arXiv subjects

Shengming Zhao

Publications and source records attributed to Shengming Zhao.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

TokenPrint: A Calibrated Token-Space Fingerprint for Language-Model Provenance

Establishing the provenance of a language model---including its base checkpoint and possible overlap in training distributions---is a governance challenge that metadata alone cannot resolve. We introduce a training-free fingerprint based on the top-$k$ vocabulary projections of late hidden states elicited by 250 fixed knowledge probes, compared using Jaccard overlap over decoded token strings. We evaluate the method on 32 open-weight models from nine families (0.6B--32B) with documented relationships. (1)~A \emph{similarity ladder} broadly follows model relatedness: independently trained models on identical data score 0.48 raw (0.35 vocabulary-corrected), followed by shared-base fine-tunes (0.39/0.33), same-developer relatives (0.38/0.28), and models with no documented relationship (0.22/0.17). This identical-data signal persists across three organizations, two tokenizer families, and two architecture classes, and emerges within the first 1\% of training before measurable task competence, suggesting a contribution from shared training data beyond capability convergence. (2)~As a nearest-neighbor \emph{lineage-retrieval} method, the fingerprint ranks the exact documented base among the top two candidates for all five R1 distillations (mean rank 1.8, MRR 0.60), including a math-specialized base not identifiable from coarse metadata. (3)~A \emph{depth ablation} shows that lineage group discrimination strengthens toward the output distribution, with AUC increasing from 0.72 at quarter depth to 0.90 at the output; using only the top 5 output tokens retains AUC 0.87. (4)~The fingerprint remains stable under quantization, with Jaccard similarity of 0.92 under int8 and 0.82--0.85 under int4, compared with a maximum cross-model similarity of 0.81 in the calibration pool. We release the probes, code, and fingerprints.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

When Is a Steerable Concept Representation Real? Measurement Confounds in a Cross-Family Audit of Neuroscience Parallels in LLMs

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly reported to exhibit human-like neural and cognitive signatures, including concept cells, mental number lines, and cognitive maps. These claims often rely on linear probing and activation steering applied to a single model, yet both methods are highly sensitive to measurement choices. A reported parallel may therefore reflect the model, the measurement procedure, or both. We audit four representative neuroscience-inspired paradigms across 17 models from five families, spanning $0.6$B to $72$B parameters. Our main experiment examines the causal steerability of concept directions. With raw activation units and a fixed layer and coefficient, steerability appears to increase with model scale, resembling an emergent capability. However, this pattern is produced by an uncalibrated pipeline rather than by a claim established in the steering literature. The trend depends jointly on raw units, the readout metric, and the operating point; correcting any one of these removes it. With residual-norm-comparable interventions and held-out operating-point selection, concept steering remains significant at every scale, but shows no significant trend across the Qwen3 series, although the confidence interval does not rule out a moderate positive slope. The remaining results are mixed. A linear geographic world map is consistently decodable in every tested checkpoint up to $72$B. Number magnitude is strongly encoded, but whether individual neurons appear bell-shaped or monotonic depends on the selection criterion. Language-specific structure is localizable, but the direction of the cross-lingual asymmetry reverses under a different attribution method. These results suggest that the main constraint on AI neuroscience is not a lack of phenomena, but a lack of comparable measurements and adequate controls. We release the protocol, stimuli, and code.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Not All RAGs Are Created Equal: A Component-Wise Empirical Study for Software Engineering Tasks

While Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is increasingly adopted to ground Large Language Models (LLMs) in software artifacts, the optimal configuration of its components remains an open question for software engineering (SE) tasks. The lack of systematic guidance forces practitioners into costly, ad-hoc experimentation. This paper presents a comprehensive, component-wise empirical study that dissects the RAG pipeline, evaluating over 21 distinct models and methods. Our study systematically isolates and evaluates 4 query processing techniques, 7 retrieval models spanning sparse, dense, and hybrid paradigms, 4 context refinement methods, and 6 distinct generators. We test these components on a suite of 3 core SE tasks: code generation, summarization, and repair. Our empirical findings reveal a crucial insight: the retriever-side components, particularly the choice of the retrieval algorithm, often exert a more significant influence on final system performance than the selection of the generator model. Strikingly, the classic lexical retriever BM25 demonstrates exceptionally robust performance across diverse tasks. Our analysis provides a practical, data-driven roadmap for researchers and practitioners, offering clear guidance on prioritizing optimization efforts when constructing effective RAG systems for software engineering contexts.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

WiseMind: a knowledge-guided multi-agent framework for accurate and empathetic psychiatric diagnosis

Large Language Models (LLMs) offer promising opportunities to support mental healthcare workflows, yet they often lack the structured clinical reasoning needed for reliable diagnosis and may struggle to provide the emotionally attuned communication essential for patient trust. Here, we introduce WiseMind, a novel multi-agent framework inspired by the theory of Dialectical Behavior Therapy designed to facilitate psychiatric assessment. By integrating a "Reasonable Mind" Agent for evidence-based logic and an "Emotional Mind" Agent for empathetic communication, WiseMind effectively bridges the gap between instrumental accuracy and humanistic care. Our framework utilizes a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5)-guided Structured Knowledge Graph to steer diagnostic inquiries, significantly reducing hallucinations compared to standard prompting methods. Using a combination of virtual standard patients, simulated interactions, and real human interaction datasets, we evaluate WiseMind across three common psychiatric conditions. WiseMind outperforms state-of-the-art LLM methods in both identifying critical diagnostic nodes and establishing accurate differential diagnoses. Across 1206 simulated conversations and 180 real user sessions, the system achieves 85.6% top-1 diagnostic accuracy, approaching reported diagnostic performance ranges of board-certified psychiatrists and surpassing knowledge-enhanced single-agent baselines by 15-54 percentage points. Expert review by psychiatrists further validates that WiseMind generates responses that are not only clinically sound but also psychologically supportive, demonstrating the feasibility of empathetic, reliable AI agents to conduct psychiatric assessments under appropriate human oversight.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2024

Understanding the Fundamental Design Decisions of Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has emerged as a critical technique for enhancing large language model (LLM) capabilities. However, practitioners face significant challenges when making RAG deployment decisions. While existing research prioritizes algorithmic innovations, a systematic gap persists in understanding fundamental engineering trade-offs that determine RAG success. We present the first comprehensive study of three universal RAG deployment decisions: whether to deploy RAG, how much information to retrieve, and how to integrate retrieved knowledge effectively. Through systematic experiments across three LLMs and six datasets spanning question answering and code generation tasks, we reveal critical insights: (1) RAG deployment must be highly selective, with variable recall thresholds and failure modes affecting up to 12.6\% of samples even with perfect documents. (2) Optimal retrieval volume exhibits task-dependent behavior QA tasks show universal patterns (5-10 documents optimal) while code generation requires scenario-specific optimization. (3) Knowledge integration effectiveness depends on task and model characteristics, with code generation benefiting significantly from prompting methods while question answering shows minimal improvement. These findings demonstrate that universal RAG strategies prove inadequate. Effective RAG systems require context-aware design decisions based on task characteristics and model capabilities. Our analysis provides evidence-based guidance for practitioners and establishes foundational insights for principled RAG deployment. Our code, data and artifacts are publicly available at https://github.com/ShengmingZ/RAG_Benchmark_Code_QA.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2024

Derailer-Rerailer: Adaptive Verification for Efficient and Reliable Language Model Reasoning

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive reasoning capabilities, yet existing prompting methods face a critical trade-off: simple approaches often struggle with complex tasks and reasoning stability, while more sophisticated methods require multiple inferences and substantial computational resources, limiting their practical deployment. To address this challenge, we propose Derailer-Rerailer, a novel framework that adaptively balances reasoning accuracy and computational efficiency. At its core, our framework employs a lightweight Derailer mechanism to assess reasoning stability and selectively triggers an advanced Rerailer verification process only when necessary, thereby optimizing computational resource usage. Extensive evaluation across both open and closed-source models on more than 20 categories of mathematical, symbolic, and commonsense reasoning tasks demonstrates our framework's effectiveness: Derailer-Rerailer achieves significant accuracy improvements (8-11\% across various reasoning tasks) while maintaining 2-3 times better efficiency than existing verification methods, with particularly strong performance in mathematical and symbolic reasoning, offering a practical solution for enhancing LLM reasoning reliability while significantly reducing computational overhead.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Beyond Fidelity: Explaining Vulnerability Localization of Learning-based Detectors

Vulnerability detectors based on deep learning (DL) models have proven their effectiveness in recent years. However, the shroud of opacity surrounding the decision-making process of these detectors makes it difficult for security analysts to comprehend. To address this, various explanation approaches have been proposed to explain the predictions by highlighting important features, which have been demonstrated effective in other domains such as computer vision and natural language processing. Unfortunately, an in-depth evaluation of vulnerability-critical features, such as fine-grained vulnerability-related code lines, learned and understood by these explanation approaches remains lacking. In this study, we first evaluate the performance of ten explanation approaches for vulnerability detectors based on graph and sequence representations, measured by two quantitative metrics including fidelity and vulnerability line coverage rate. Our results show that fidelity alone is not sufficient for evaluating these approaches, as fidelity incurs significant fluctuations across different datasets and detectors. We subsequently check the precision of the vulnerability-related code lines reported by the explanation approaches, and find poor accuracy in this task among all of them. This can be attributed to the inefficiency of explainers in selecting important features and the presence of irrelevant artifacts learned by DL-based detectors.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2023

Look Before You Leap: An Exploratory Study of Uncertainty Measurement for Large Language Models

The recent performance leap of Large Language Models (LLMs) opens up new opportunities across numerous industrial applications and domains. However, erroneous generations, such as false predictions, misinformation, and hallucination made by LLMs, have also raised severe concerns for the trustworthiness of LLMs', especially in safety-, security- and reliability-sensitive scenarios, potentially hindering real-world adoptions. While uncertainty estimation has shown its potential for interpreting the prediction risks made by general machine learning (ML) models, little is known about whether and to what extent it can help explore an LLM's capabilities and counteract its undesired behavior. To bridge the gap, in this paper, we initiate an exploratory study on the risk assessment of LLMs from the lens of uncertainty. In particular, we experiment with twelve uncertainty estimation methods and four LLMs on four prominent natural language processing (NLP) tasks to investigate to what extent uncertainty estimation techniques could help characterize the prediction risks of LLMs. Our findings validate the effectiveness of uncertainty estimation for revealing LLMs' uncertain/non-factual predictions. In addition to general NLP tasks, we extensively conduct experiments with four LLMs for code generation on two datasets. We find that uncertainty estimation can potentially uncover buggy programs generated by LLMs. Insights from our study shed light on future design and development for reliable LLMs, facilitating further research toward enhancing the trustworthiness of LLMs.

cs.SE↗