SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Xianjun Yang

Publications and source records attributed to Xianjun Yang.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Learning Personalized Agents from Human Feedback

Modern AI agents are powerful but often fail to align with the idiosyncratic, evolving preferences of individual users. Prior approaches typically rely on static datasets, either training implicit preference models on interaction history or encoding user profiles in external memory. However, these approaches struggle with new users and with preferences that change over time. We introduce Personalized Agents from Human Feedback (PAHF), a framework for continual personalization in which agents learn online from live interaction using explicit per-user memory. PAHF operationalizes a three-step loop: (1) seeking pre-action clarification to resolve ambiguity, (2) grounding actions in preferences retrieved from memory, and (3) integrating post-action feedback to update memory when preferences drift. To evaluate this capability, we develop a four-phase protocol and two benchmarks in embodied manipulation and online shopping. These benchmarks quantify an agent's ability to learn initial preferences from scratch and subsequently adapt to persona shifts. Our theoretical analysis and empirical results show that integrating explicit memory with dual feedback channels is critical: PAHF learns substantially faster and consistently outperforms both no-memory and single-channel baselines, reducing initial personalization error and enabling rapid adaptation to preference shifts.

cs.AI

Dr. Zero: Self-Evolving Search Agents without Training Data

As high-quality data becomes increasingly difficult to obtain, self-evolution without curated training data has emerged as a promising paradigm. This approach allows large language models (LLMs) to autonomously generate and solve complex problems, thereby improving their reasoning capabilities. However, multi-turn search agents struggle in this setting due to limited question diversity and the substantial compute required for multi-step reasoning and tool use. In this work, we introduce Dr. Zero, a framework that enables search agents to effectively self-evolve without human-annotated training data, relying solely on an external search engine as their knowledge environment. In particular, we design a self-evolution feedback loop where a proposer generates structurally diverse questions to train a solver initialized from the same base model. As the solver evolves, it incentivizes the proposer to produce increasingly difficult yet solvable tasks, thus establishing an automated curriculum to refine both agents. To enhance training efficiency, we also introduce hop-grouped relative policy optimization (HRPO). This method clusters structurally similar questions to construct group-level baselines, effectively minimizing the sampling overhead in evaluating each query's individual difficulty and solvability. Consequently, HRPO significantly reduces the compute requirements for proposer training and reward estimation without compromising performance or stability. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that Dr. Zero matches or surpasses fully supervised search agents on several question answering benchmarks, showing that strong agentic search and evidence-grounded reasoning can emerge solely through self-evolution.

cs.AI

Beyond Reasoning Gains: Mitigating General-Capability Forgetting in Large Reasoning Models

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has delivered impressive gains in mathematical and multimodal reasoning and has become a standard post-training paradigm for contemporary language and vision-language models. However, the RLVR recipe introduces a significant risk of capability regression, in which models forget foundational skills after prolonged training without employing regularization strategies. We empirically confirm this concern, observing that open-source reasoning models suffer performance degradation on core capabilities such as perception and faithfulness. While imposing regularization terms like KL divergence can help prevent deviation from the base model, these terms are computed on the current task and therefore do not guarantee preservation of broader knowledge. Meanwhile, commonly used experience replay across heterogeneous domains makes it nontrivial to decide how much training emphasis each objective should receive. To address this, we propose RECAP-a replay strategy with dynamic objective reweighting for general knowledge preservation. Our reweighting mechanism adapts online using short-horizon signals of convergence and instability, shifting the post-training focus away from saturated objectives and toward underperforming or volatile ones. Our method is end-to-end and readily applicable to existing RLVR pipelines without training additional models or heavy tuning. Extensive experiments on benchmarks using Qwen2.5-VL-3B and Qwen2.5-VL-7B demonstrate the effectiveness of our method, which not only preserves general capabilities but also improves reasoning by enabling more flexible trade-offs among in-task rewards.

cs.LG

Verifying Chain-of-Thought Reasoning via Its Computational Graph

Current Chain-of-Thought (CoT) verification methods predict reasoning correctness based on outputs (black-box) or activations (gray-box), but offer limited insight into why a computation fails. We introduce a white-box method: Circuit-based Reasoning Verification (CRV). We hypothesize that attribution graphs of correct CoT steps, viewed as execution traces of the model's latent reasoning circuits, possess distinct structural fingerprints from those of incorrect steps. By training a classifier on structural features of these graphs, we show that these traces contain a powerful signal of reasoning errors. Our white-box approach yields novel scientific insights unattainable by other methods. (1) We demonstrate that structural signatures of error are highly predictive, establishing the viability of verifying reasoning directly via its computational graph. (2) We find these signatures to be highly domain-specific, revealing that failures in different reasoning tasks manifest as distinct computational patterns. (3) We provide evidence that these signatures are not merely correlational; by using our analysis to guide targeted interventions on individual transcoder features, we successfully correct the model's faulty reasoning. Our work shows that, by scrutinizing a model's computational process, we can move from simple error detection to a deeper, causal understanding of LLM reasoning.

cs.CL

Your thoughts tell who you are: Characterize the reasoning patterns of LRMs

Current comparisons of large reasoning models (LRMs) focus on macro-level statistics such as task accuracy or reasoning length. Whether different LRMs reason differently remains an open question. To address this gap, we introduce the LLM-proposed Open Taxonomy (LOT), a classification method that uses a generative language model to compare reasoning traces from two LRMs and articulate their distinctive features in words. LOT then models how these features predict the source LRM of a reasoning trace based on their empirical distributions across LRM outputs. Iterating this process over a dataset of reasoning traces yields a human-readable taxonomy that characterizes how models think. We apply LOT to compare the reasoning of 12 open-source LRMs on tasks in math, science, and coding. LOT identifies systematic differences in their thoughts, achieving 80-100% accuracy in distinguishing reasoning traces from LRMs that differ in scale, base model family, or objective domain. Beyond classification, LOT's natural-language taxonomy provides qualitative explanations of how LRMs think differently. Finally, in a case study, we link the reasoning differences to performance: aligning the reasoning style of smaller Qwen3 models with that of the largest Qwen3 during test time improves their accuracy on GPQA by 3.3-5.7%.

cs.CL

Hallucination as a Computational Boundary: A Hierarchy of Inevitability and the Oracle Escape

The illusion phenomenon of large language models (LLMs) is the core obstacle to their reliable deployment. This article formalizes the large language model as a probabilistic Turing machine by constructing a "computational necessity hierarchy", and for the first time proves the illusions are inevitable on diagonalization, incomputability, and information theory boundaries supported by the new "learner pump lemma". However, we propose two "escape routes": one is to model Retrieval Enhanced Generations (RAGs) as oracle machines, proving their absolute escape through "computational jumps", providing the first formal theory for the effectiveness of RAGs; The second is to formalize continuous learning as an "internalized oracle" mechanism and implement this path through a novel neural game theory framework. Finally, this article proposes a feasible new principle for artificial intelligence security - Computational Class Alignment (CCA), which requires strict matching between task complexity and the actual computing power of the system, providing theoretical support for the secure application of artificial intelligence.

cs.AI

Many-Turn Jailbreaking

Current jailbreaking work on large language models (LLMs) aims to elicit unsafe outputs from given prompts. However, it only focuses on single-turn jailbreaking targeting one specific query. On the contrary, the advanced LLMs are designed to handle extremely long contexts and can thus conduct multi-turn conversations. So, we propose exploring multi-turn jailbreaking, in which the jailbroken LLMs are continuously tested on more than the first-turn conversation or a single target query. This is an even more serious threat because 1) it is common for users to continue asking relevant follow-up questions to clarify certain jailbroken details, and 2) it is also possible that the initial round of jailbreaking causes the LLMs to respond to additional irrelevant questions consistently. As the first step (First draft done at June 2024) in exploring multi-turn jailbreaking, we construct a Multi-Turn Jailbreak Benchmark (MTJ-Bench) for benchmarking this setting on a series of open- and closed-source models and provide novel insights into this new safety threat. By revealing this new vulnerability, we aim to call for community efforts to build safer LLMs and pave the way for a more in-depth understanding of jailbreaking LLMs.

cs.CL

Diversity-driven Data Selection for Language Model Tuning through Sparse Autoencoder

Instruction tuning data are often quantity-saturated due to the large volume of data collection and fast model iteration, leaving data selection important but underexplored. Existing quality-driven data selection methods, such as LIMA (NeurIPS 2023 \citep{zhou2024lima}) and AlpaGasus (ICLR 2024 \citep{chenalpagasus}) generally ignore the equal importance of data diversity and complexity. In this work, we aim to design a diversity-aware data selection strategy and creatively propose using sparse autoencoders (SAEs) to tackle the challenge of data diversity measure. In addition, SAEs can also provide more interpretability of model behavior and explain, e.g., the surprising effectiveness of selecting the longest response (ICML 2024 \citep{zhaolong}). Using effective data selection, we experimentally prove that models trained on our selected data can outperform other methods in terms of model capabilities, reduce training cost, and potentially gain more control over model behaviors. We prove that SAEs can serve as a good alternative to diversity measure and design our method to be scalable for potential industrial large-scale pruning, and we will also release our trained SAEs for use by the broader community.

cs.CL

AILuminate: Introducing v1.0 of the AI Risk and Reliability Benchmark from MLCommons

The rapid advancement and deployment of AI systems have created an urgent need for standard safety-evaluation frameworks. This paper introduces AILuminate v1.0, the first comprehensive industry-standard benchmark for assessing AI-product risk and reliability. Its development employed an open process that included participants from multiple fields. The benchmark evaluates an AI system's resistance to prompts designed to elicit dangerous, illegal, or undesirable behavior in 12 hazard categories, including violent crimes, nonviolent crimes, sex-related crimes, child sexual exploitation, indiscriminate weapons, suicide and self-harm, intellectual property, privacy, defamation, hate, sexual content, and specialized advice (election, financial, health, legal). Our method incorporates a complete assessment standard, extensive prompt datasets, a novel evaluation framework, a grading and reporting system, and the technical as well as organizational infrastructure for long-term support and evolution. In particular, the benchmark employs an understandable five-tier grading scale (Poor to Excellent) and incorporates an innovative entropy-based system-response evaluation. In addition to unveiling the benchmark, this report also identifies limitations of our method and of building safety benchmarks generally, including evaluator uncertainty and the constraints of single-turn interactions. This work represents a crucial step toward establishing global standards for AI risk and reliability evaluation while acknowledging the need for continued development in areas such as multiturn interactions, multimodal understanding, coverage of additional languages, and emerging hazard categories. Our findings provide valuable insights for model developers, system integrators, and policymakers working to promote safer AI deployment.

cs.CY

MELON: Provable Defense Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks in AI Agents

Recent research has explored that LLM agents are vulnerable to indirect prompt injection (IPI) attacks, where malicious tasks embedded in tool-retrieved information can redirect the agent to take unauthorized actions. Existing defenses against IPI have significant limitations: either require essential model training resources, lack effectiveness against sophisticated attacks, or harm the normal utilities. We present MELON (Masked re-Execution and TooL comparisON), a novel IPI defense. Our approach builds on the observation that under a successful attack, the agent's next action becomes less dependent on user tasks and more on malicious tasks. Following this, we design MELON to detect attacks by re-executing the agent's trajectory with a masked user prompt modified through a masking function. We identify an attack if the actions generated in the original and masked executions are similar. We also include three key designs to reduce the potential false positives and false negatives. Extensive evaluation on the IPI benchmark AgentDojo demonstrates that MELON outperforms SOTA defenses in both attack prevention and utility preservation. Moreover, we show that combining MELON with a SOTA prompt augmentation defense (denoted as MELON-Aug) further improves its performance. We also conduct a detailed ablation study to validate our key designs. Code is available at https://github.com/kaijiezhu11/MELON.

cs.CR

Beyond Training: Dynamic Token Merging for Zero-Shot Video Understanding

Recent advancements in multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have opened new avenues for video understanding. However, achieving high fidelity in zero-shot video tasks remains challenging. Traditional video processing methods rely heavily on fine-tuning to capture nuanced spatial-temporal details, which incurs significant data and computation costs. In contrast, training-free approaches, though efficient, often lack robustness in preserving context-rich features across complex video content. To this end, we propose DYTO, a novel dynamic token merging framework for zero-shot video understanding that adaptively optimizes token efficiency while preserving crucial scene details. DYTO integrates a hierarchical frame selection and a bipartite token merging strategy to dynamically cluster key frames and selectively compress token sequences, striking a balance between computational efficiency with semantic richness. Extensive experiments across multiple benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of DYTO, achieving superior performance compared to both fine-tuned and training-free methods and setting a new state-of-the-art for zero-shot video understanding.

cs.CV

CBT-Bench: Evaluating Large Language Models on Assisting Cognitive Behavior Therapy

There is a significant gap between patient needs and available mental health support today. In this paper, we aim to thoroughly examine the potential of using Large Language Models (LLMs) to assist professional psychotherapy. To this end, we propose a new benchmark, CBT-BENCH, for the systematic evaluation of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) assistance. We include three levels of tasks in CBT-BENCH: I: Basic CBT knowledge acquisition, with the task of multiple-choice questions; II: Cognitive model understanding, with the tasks of cognitive distortion classification, primary core belief classification, and fine-grained core belief classification; III: Therapeutic response generation, with the task of generating responses to patient speech in CBT therapy sessions. These tasks encompass key aspects of CBT that could potentially be enhanced through AI assistance, while also outlining a hierarchy of capability requirements, ranging from basic knowledge recitation to engaging in real therapeutic conversations. We evaluated representative LLMs on our benchmark. Experimental results indicate that while LLMs perform well in reciting CBT knowledge, they fall short in complex real-world scenarios requiring deep analysis of patients' cognitive structures and generating effective responses, suggesting potential future work.

cs.CL

MMSci: A Dataset for Graduate-Level Multi-Discipline Multimodal Scientific Understanding

Scientific figure interpretation is a crucial capability for AI-driven scientific assistants built on advanced Large Vision Language Models. However, current datasets and benchmarks primarily focus on simple charts or other relatively straightforward figures from limited science domains. To address this gap, we present a comprehensive dataset compiled from peer-reviewed Nature Communications articles covering 72 scientific fields, encompassing complex visualizations such as schematic diagrams, microscopic images, and experimental data which require graduate-level expertise to interpret. We evaluated 19 proprietary and open-source models on two benchmark tasks, figure captioning and multiple-choice, and conducted human expert annotation. Our analysis revealed significant task challenges and performance gaps among models. Beyond serving as a benchmark, this dataset serves as a valuable resource for large-scale training. Fine-tuning Qwen2-VL-7B with our task-specific data achieved better performance than GPT-4o and even human experts in multiple-choice evaluations. Furthermore, continuous pre-training on our interleaved article and figure data substantially enhanced the model's downstream task performance in materials science. We have released our dataset to support further research.

cs.CL

MultiAgent Collaboration Attack: Investigating Adversarial Attacks in Large Language Model Collaborations via Debate

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown exceptional results on current benchmarks when working individually. The advancement in their capabilities, along with a reduction in parameter size and inference times, has facilitated the use of these models as agents, enabling interactions among multiple models to execute complex tasks. Such collaborations offer several advantages, including the use of specialized models (e.g. coding), improved confidence through multiple computations, and enhanced divergent thinking, leading to more diverse outputs. Thus, the collaborative use of language models is expected to grow significantly in the coming years. In this work, we evaluate the behavior of a network of models collaborating through debate under the influence of an adversary. We introduce pertinent metrics to assess the adversary's effectiveness, focusing on system accuracy and model agreement. Our findings highlight the importance of a model's persuasive ability in influencing others. Additionally, we explore inference-time methods to generate more compelling arguments and evaluate the potential of prompt-based mitigation as a defensive strategy.

cs.CL

DALD: Improving Logits-based Detector without Logits from Black-box LLMs

The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) has revolutionized text generation, producing outputs that closely mimic human writing. This blurring of lines between machine- and human-written text presents new challenges in distinguishing one from the other a task further complicated by the frequent updates and closed nature of leading proprietary LLMs. Traditional logits-based detection methods leverage surrogate models for identifying LLM-generated content when the exact logits are unavailable from black-box LLMs. However, these methods grapple with the misalignment between the distributions of the surrogate and the often undisclosed target models, leading to performance degradation, particularly with the introduction of new, closed-source models. Furthermore, while current methodologies are generally effective when the source model is identified, they falter in scenarios where the model version remains unknown, or the test set comprises outputs from various source models. To address these limitations, we present Distribution-Aligned LLMs Detection (DALD), an innovative framework that redefines the state-of-the-art performance in black-box text detection even without logits from source LLMs. DALD is designed to align the surrogate model's distribution with that of unknown target LLMs, ensuring enhanced detection capability and resilience against rapid model iterations with minimal training investment. By leveraging corpus samples from publicly accessible outputs of advanced models such as ChatGPT, GPT-4 and Claude-3, DALD fine-tunes surrogate models to synchronize with unknown source model distributions effectively.

cs.CL

Unveiling the Impact of Coding Data Instruction Fine-Tuning on Large Language Models Reasoning

Instruction Fine-Tuning (IFT) significantly enhances the zero-shot capabilities of pretrained Large Language Models (LLMs). While coding data is known to boost LLM reasoning abilities during pretraining, its role in activating internal reasoning capacities during IFT remains understudied. This paper investigates a key question: How does coding data impact LLMs' reasoning capacities during IFT stage? To explore this, we thoroughly examine the impact of coding data across different coding data proportions, model families, sizes, and reasoning domains, from various perspectives. Specifically, we create three IFT datasets with increasing coding data proportions, fine-tune six LLM backbones across different families and scales on these datasets, evaluate the tuned models' performance across twelve tasks in three reasoning domains, and analyze the outcomes from three broad-to-granular perspectives: overall, domain-level, and task-specific. Our holistic analysis provides valuable insights into each perspective. First, coding data tuning enhances the overall reasoning capabilities of LLMs across different model families and scales. Moreover, while the impact of coding data varies by domain, it shows consistent trends within each domain across different model families and scales. Additionally, coding data generally provides comparable task-specific benefits across model families, with optimal proportions in IFT datasets being task-dependent.

cs.AI

A Survey on Large Language Models for Critical Societal Domains: Finance, Healthcare, and Law

In the fast-evolving domain of artificial intelligence, large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-3 and GPT-4 are revolutionizing the landscapes of finance, healthcare, and law: domains characterized by their reliance on professional expertise, challenging data acquisition, high-stakes, and stringent regulatory compliance. This survey offers a detailed exploration of the methodologies, applications, challenges, and forward-looking opportunities of LLMs within these high-stakes sectors. We highlight the instrumental role of LLMs in enhancing diagnostic and treatment methodologies in healthcare, innovating financial analytics, and refining legal interpretation and compliance strategies. Moreover, we critically examine the ethics for LLM applications in these fields, pointing out the existing ethical concerns and the need for transparent, fair, and robust AI systems that respect regulatory norms. By presenting a thorough review of current literature and practical applications, we showcase the transformative impact of LLMs, and outline the imperative for interdisciplinary cooperation, methodological advancements, and ethical vigilance. Through this lens, we aim to spark dialogue and inspire future research dedicated to maximizing the benefits of LLMs while mitigating their risks in these precision-dependent sectors. To facilitate future research on LLMs in these critical societal domains, we also initiate a reading list that tracks the latest advancements under this topic, which will be continually updated: \url{https://github.com/czyssrs/LLM_X_papers}.

cs.CL

Introducing v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark from MLCommons

This paper introduces v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark, which has been created by the MLCommons AI Safety Working Group. The AI Safety Benchmark has been designed to assess the safety risks of AI systems that use chat-tuned language models. We introduce a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which for v0.5 covers only a single use case (an adult chatting to a general-purpose assistant in English), and a limited set of personas (i.e., typical users, malicious users, and vulnerable users). We created a new taxonomy of 13 hazard categories, of which 7 have tests in the v0.5 benchmark. We plan to release version 1.0 of the AI Safety Benchmark by the end of 2024. The v1.0 benchmark will provide meaningful insights into the safety of AI systems. However, the v0.5 benchmark should not be used to assess the safety of AI systems. We have sought to fully document the limitations, flaws, and challenges of v0.5. This release of v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark includes (1) a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which comprises use cases, types of systems under test (SUTs), language and context, personas, tests, and test items; (2) a taxonomy of 13 hazard categories with definitions and subcategories; (3) tests for seven of the hazard categories, each comprising a unique set of test items, i.e., prompts. There are 43,090 test items in total, which we created with templates; (4) a grading system for AI systems against the benchmark; (5) an openly available platform, and downloadable tool, called ModelBench that can be used to evaluate the safety of AI systems on the benchmark; (6) an example evaluation report which benchmarks the performance of over a dozen openly available chat-tuned language models; (7) a test specification for the benchmark.

cs.CL