Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Pardis Sadat Zahraei

Publications and source records attributed to Pardis Sadat Zahraei.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

AgentAbstain: Do LLM Agents Know When Not to Act?

Agent systems based on large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed for autonomous tasks, yet existing evaluations mostly focus on task success rather than whether agents know when to abstain. This gap poses real risks: under ambiguity, conflicting constraints, or tool failures, agents may execute unintended and irreversible actions. To close this gap, we present the first systematic evaluation framework for agentic abstention: the calibrated ability of tool-using LLM agents to recognize when not to act. At its core, AgentAbstain is a paired-task benchmark built on an agent-native taxonomy of 8 abstention scenarios across pre-execution reasoning and runtime discovery. It contains 263 paired tasks across 42 executable sandbox environments, where each pair consists of a should-act task and a should-abstain variant produced through a controlled perturbation to the instruction, tool, or environment state. To scale this paired design and resist data contamination, we propose AbstainGen, a fully automated pipeline that synthesizes sandbox environments and generates paired tasks end-to-end, validated by deterministic replay and semantic LLM judges; fresh task instances can be regenerated on demand, and three independent annotators rate 94-98% of sampled tasks as well-designed. Across 17 frontier LLMs in 4 agent harnesses, the best agent (Gemini 3.1 Pro) achieves only 59.5% paired accuracy (correct on both the act and abstain sides of each paired task). More importantly, abstention capability is largely independent of general task-solving capability, indicating that scaling task-solving alone will not close this gap. We further identify failure modes such as post-hoc abstention, in which agents execute irreversible actions before recognizing abstention triggers. Our code and dataset are open-sourced at agentabstain.github.io.

cs.AI↗

The Alignment Veto: How Safety Training Suppresses Cultural Knowledge in LLMs

What happens inside a language model when alignment training conflicts with a cultural value it encodes? Across 16 MENA countries, 26 models, and 1.53M human survey responses, we show the answer is suppression, not erasure: at the moment of refusal, a model's internal logit distribution correlates with human survey data more strongly than its freely generated answers. We call this the alignment veto. We distinguish suppression failures (accurate internal distributions blocked at output) from representational bias failures (the encoding itself diverges from human values), and show the two require different interventions. The gate is inequitable: the safety tax reaches 37.6%, with a 19.8% alignment-quality gap between best- and worst-served nations, and native-language prompting widens rather than closes it. Sparse autoencoder analysis corroborated by comparisons across alignment stages identifies a candidate DPO-stage feature mediating suppression in Tulu-3-8B. The gate is real, its costs are unequal, and deciding what it should protect is not a technical question.

cs.CL↗

EiCAP: Beyond Fluency, Probing and Improving Emotional Intelligence in LLMs via Psychologically Grounded Multi-Turn Dialogue

Large Language Models increasingly serve in emotionally sensitive roles, including mental health support, education, and crisis response, yet they lack a principled framework for assessing or improving Emotional Intelligence (EI). We introduce EiCAP, a unified, psychologically grounded six-layer EI taxonomy operationalized into two complementary resources. EiCAP-Bench is a multi-turn, one-vs-three forced-choice evaluation suite with 3,174 probes across 24 subcategories and cross-turn dependencies that reflect real conversational EI demands. EiCAP-SFT is a 152,820-dialogue supervision corpus aligned to the same taxonomy, enabling controlled, interpretable fine-tuning. Two key findings emerge. First, generic conversational supervised fine-tuning does not confer EI: fine-tuning on UltraChat yields no significant gain in any of the 24 subcategories, with a macro score of 24.6%, near the chance level of 25%. Second, applying EI-grounded LoRA, using approximately 0.8% of parameters, directly to Qwen-2.5-7B-Base achieves significant gains in all 24 subcategories, reaching a macro score of 75.33%, a gain of 51.7 percentage points over Base and 37.1 percentage points over Instruct. Crucially, an ablation shows that the UltraChat pre-stage is counterproductive, reducing performance by 21.4 percentage points: direct EI-grounded training is both necessary and sufficient.

cs.CL↗

Translate With Care: Addressing Gender Bias, Neutrality, and Reasoning in Large Language Model Translations

Addressing gender bias and maintaining logical coherence in machine translation remains challenging, particularly when translating between natural gender languages, like English, and genderless languages, such as Persian, Indonesian, and Finnish. We introduce the Translate-with-Care (TWC) dataset, comprising 3,950 challenging scenarios across six low- to mid-resource languages, to assess translation systems' performance. Our analysis of diverse technologies, including GPT-4, mBART-50, NLLB-200, and Google Translate, reveals a universal struggle in translating genderless content, resulting in gender stereotyping and reasoning errors. All models preferred masculine pronouns when gender stereotypes could influence choices. Google Translate and GPT-4 showed particularly strong bias, favoring male pronouns 4-6 times more than feminine ones in leadership and professional success contexts. Fine-tuning mBART-50 on TWC substantially resolved these biases and errors, led to strong generalization, and surpassed proprietary LLMs while remaining open-source. This work emphasizes the need for targeted approaches to gender and semantic coherence in machine translation, particularly for genderless languages, contributing to more equitable and accurate translation systems.

cs.CL↗

Generative AI for Character Animation: A Comprehensive Survey of Techniques, Applications, and Future Directions

Generative AI is reshaping art, gaming, and most notably animation. Recent breakthroughs in foundation and diffusion models have reduced the time and cost of producing animated content. Characters are central animation components, involving motion, emotions, gestures, and facial expressions. The pace and breadth of advances in recent months make it difficult to maintain a coherent view of the field, motivating the need for an integrative review. Unlike earlier overviews that treat avatars, gestures, or facial animation in isolation, this survey offers a single, comprehensive perspective on all the main generative AI applications for character animation. We begin by examining the state-of-the-art in facial animation, expression rendering, image synthesis, avatar creation, gesture modeling, motion synthesis, object generation, and texture synthesis. We highlight leading research, practical deployments, commonly used datasets, and emerging trends for each area. To support newcomers, we also provide a comprehensive background section that introduces foundational models and evaluation metrics, equipping readers with the knowledge needed to enter the field. We discuss open challenges and map future research directions, providing a roadmap to advance AI-driven character-animation technologies. This survey is intended as a resource for researchers and developers entering the field of generative AI animation or adjacent fields. Resources are available at: https://github.com/llm-lab-org/Generative-AI-for-Character-Animation-Survey.

cs.CV↗

TuringQ: Benchmarking AI Comprehension in Theory of Computation

We present TuringQ, the first benchmark designed to evaluate the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in the theory of computation. TuringQ consists of 4,006 undergraduate and graduate-level question-answer pairs, categorized into four difficulty levels and covering seven core theoretical areas. We evaluate several open-source LLMs, as well as GPT-4, using Chain of Thought prompting and expert human assessment. Additionally, we propose an automated LLM-based evaluation system that demonstrates competitive accuracy when compared to human evaluation. Fine-tuning a Llama3-8B model on TuringQ shows measurable improvements in reasoning ability and out-of-domain tasks such as algebra. TuringQ serves as both a benchmark and a resource for enhancing LLM performance in complex computational reasoning tasks. Our analysis offers insights into LLM capabilities and advances in AI comprehension of theoretical computer science.

cs.CL↗

Detecting Bias and Enhancing Diagnostic Accuracy in Large Language Models for Healthcare

Biased AI-generated medical advice and misdiagnoses can jeopardize patient safety, making the integrity of AI in healthcare more critical than ever. As Large Language Models (LLMs) take on a growing role in medical decision-making, addressing their biases and enhancing their accuracy is key to delivering safe, reliable care. This study addresses these challenges head-on by introducing new resources designed to promote ethical and precise AI in healthcare. We present two datasets: BiasMD, featuring 6,007 question-answer pairs crafted to evaluate and mitigate biases in health-related LLM outputs, and DiseaseMatcher, with 32,000 clinical question-answer pairs spanning 700 diseases, aimed at assessing symptom-based diagnostic accuracy. Using these datasets, we developed the EthiClinician, a fine-tuned model built on the ChatDoctor framework, which outperforms GPT-4 in both ethical reasoning and clinical judgment. By exposing and correcting hidden biases in existing models for healthcare, our work sets a new benchmark for safer, more reliable patient outcomes.

cs.CL↗

WSC+: Enhancing The Winograd Schema Challenge Using Tree-of-Experts

The Winograd Schema Challenge (WSC) serves as a prominent benchmark for evaluating machine understanding. While Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at answering WSC questions, their ability to generate such questions remains less explored. In this work, we propose Tree-of-Experts (ToE), a novel prompting method which enhances the generation of WSC instances (50% valid cases vs. 10% in recent methods). Using this approach, we introduce WSC+, a novel dataset comprising 3,026 LLM-generated sentences. Notably, we extend the WSC framework by incorporating new 'ambiguous' and 'offensive' categories, providing a deeper insight into model overconfidence and bias. Our analysis reveals nuances in generation-evaluation consistency, suggesting that LLMs may not always outperform in evaluating their own generated questions when compared to those crafted by other models. On WSC+, GPT-4, the top-performing LLM, achieves an accuracy of 68.7%, significantly below the human benchmark of 95.1%.

cs.CL↗