and mental-health risks (depression, suicide ideation), questionnaires exhibit systematic directional shifts under social-desirability framing, most strongly on suicide ideation, whereas GenPT’s collected behavioral patterns stay near the symmetric baseline; under a longitudinal counselling context, GenPT-based depression assessment shifts by roughly an order of magnitude more than its questionnaire counterpart. Questionnaires remain competitive on clean-persona trait tasks where items align lexically with the persona description. Overall, GenPT complements rather than replaces self-report when contamination resistance, bias asymmetry, and context sensitivity matter. Code and stimuli: https://github.com/sci-m-wang/GenPT.
SemCSE-Multi: Multifaceted and Decodable Embeddings for Aspect-Specific and Interpretable Scientific Domain Mapping
PDF ↗We propose SemCSE-Multi, a novel unsupervised framework for generating multifaceted embeddings of scientific abstracts, evaluated in the domains of invasion biology and medicine. These embeddings capture distinct, individually specifiable aspects in isolation, thus enabling fine-grained and controllable similarity assessments as well as adaptive, user-driven visualizations of scientific domains. Our approach relies on an unsupervised procedure that produces aspect-specific summarizing sentences and trains embedding models to map semantically related summaries to nearby positions in the embedding space. We then distill these aspect-specific embedding capabilities into a unified embedding model that directly predicts multiple aspect embeddings from a scientific abstract in a single, efficient forward pass. In addition, we introduce an embedding decoding pipeline that decodes embeddings back into natural language descriptions of their associated aspects. Notably, we show that this decoding remains effective even for unoccupied regions in low-dimensional visualizations, thus offering vastly improved interpretability in user-centric settings.
Large language models (LLMs) can call tools effectively, yet they remain brittle in multi-turn execution: after a tool-call error, smaller models often fall into repetitive invalid re-invocations instead of interpreting the feedback and recovering. This failure mode persists because current training paradigms do not explicitly teach models how to recover from execution errors. In particular, standard reinforcement learning (RL) collapses rich failure experience into sparse negative rewards, while pre-collected error-correction datasets become mismatched to the policy’s evolving failure modes. To bridge this gap, we propose Fission-GRPO, a framework that converts execution errors into on-policy corrective supervision within the RL training loop. Our core mechanism fissions each failed trajectory into a new training instance by augmenting it with diagnostic feedback from a fine-tuned Error Simulator, then resampling multiple recovery rollouts on-policy. This enables the model to learn from the precise errors it makes during exploration, rather than from static, pre-collected error cases. On BFCL v4 Multi-Turn, Fission-GRPO improves the error recovery rate of Qwen3-8B by 5.7% absolute and overall accuracy by 4.0% (from 42.75% to 46.75%), outperforming both RL baselines and specialized tool-use agents. The method further generalizes to TAU-Bench and TAU2-Bench, achieving leading results across most settings with gains up to +17.4%.
Recent advances in multimodal LLMs and systems that use tools for long-video QA point to the promise of reasoning over hour-long episodes. However, many methods still compress content into lossy summaries or rely on limited toolsets, weakening temporal grounding and missing fine-grained cues. We propose a multi-agent framework in which a master LLM coordinates a grounding agent to localize question-relevant segments and a vision agent to extract targeted textual observations. The master agent plans with a step limit, and is trained with reinforcement learning to encourage concise, correct, and efficient multi-agent cooperation. This design helps the master agent focus on relevant clips via grounding, complements subtitles with visual detail, and yields interpretable trajectories. On our proposed *LongTVQA* and *LongTVQA+* which are episode-level datasets aggregated from TVQA/TVQA+, our multi-agent system significantly outperforms strong non-agent baselines. Experiments also show reinforcement learning further strengthens reasoning and planning for the trained agent.
The evaluation of navigation instructions remains a persistent challenge in Vision-and-Language Navigation (VLN) research. Traditional reference-based metrics such as BLEU and ROUGE fail to capture the functional utility of spatial directives, specifically whether an instruction successfully guides a navigator to the intended destination. Although existing VLN agents could serve as evaluators, their reliance on high-fidelity visual simulators introduces licensing constraints and computational costs, and perception errors further confound linguistic quality assessment. This paper introduces GROKE (Graph-based Reasoning over OSM Knowledge for instruction Evaluation), a vision-free training-free hierarchical LLM-based framework for evaluating navigation instructions using OpenStreetMap data. Through systematic ablation studies, we demonstrate that structured JSON and textual formats for spatial information substantially outperform grid-based and visual graph representations. Our hierarchical architecture combines sub-instruction planning with topological graph navigation, reducing navigation error by 68.5% compared to heuristic and sampling baselines on the Map2Seq dataset. The agent’s execution success, trajectory fidelity, and decision patterns serve as proxy metrics for functional navigability given OSM-visible landmarks and topology, establishing a scalable and interpretable evaluation paradigm without visual dependencies.
Steering methods have emerged as effective tools for guiding large language models’ behavior, yet multimodal large language models (MLLMs) lack comparable techniques due to architectural diversity and limited availability of multimodal steering vectors. Inspired by this gap, we demonstrate that steering vectors derived solely from text-only LLM backbones can effectively guide and enhance their multimodal counterparts, revealing a novel cross-modal transfer that enables reuse of existing interpretability tools. Using community-standard methods—Sparse Autoencoders (SAE), Mean Shift, and Linear Probing—we validate this transfer effect across diverse MLLM architectures and visual reasoning tasks. Text-derived steering consistently enhances multimodal performance, with Mean Shift achieving up to +7.3% improvement in spatial relationship accuracy and +3.3% in counting accuracy on CV-Bench, and exhibits strong generalization to out-of-distribution datasets, for example reaching +34.2% on CLEVR counting tasks. This reveals that textual representations alone can effectively enhance visual grounding in MLLMs, bridging the mature ecosystem of text-based steering to MLLMs with minimal additional data collection or computational overhead.
To reliably interpret the evolving context of an LLM as a reasoning trace, the underlying belief of the LLM needs to transition consistently with the progression of the context.We focus on evaluating whether the beliefs held by a model remain consistent before and after the extension of the context.Previous research on consistency evaluation typically uses datasets with ground-truth answers, which is problematic because task-solving ability acts as a confounding factor, obscuring the direct evaluation of consistency.Furthermore, evaluating cases where inconsistency stems from multiple errors poses difficulties.We propose a new evaluation method to assess the consistency of LLMs in a multiple-choice question answering format, designed so that any option chosen is correct, allowing for the evaluation of the proposed belief consistency.It also supports isolation of errors such as reasoning failures and biases.We reveal that the belief consistency does not improve solely with model size scaling,whereas continual pre-training on code and mathematics text improves it.Furthermore, models trained on code and mathematics text show a seemingly contradictory result of increased logical failures, indicating that belief consistency and superficial consistency are not necessarily directly linked.
Causal reasoning in natural language requires identifying relevant variables, understanding their interactions, and reasoning about effects and interventions, often under noisy or ambiguous conditions. While large language models (LLMs) exhibit strong general reasoning abilities, they struggle to disentangle correlation from causation, particularly when observations are partially incorrect or irrelevant information is present. In this work, we introduce NoisyCausal, a new benchmark designed to evaluate causal reasoning under structured noise. Each instance is generated from a ground-truth causal graph and contextualized with a natural language scenario by injecting controllable forms of noise, such as irrelevant distractors, value perturbations, confounding, and partial observability. Moreover, we propose a modular reasoning framework that combines LLMs with explicit causal structure to address these challenges. Our method prompts the LLM to extract variables, construct a causal graph from context, and then reformulates the reasoning task as a structured prompt grounded in this graph. Rather than relying on statistical patterns alone, the LLM is guided by symbolic structure, enabling more interpretable and robust inference. Experimental results show that our method significantly outperforms standard prompting and reasoning baselines on NoisyCausal. Furthermore, it generalizes well to external benchmarks such as Cladder without task-specific tuning. Our findings highlight the importance of combining causal abstractions with language-driven reasoning to achieve faithful and robust causal understanding in LLMs.
Emotion Recognition in Conversation (ERC) aims to identify the emotional states of speakers in conversations. Existing ERC methods perform either fast thinking or slow thinking for emotion predictions. The former lacks interpretability of emotion predictions, and the latter focuses on emotion analysis at shallow semantics. Such insufficient reasoning chains fall short in capturing deep semantics within conversations. To address these limitations, we propose ERCThinker, a Fast-Slow thinking framework for the task of ERC. First, we design different thinking strategies with fine-grained emotion reasoning chains to capture deep semantics that contain topic, discourse structure, speaker characteristic, scene, and emotion shift. Second, we develop an adaptive thinking mechanism in both strategy-level and utterance-level, guiding the model to dynamically perform thinking switching across various scenarios. Furthermore, we utilize Agent-as-Judge to score reasoning chains as reward signals for more accurate emotion predictions. To support training, we construct EmotionCueCoT, the emotion reasoning dataset with supervision in both explanation and judgment. Extensive experiments on various ERC benchmark datasets demonstrate that ERCThinker achieves state-of-the-art performance in both explanation and judgment, making progress in the realm of ERC.
We model utterance production as probabilistic cost-sensitive choice over contextual alternatives, using information-theoretic notions of cost. We distinguish between goal-directed alternatives that realise a fixed communicative intent and goal-agnostic alternatives defined only by contextual plausibility, allowing us to derive speaker- and listener-oriented interpretations of different cost measures. We present a procedure to generate both types of alternative sets using language models. Analysing production choices in open-ended dialogue under both deterministic and noisy cost minimisation, we find that surprisal minimisation relative to goal-directed alternatives provides the strongest explanation of production choices. Uniformity-based costs show weaker overall predictive power, but their influence increases markedly when evaluated relative to goal-agnostic alternatives, consistent with listener-oriented accounts. More broadly, our study suggests that alternative-conditioned optimisation with LM-generated alternatives provides a principled framework for studying speaker and listener pressures in naturalistic language production.
Why Does Reinforcement Learning Generalize? A Feature-Level Mechanistic Study of Post-Training in Large Language Models
PDF ↗Reinforcement learning (RL)-based post-training often improves the reasoning performance of large language models (LLMs) beyond the training domain, while supervised fine-tuning (SFT) frequently leads to general capabilities forgetting. However, the mechanisms underlying this contrast remain unclear.To bridge this gap, we present a feature-level mechanistic analysis methodology to probe RL generalization using a controlled experimental setup, where RL- and SFT-tuned models are trained from the same base model on identical data. Leveraging our interpretability framework, we align internal activations across models within a shared feature space and analyze how features evolve during post-training.We find that SFT rapidly introduces many highly specialized features that stabilize early in training, whereas RL induces more restrained and continually evolving feature changes that largely preserve base models’ representations. Focusing on samples where RL succeeds but the base model fails, we identify a compact, task-agnostic set of features that directly mediate generalization across diverse tasks. Feature-level interventions confirm their causal role: disabling these features significantly degrades RL models’ generalization performance, while amplifying them improves base models’ performance. The code is available at https://github.com/danshi777/RL-generalization.
Mathematical reasoning is one of the core capabilities for Large Language Models (LLMs). Yet, existing approaches often rely on static heuristics or pre-determined reasoning strategies, limiting their ability to adapt to different intermediate states. To address this limitation, we propose FLAIR (Fuzzy-Logic-AssIsted Reasoner), an adaptive framework that integrates fuzzy theory into LLM-based mathematical reasoning. Specifically, FLAIR characterizes intermediate problem-solving states using fuzzy memberships and employs a parameterized fuzzy rule system to conditionally activate subsequent actions. These rule parameters are further adjusted via Reinforcement Learning using solution-level feedback as the reward signal, enabling adaptive and iterative refinement without reliance on a fixed strategy. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first to integrate fuzzy theory into LLM-based mathematical reasoning. Extensive experiments across multiple benchmarks demonstrate that FLAIR consistently outperforms recent state-of-the-art baselines, while offering effective and interpretable diagnostics of intermediate problem-solving states.
Vision-Language Introspection: Mitigating Overconfident Hallucinations in MLLMs via Interpretable Bi-Causal Steering
PDF ↗Object hallucination critically undermines the reliability of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), often stemming from a fundamental failure in cognitive introspection—where models blindly trust linguistic priors over specific visual evidence. Existing mitigations remain limited: contrastive decoding approaches operate superficially without rectifying internal semantic misalignments, while current latent steering methods rely on static vectors that lack instance-specific precision. We introduce Vision-Language Introspection (VLI), a training-free inference framework that simulates a metacognitive self-correction process. VLI first performs Attributive Introspection to diagnose hallucination risks via probabilistic conflict detection and localize the causal visual anchors. It then employs Interpretable Bi-Causal Steering to actively modulate the inference process, dynamically isolating visual evidence from background noise while neutralizing blind confidence through adaptive calibration. VLI achieves state-of-the-art performance on advanced models, reducing object hallucination rates by 12.67% on MMHal-Bench and improving accuracy by 5.8% on POPE.
Culture serves as a fundamental determinant of human affective processing and profoundly shapes how individuals perceive and interpret emotional stimuli. Despite this intrinsic link extant evaluations regarding cultural alignment within Large Language Models primarily prioritize declarative knowledge such as geographical facts or established societal customs. These benchmarks remain insufficient to capture the subjective interpretative variance inherent to diverse sociocultural lenses. To address this limitation, we introduce CEDAR, a multimodal benchmark constructed entirely from scenarios capturing **C**ulturally **E**licited **D**istinct **A**ffective **R**esponses. To construct CEDAR, we implement a novel pipeline that leverages LLM-generated provisional labels to isolate instances yielding cross-cultural emotional distinctions, and subsequently derives reliable ground-truth annotations through rigorous human evaluation. The resulting benchmark comprises 10,962 instances across seven languages and 14 fine-grained emotion categories, with each language including 400 multimodal and 1,166 text-only samples. Comprehensive evaluations of 17 representative multilingual models reveal a dissociation between language consistency and cultural alignment, demonstrating that culturally grounded affective understanding remains a significant challenge for current models.
Cross-Examination Framework: A Task-Agnostic Diagnostic for Information Fidelity in Text-to-Text Generation
PDF ↗Traditional metrics like BLEU and BERTScore fail to capture semantic fidelity in generative text-to-text tasks. We adapt the Cross-Examination Framework (CEF) for a reference-free, multi-dimensional evaluation by treating the source and candidate as independent knowledge bases. CEF generates verifiable questions from each text and performs a cross-examination to derive three interpretable scores: Coverage, Conformity, and Consistency. Validated across translation, summarization and clinical note-generation, our framework identifies critical errors, such as content omissions and factual contradictions, missed by standard metrics. A key contribution is a systematic robustness analysis to select a stable judge model. Crucially, the strong correlation between our reference-free and with-reference modes validates CEF’s reliability without gold references. Furthermore, human expert validation demonstrates that CEF mismatching questions align with meaning-altering semantic errors higher than with non-semantic errors, particularly excelling at identifying entity-based and relational distortions.
Knowledge Base Question Answering (KBQA) leverages structured knowledge bases to offer superior interpretability and hallucination resistance, making it a critical technology for precise knowledge reasoning. However, the prevailing LLM-based generate-then-execute formulation of semantic parsing is limited by strict syntactic constraints, making it primarily prone to structural deviations that render queries unexecutable, while suffering from semantic deviations that yield incorrect execution results. To address these challenges, we propose the Execution as Verification (EVER) framework, reframing semantic parsing as an iterative, self-correcting reasoning process driven by execution feedback. First, motivated by the insight that query executability serves as a strong proxy for answer correctness, we introduce Fine-Grained Execution-Aware Planning. This mechanism decomposes complex semantic parsing into a sequence of stepwise reasoning processes oriented by executability verification, ensuring high query executability. We further design a Self-Guided Semantic Correction mechanism based on execution result verification, utilizing execution feedback to verify and calibrate semantic deviations, thereby ensuring the semantic correctness of executable queries. Experimental results on the WebQSP and CWQ datasets demonstrate that our method achieves significant improvements in both query executability and answer accuracy, achieving state-of-the-art performance, particularly in complex multi-hop scenarios. Our code is available at https://github.com/ahu-zmh/EVER.
Graph-based Retrieval-Augmented Generation (GraphRAG) advances flat document retrieval by structuring knowledge as relational graphs, enabling more coherent and effective reasoning. However, applying it to specific domains like legal reasoning faces critical challenges. (i) Legal corpora are heterogeneous, containing multi-granular knowledge from cases, articles and interpretations. A flat knowledge graph cannot adequately differentiate between factual details, applied rules, and abstract principles, limiting accurate retrieval. (ii) Reliable legal judgment demands transparent, evidence-based reasoning. Traditional RAG passes retrieved context directly to an LLM without verification, resulting in opaque, error-prone reasoning. To this end, we propose LegalGraphRAG, a framework designed for reliable legal reasoning. Our approach introduces two core components: a hierarchical legal graph that hierarchically organizes legal sources to enable retrieval at appropriate abstraction levels, and a multi-agent system for reliable legal reasoning, where a Researcher retrieves candidate evidence, an Auditor rigorously verifies its validity against source documents, and an Adjudicator synthesizes the set of verified evidence to render a final judgment. Extensive experiments show that LegalGraphRAG achieves the state-of-the-art performance, outperforming existing GraphRAG baselines in accurate and trustworthy legal analysis. Our code, datasets and implementation details are available at https://github.com/XMUDeepLIT/LegalGraphRAG.