Automated interlinear gloss prediction with neural networks is a promising approach to accelerate language documentation efforts. However, while state-of-the-art models like GlossLM (Ginn et al., 2024) achieve high scores on glossing benchmarks, user studies with linguists have found critical barriers to the usefulness of such models in real-world scenarios (Rice et al., 2025). In particular, existing models typically generate morpheme-level glosses but assign them to whole words without predicting the actual morpheme boundaries, making the predictions less interpretable and thus untrustworthy to human annotators.We conduct the first study on neural models that jointly predict interlinear glosses and the corresponding morphological segmentation from raw text. We run experiments to determine the optimal way to train models that balance segmentation and glossing accuracy, as well as the alignment between the two tasks. We extend the training corpus of GlossLM and pretrain PolyGloss, a family of seq2seq multilingual models for joint segmentation and glossing that outperforms GlossLM on glossing and beats various open-source LLMs on segmentation, glossing, and alignment. In addition, we demonstrate that PolyGloss can be quickly adapted to a new dataset via low-rank adaptation.
论文检索
输入标题、作者或关键词，从 12,319 篇学术成果中精准定位
Automated schedule generation for multitask from natural language descriptions has huge potential in modern industry. While classic methods bypass language complexities by using pre-formatted matrices, and recent LLM+solver approaches introduce new fragilities by relying on solver-specific code generation. This raises critical questions: Can large language models (LLMs) solve this NL \Rightarrow Schedule task end-to-end well(RQ1)? If the answer is "no", where do they fall short(RQ2)? And how can their capabilities be enhanced (RQ3)? To answer these questions, we introduce NL \Rightarrow Schedule, the first benchmark for this task, equipped with a dataset of 240 description-schedule pairs constructed from real-world materials and a rigorous evaluation suite. Our evaluation of nine state-of-the-art LLMs reveals the limitations of different LLMs in procedure grounding and the strengths of advanced LLMs in global planning via local analysis. To address these shortcomings, we propose Mans, a novel multi-agent framework. Extensive experiments show that Mans achieves more robust performance comparable to six state-of-the-art LLM+solver methods. We hope NL \Rightarrow Schedule and Mans will serve as a solid foundation for automatic scheduling.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in automating code generation. Recent approaches that incorporate feedback refinement mechanisms into the generation process have further enhanced software generation quality. However, these methods can be characterized as single-path approaches, which suffer from insufficient exploration of the vast solution space, often causing even the most powerful models to get stuck in local optima and struggle to generate the desired software. Some other works use Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to explore multiple paths for finding the best solution; yet, MCTS can be extremely inefficient in practice. To this end, we propose SeDev, a novel LLM-driven code generation framework that efficiently finds high-quality solutions in only a few iterations. The core idea of SeDev is to gradually explore semantically adjacent solutions through structured prompt guidance and feedback on previous trials, while using unit tests to evaluate the quality of exploration. To distill the exploration experience, SeDev incorporates a feedback synthesis module that translates unit test results within exploration into comprehensive suggestions. We construct a challenging feature oriented software benchmark FSD-bench++, along with two open datasets to evaluate. Experimental results show that SeDev outperforms baselines while maintaining reasonable time and computational costs. Code is available here.
Editing large language models is challenging as incorporating new knowledge often requires sequential parameter updates while maintaining model capability. In this work, we experimentally observe that sequential knowledge updating under the locate-then-edit framework can introduce safety risks, regardless of whether the knowledge being edited is benign or malicious. We propose a novel model editing approach that estimates safety transforms and identifies corresponding safety direction in the neural activation space, and then aligns neural activation updates and network parameter updates under the safety constraints, resulting in a safety-aware model editing approach. We evaluate our approach on open-source LLMs, Llama-3-8B-Instruct, Qwen3-4B-Instruct and Qwen2.5-14B-Instruct, using the benchmark datasets ZsRE and COUNTERFACT, as well as the malicious dataset Mal-KSet. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach effectively reduces unsafe responses to malicious queries while preserving the effectiveness of model editing.
DiningBench: A Hierarchical Multi-view Benchmark for Perception and Reasoning in the Dietary Domain
PDF ↗Recent advancements in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have revolutionized general visual understanding. However, their application in the food domain remains constrained by benchmarks that rely on coarse-grained categories, single-view imagery, and inaccurate metadata. To bridge this gap, we introduce DiningBench, a hierarchical, multi-view benchmark designed to evaluate VLMs across three levels of cognitive complexity: Fine-Grained Classification, Nutrition Estimation, and Visual Question Answering. Unlike previous datasets, DiningBench comprises 3,021 distinct dishes with an average of 5.27 images per entry, incorporating fine-grained "hard" negatives from identical menus and rigorous, verification-based nutritional data. We conduct an extensive evaluation of 29 state-of-the-art open-source and proprietary models. Our experiments reveal that while current VLMs excel at general reasoning, they struggle significantly with fine-grained visual discrimination and precise nutritional reasoning. Furthermore, we systematically investigate the impact of multi-view inputs and Chain-of-Thought reasoning, identifying five primary failure modes. DiningBench serves as a challenging testbed to drive the next generation of food-centric VLM research. All codes are released in https://github.com/meituan/DiningBench.
Specializing Large Models for Oracle Bone Script Interpretation via Component-Grounded Multimodal Knowledge Augmentation
PDF ↗Deciphering ancient Chinese Oracle Bone Script (OBS) is a challenging task that offers insights into the beliefs, systems, and culture of the ancient era. Existing approaches treat decipherment as a closed-set image recognition problem, which fails to bridge the “interpretation gap”: while individual characters are often unique and rare, they are composed of a limited set of recurring, pictographic components that carry transferable semantic meanings. To leverage this structural logic, we propose an agent-driven Vision-Language Model (VLM) framework that integrates a VLM for precise visual grounding with an LLM-based agent to automate a reasoning chain of component identification, graph-based knowledge retrieval, and relationship inference for linguistically accurate interpretation. To support this, we also introduce OB-Radix, an expert-annotated dataset providing structural and semantic data absent from prior corpora, comprising 1,022 character images (934 unique characters) and 1,853 fine-grained component images across 478 distinct components with verified explanations. By evaluating our system across three benchmarks of different tasks, we demonstrate that our framework yields more detailed and precise decipherments compared to baseline methods.
Extracting structured procedural knowledge from unstructured business documents is a critical yet unresolved bottleneck in process automation. While prior work has focused on extracting linear action flows from instructional texts (e.g., recipes), it has insufficiently addressed the complex logical structures—such as conditional branching and parallel execution—that are pervasive in real-world regulatory and administrative documents. Furthermore, existing benchmarks are limited by simplistic schemas and shallow logical dependencies, restricting progress toward logic-aware large language models (LLMs). To bridge this “Logic Gap”, we introduce \textbf{BREX}, a carefully curated benchmark comprising 409 real-world business documents and 2,855 expert-annotated rules. Unlike prior datasets centered on narrow service scenarios, BREX spans over 30 vertical domains, covering scientific, industrial, administrative, and financial regulations.We further propose \textbf{ExIde}, a structure-aware reasoning framework that investigates five distinct prompting strategies, ranging from implicit semantic alignment to executable grounding via pseudo-code generation, enabling explicit modeling of rule dependencies and providing an out-of-the-box framework for different business customers without finetuning their own LLMs. We benchmark ExIde using 13 state-of-the-art LLMs. Our extensive evaluation reveals that: (1) Executable grounding serves as a superior inductive bias, significantly outperforming standard prompts in rule extraction; and (2) Reasoning-optimized models demonstrate a distinct advantage in tracing long-range dependencies and non-linear rule dependencies compared to standard instruction-tuned models.
Large Language Models based Table Question Answering (LLMs-based TableQA) models excel in NLP field, however, they occasionally exhibit an unfaithful behavior where correct answers are derived through erroneous reasoning paths. In this condition, we propose TrustTable, a neuro-symbolic framework designed to ensure reasoning faithfulness by auditing the reasoning processes of LLMs. Unlike monolithic LLM-based auditors, TrustTable decouples the auditing operation into two orthogonal dimensions. It enforces factual grounding by executing neurally generated Pandas code against the table, and ensures logical soundness by verifying reasoning chains through a LLM-synthesized formal solver. By integrating these symbolic checks, TrustTable enables a Label-Free Audit Loop that systematically identifies and rectifies reasoning flaws without human supervision. In addition, we present the TrustTable-Bench, a diagnostic dataset containing diverse error categories that range from calculation discrepancies to schema misalignments. This benchmark allows for a rigorous quantification of reasoning limitations. Experiments demonstrate that our symbolic audit detects reasoning flaws more accurately than advanced baselines. More broadly, the TrustTable outperforms LLM judges in both majority voting with logical weighting and rejection sampling with process supervision.
WSDPO: A Generative Word Sense Disambiguation Framework with Chain-of-Thought and Preference Optimization
PDF ↗Word sense disambiguation (WSD) is a foundational task in natural language processing. Recent research has reformulated WSD for large language models (LLMs) as a generative task, where the model produces a definition to convey the intended meaning of an ambiguous word in context.In practice, most existing approaches implement this formulation through straightforward supervised fine-tuning, which tends to prioritize superficial context-to-gloss memorization over true contextual sense discrimination, leading to degraded performance on less frequent senses (LFS), particularly in unseen settings.To address this issue, we propose WSDPO, a training framework for generative WSD with chain-of-thought (CoT) and preference optimization. WSDPO consists of three stages: (1) disambiguation-aware CoT construction, which produces training data containing explicit disambiguation steps for the later stage;(2) disambiguation-guided supervised fine-tuning, which explicitly trains the model to discriminate word sense before generating the final definition; and(3) preference-based optimization, which further strengthens the model’s ability to generate sense-faithful definitions by optimizing it using preference pairs constructed from multiple sampled CoT outputs.Extensive experiments across benchmark datasets and multiple backbone LLMs demonstrate that WSDPO achieves substantial performance gains on rare and unseen settings, and exhibits strong generalization in standard evaluation settings.
Traditional reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) for large language models (LLMs) relies on expensive human-annotated datasets, while Reinforcement Learning from AI Feedback (RLAIF) also incurs significant costs, requiring the collection of diverse prompts and corresponding responses, often necessitating external reward models or proprietary models like GPT-4 to annotate preference pairs. In this work, we introduce Self-Alignment Optimization (SAO), a fully self-synthetic framework for LLM alignment, where all training data, including prompts (i.e., user queries), responses, and preferences, are generated by the model itself. Specifically, SAO first instructs the LLM to engage in persona role-play and generate diverse prompts and responses, which are then self-evaluated for preference optimization. Extensive experiments demonstrate that SAO effectively enhances the model’s chat capabilities on standard benchmarks like AlpacaEval 2.0, while maintaining strong performance on downstream objective tasks (i.e.,, question-answering, math reasoning). Our work provides a practical solution for self-improvement in aligning LLMs, and the code for reproducing our results is available at: https://github.com/SJY8460/SAO.
English financial NLP has progressed rapidly through benchmarks for sentiment, document understanding, and financial question answering, while Arabic financial NLP remains comparatively under-explored despite strong practical demand for trustworthy finance and Islamic-finance assistants. We introduce SAHM, a document-grounded benchmark and instruction-tuning dataset for Arabic financial NLP and Shari’ah-compliant reasoning. SAHM contains 14,380 expert-verified instances spanning seven tasks: AAOIFI standards QA, fatwa-based QA/MCQ, accounting and business exams, financial sentiment analysis, extractive summarization, and event–cause reasoning, curated from authentic regulatory, juristic, and corporate sources. We evaluate 19 strong open and proprietary LLMs using task-specific metrics and rubric-based scoring for open-ended outputs, and find that Arabic fluency does not reliably translate to evidence-grounded financial reasoning: models are substantially stronger on recognition-style tasks than on generation and causal reasoning, with the largest gaps on event–cause reasoning. We release the benchmark, evaluation framework, and an instruction-tuned model to support future research on trustworthy Arabic financial NLP.
Cross-architecture GPU code transpilation is essential for unlocking low-level hardware portability, yet no scalable solution exists. We introduce CASS, the first dataset and model suite for source- and assembly-level GPU translation (CUDA ↔ HIP, SASS ↔ RDNA3). CASS contains 60k verified host-device code pairs, enabling learning-based translation across both ISA and runtime boundaries. We generate each sample using our automated pipeline that scrapes, translates, compiles, and aligns GPU programs across vendor stacks. Leveraging CASS, we train a suite of domain-specific translation models that achieve 88.2% accuracy on CUDA → HIP and 69.1% on SASS → RDNA3, outperforming commercial baselines including GPT-5.1, Claude-4.5, and Hipify by wide margins. Generated code matches native performance in 85% of cases, preserving both runtime and memory behavior. To support rigorous evaluation, we introduce CASS-Bench, a curated benchmark spanning 18 GPU domains with ground-truth execution. All data, models, and evaluation tools will be released as open source to support progress in GPU compiler tooling, binary compatibility, and LLM-guided code translation.
Search-augmented LLM agents can produce deep research reports (DRRs), but verifying claim-level factuality remains challenging. Existing fact-checkers usually target general-domain atomic claims, and there is no benchmark to test whether such verifiers transfer to DRRs.Yet building such a benchmark for DRR fact-checkers is itself difficult because it requires expert judgments over cognitively demanding, domain-specific claims.In a controlled study with PhD-level specialists, unassisted experts achieve only 60.8% accuracy on hidden known-answer claims. We therefore propose evolving benchmarking via **Audit-then-Score** (**AtS**), in which labels and rationales remain revisable: when a verifier disagrees with the current benchmark, it submits evidence; an auditor adjudicates the dispute; and accepted revisions update the benchmark before scoring. After three additional **AtS** rounds, expert accuracy rises to 90.9%, showing that experts are better auditors than one-shot labelers.We instantiate **AtS** as **DeepFactBench**, a versioned DRR factuality benchmark with auditable rationales, and introduce **DeepFactEval**, a claim-level verifier.On the frozen **DeepFactBench** release, **DeepFactEval** achieves 83.4% accuracy, outperforming the best prior deep-research and traditional fact-checkers by 14.3 and 24.9 points, respectively, and transferring well to external factuality datasets.
The ability to accurately align LLMs with diverse population groups on subjective questions would have great value. In this work, we show that adding simple supervision can more consistently improve the alignment of LLM-generated distributions with diverse population groups, as measured across three datasets spanning public health, public opinion, and values and beliefs. Beyond evaluating average alignment, we also report how alignment varies across specific groups. Our broad findings provide insights into the distributional alignment of LLM generations with diverse populations. By conducting evaluation over many LLMs and prompting strategies, we provide a benchmark to stimulate future research.
Story visualization requires generating a coherent sequence of images that collectively form a narrative, yet existing evaluation metrics and datasets often overlook visual continuity and narrative diversity. In this paper, we introduce the Visual Context-Aware Metric for Story Visualization, which uses large vision-language models to jointly assess caption fidelity and inter-image consistency, achieving Spearman’s correlation comparable to human agreement on two benchmarks. Also, to address the shortcomings of narrowly defined datasets with low diversity, we propose a diffusion-augmented evaluation pipeline that blends diverse and controlled narrative elements at adjustable ratios, producing challenging evaluation sets. By combining VCMS with this pipeline, we provide a scalable, human-aligned framework for evaluating story visualization models.
We introduce MMSciCode, a comprehensive expert-level, multilingual multi-discipline benchmark for evaluating foundation models in scientific code generation. It includes 624 expert-annotated research coding problems spanning six core scientific disciplines. Compared to prior benchmarks, MMSciCode features three key advancements. First, it challenges models to integrate domain-specific knowledge with algorithmic reasoning to implement core functions from research papers, moving beyond the isolated, general-purpose coding tasks typically assessed in current benchmarks. Second, each problem is meticulously annotated by domain experts through a rigorous paper-grounded process, with strict quality controls implemented to ensure dataset integrity and authenticity. Finally, each problem is equipped with comprehensive unit test suites and containerized environments, enabling reproducible and diagnostic evaluation of both functional correctness and domain validity. We conduct an extensive evaluation of 28 state-of-the-art foundation models and 2 agentic coding tools on MMSciCode. Our results reveal that even the best non-agentic model achieves only around 15% accuracy, while the top agentic coding tool reaches 32.2%, both still far below human expert performance of 68.8%. Through comprehensive error analyses and case studies, we identify substantial performance gaps between models and human experts, providing actionable insights for advancing expert-level scientific code generation.
Online social media platforms have become central to communication and information exchange, however, they also serve as fertile ground for hate speech, offensive language, and bullying targeting individuals and communities. Such content undermines online safety and inclusion, underscoring the need for reliable detection systems—especially in low-resource languages with limited moderation tools. For Bangla, existing work provides valuable resources and models, however, they are mostly single-task (e.g., binary hate/offense) with narrow coverage of key dimensions such as type, severity, and target. We address these gaps by introducing *the first multi-task* Bangla hate-speech dataset, *BanglaMultiHate*, one of the largest manually annotated dataset to date. Using this resource, we performed a comparative study across different baselines, monolingual pretrained models, and LLMs under zero-shot, few-shot, and LoRA fine-tuning settings. Our findings show that while LoRA-tuned LLMs rival BanglaBERT, culturally grounded pretraining remains crucial for robust performance. Overall, *BanglaMultiHate* establishes a stronger benchmark for hate speech detection in low-resource contexts. All data and scripts are released for reproducibility.
In real-world business environments, data is stored in a variety of sources, including structured relational databases, semi-structured databases, and unstructured files. The ability to extract reasonable insights across these diverse sources is integral to data-driven decision-making. Existing benchmarks, however, are limited in assessing agents’ capabilities across these diverse data types. To address this gap, we introduce UniDataBench, a multi-source benchmark designed to evaluate the performance of data analytics agents in handling diverse data sources. Specifically, UniDataBench is constructed based on real-life industry analysis reports, employing a pipeline to synthesize data that aligns with authentic analytical trends. It encompasses diverse datasets spanning relational databases, CSV files, and NoSQL stores to reflect real-world business settings, and provides a unified framework for evaluating how effectively agents can explore multiple data formats, extract insights, and generate meaningful summaries and recommendations. Based on UniDataBench, we propose a novel LLM-based agent named ReActInsight, an autonomous agent that performs end-to-end analysis over diverse data sources by automatically discovering cross-source linkages, decomposing goals, and generating robust, self-correcting code to extract actionable insights. Our benchmark and agent together provide a framework for facilitating the development of data analytics agents in real-world applications.
AI Clones aim to simulate an individual’s thoughts and behaviors to enable long-term, personalized interaction, placing stringent demands on memory systems to model experiences, emotions, and opinions over time. Existing memory benchmarks primarily rely on user–agent conversational histories, which are temporally fragmented and insufficient for capturing continuous life trajectories. We introduce CloneMem, a benchmark for evaluating long-term memory in AI Clone scenarios grounded in non-conversational digital traces, including diaries, social media posts, and emails, spanning one to three years. CloneMem adopts a top-down data construction framework to ensure longitudinal coherence and defines tasks that assess an agent’s ability to track evolving personal states. Experiments show that current memory mechanisms struggle in this setting, highlighting open challenges for life-grounded personalized AI. Code and dataset are available at https://github.com/AvatarMemory/CloneMemBench
With the generative capabilities of large language models (LLMs) reshaping the information ecosystem, the concern with the sociological validity of claim detection benchmarks is increasing. Current claim detection benchmarks predominantly treat claims as static textual artifacts, overlooking the sociological etiology of how information naturally emerges and mutates. In this paper, we propose an evolutionary paradigm that models claims as socially evolving entities. In specific, we introduce a socially generative framework for synthetic claim generation, a multi-agent simulation grounded in the Open Claims Model. By decomposing claims into context, utterance, and proposition, our approach enables the precise simulation of unmitigated propagation to capture truth decay, and intervened propagation with multi-auditor oversight for targeted generation. Furthermore, we propose the background-user-perspective (BUP) framework, which reformulates check-worthiness as a condition-dependent probability rooted in social environment. Experiments on our datasets verify the data quality and reveal how network topology and user attributes systematically shape veracity drift.