Searcharxiv⌕ Search

SEARCH · Searcharxiv

Search Searcharxiv

Search indexed arXiv papers on artificial intelligence, large language models, computer vision and robotics. Read source abstracts and follow links to arXiv.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 523 records · Page 29Linked to original sources
arXiv2026

What the Window Does Not Contain: Auditing Provenance in a Document-Grounded Instability Benchmark

Ask a language model the same question about the same document twenty times, and it sometimes returns two different answers. We built Probity, a benchmark of 60 tasks and 470 items from real venture-financing filings, to measure how often this happens. Then we audited our own corpus and found a defect any excerpt-built benchmark can carry: items whose evidence is missing from the window of text the model is shown. The audit flags 36 items and separates two failures a single flag would conflate: evidence genuinely absent from the window and answers that must be computed from numbers the window does supply. Flagged items change their answers far more often, wobbling at 0.255 against 0.087 on the 427 clean items, and excluding them cuts apparent cross-model agreement by about a fifth. Before testing whether the missing evidence explains the instability, we registered a prediction: re-cut each window to hold its evidence, and instability should fall below a set threshold. It failed: the repair moved wobble by 0.058, with an interval containing zero. We report the association as correlational. Almost all measurements sit where instability cannot show, which bounds what a corpus built for accuracy can say about stability. We release the corpus, all 112,800 raw responses, and the audit as a runnable check for any document benchmark.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

SLATE: Are AI-Generated Slides Educationally Effective? A Benchmark for Language Teaching Quality and Learner Knowledge Acquisition

LLMs have achieved remarkable capabilities in generating language teaching slides. However, a critical mismatch persists between visual polish and actual instructional effectiveness. To address this gap, we introduce SLATE (Slide-based Learning Assessment for Teaching Effectiveness), the first benchmark that evaluates AI-generated language teaching slides through instructional effectiveness and learner knowledge acquisition. SLATE transforms linguistics olympiad puzzles from low-resource languages with negligible web presence into 90 standardized instructional units comprising 1,133 assessable items, paired with a structured course outline and matched near- and far-transfer test sets. This pretest-posttest design eliminates pretrained knowledge leakage, ensuring gains reflect learning rather than prior recall. Using VLMs as scalable learner proxies and directionally supported by a three-system human pilot, our results show that content validity exhibits a weak association with learning gain, while pedagogical design exhibits a robust positive association. Moreover, most systems show a significant gap between near- and far-transfer accuracy, and even frontier models can produce negative learning gains. SLATE reveals a dissociation between artifact quality and instructional effectiveness, calling for a paradigm shift in how generative teaching systems are built, evaluated, and deployed.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

VDiff-Bench: A Challenging Benchmark for Fine-Grained Image Difference Identification

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) perform strongly on general visual understanding tasks such as visual question answering, yet they often struggle with a basic comparative skill: identifying what has changed between two similar images. We introduce VDiff-Bench, a challenging multiple-choice benchmark for fine-grained Image Difference Identification. VDiff-Bench contains 1,756 four-way questions over image pairs and covers 10 change categories: position, motion, regional image color, overall image color, appearance/disappearance, noise/resolution, texture, substitution/size, OCR/text, and illumination. Each question corresponds to two image inputs with 4 choices: the true difference, two hard negative descriptions, and a "no difference" distractor. To make the task challenging, we specifically curate ground-truth-conditioned negatives that require models to distinguish the actual change from nearby semantic alternatives. Experiments with 11 state-of-the-art open- and closed-source MLLMs show that fine-grained visual comparison remains brittle: models exhibit uneven performance across sources and change categories, with persistent failures on subtle low-level changes like noises and textures. For instance, three 7-8B-scale open-source MLLMs score 52.5-70.6% on semantic changes but only 8.7-33.3% on low-level changes like noise and texture, falsely assuming no changes between two image inputs. Surprisingly, despite strong performance of other closed-source commercial models, Grok 4.3 demonstrate remarkable performance drop on identifying noise and texture differences between images, falling significantly behind large open-source models like Kimi K2.5 and K3. Overall, VDiff-Bench provides a targeted diagnostic for evaluating comparative visual understanding in MLLMs, exposing failures that are not captured by standard single-image vision-language tasks.

cs.CV↗
arXiv2026

Beyond the Flag: Clinical Framing Closes the Moderation Gap in Suicide Risk Measurement

Moderation APIs are built to flag policy-violating content, not to measure graded clinical risk. But a platform's duty does not end at detection: the response owed to passive distress differs sharply from the response owed to active planning with means access, and emerging regulation (e.g., California Senate Bill 243) is turning that distinction into a compliance requirement. We therefore ask how well deployed safety signals recover clinically meaningful severity. We release a benchmark of 516 r/SuicideWatch posts rated by a licensed psychiatrist on a four-level ordinal schema (Indicator, Ideation, Behavior, Attempt) grounded in the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale, and evaluate moderation APIs, prompted LLMs, and supervised baselines under seven ordinal-aware metrics. Three findings. Vendor moderation APIs separate low- from high-severity posts well (0.860 high-risk F1) but measure severity poorly (0.395 macro F1), systematically over-predicting the most severe category. Clinically grounded zero-shot prompting recovers much of that gap (0.562 macro F1), and expert-authored framing (not fine-tuning, added reasoning, or naive multi-agent aggregation) is the effective lever. The value of reasoning depends on register: it hurts on long, noisy Reddit posts and helps on short, clinician-authored statements. We argue graded severity, not a binary flag, is what a proportionate duty of care requires, and release our evaluation framework to support that measurement.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Correction as Annotation: Bootstrapping a Dependency Parser for Documentary Medieval Latin

Medieval documentary sources remain inadequately served by existing natural language processing tools. None of the five readily available Latin treebank models attains usable performance on a collection of 160 inventories compiled in Marseille between 1258 and 1446. The best labelled attachment score is 0.62 and the best morphology-aware score is 0.24. Performance does not correlate with either genre or period proximity. To address this shortfall, in-domain training data was generated as a by-product of using these inadequate models. In each of nine iterations, a model pre-annotated 200 sentences; an expert corrected the annotations; and the corrected sentences were used to train the subsequent model, with batches sampled independently of model state, without active-learning selection. Thirty-three hours of annotation effort over 1,804 sentences increased universal part-of-speech accuracy from 0.80 to 0.98 and labelled attachment from 0.48 to 0.92, outperforming all baselines on the reported metrics while using 97% less training data than the largest one of them. Annotator effort declined from 54% of tokens to a plateau of 14-18%, an operational progress metric that requires no separate gold standard and can serve as a stopping criterion.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Steering Geometry: Validating Human Value Geometry in LLM Steering Space

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in alignment-sensitive contexts, activation steering has emerged as a lightweight, inference-time alternative to fine-tuning methods (e.g., RLHF, DPO) for behavioral control. However, existing work typically validates steering on isolated behaviors, leaving it unclear whether steering vectors encode coherent semantic structure or merely exploit behavior-specific shortcuts. We investigate whether the latent geometry of LLM steering vectors reflects theory-specified structure in human values and morality. Using Schwartz's Theory of Basic Human Values as our primary fine-grained framework, we introduce a 26K-sample benchmark covering 20 human values and analyze distribution-driven methods (e.g., CAA, SphericalSteer, ODESteer) and behavior-centric approaches (e.g., COLD-Steer, BiPO) across diverse model families and sizes. We find that distribution-driven methods recover human value topologies aligned with theoretical predictions (Spearman $ρ$ up to 0.51, $p < 10^{-13}$). In contrast, behavior-centric methods achieve comparable steering performance but show little correlation with the expected value geometry. Geometric fidelity improves with model scale but drops after instruction tuning. Finally, better geometric alignment also leads to more human-consistent transfer across values: steering one value correctly lifts compatible values and suppresses opposing ones. Code and data are available at: https://github.com/DeepRCL/Steering_Geometry.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Multilingual Models for Check-Worthy Social Media Posts Detection

This work presents an extensive study of transformer-based NLP models application for detection of social media posts that contain verifiable factual claims and harmful claims. The study covers various activities, including dataset collection, dataset pre-processing, architecture selection, setup of settings, model training (fine-tuning), model testing, and implementation. The study includes a comprehensive analysis of different models, with a special focus on multilingual models where the same model is capable of processing social media posts in both English and in low-resource languages such as Arabic, Bulgarian, Dutch, Polish, Czech, Slovak. The results obtained from the study were validated against state-of-the-art models, and the comparison demonstrated the robustness of the proposed models. The novelty of this work lies in the development of multi-label multilingual classification models that can simultaneously detect harmful posts and posts that contain verifiable factual claims in an efficient way.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

ConfRAG: Confidence-Guided Retrieval-Augmenting Generation

Can Large Language Models (LLMs) be trained to avoid hallucinating factual statements, and can Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) be triggered only when necessary to reduce retrieval and computation costs? In this work, we address both challenges simultaneously. We introduce ConfQA, a fine-tuning strategy that reduces hallucination rates from 20-40% to below 5% across multiple factuality benchmarks. The approach is simple: when the model answers correctly, it is trained to output the answer; otherwise, it is trained to respond with "I am unsure". Two design choices make this training effective: (1) a dampening prompt ("answer only if you are confident") that explicitly discourages overconfident hallucinations, and (2) training data drawn from atomic factual statements (e.g., knowledge graph attribute values), which calibrates model confidence and yields robust generalization across domains and question types. Building on ConfQA, we propose ConfRAG, a triggering strategy that invokes RAG only when the model responses with unsure. This framework achieves accuracy above 95% in ideal case while reducing unnecessary external retrievals by over 30%.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

QoNext: Towards Next-generation QoE for Foundation Models

Existing evaluations of foundation models predominantly focus on output correctness, treating interaction as a static exchange of information. However, such perspectives overlook the essence of the LLM-driven conversational experience, which is determined not only by content quality but, crucially, by dynamic service attributes such as generation velocity and latency patterns. To address this gap, we introduce QoNext, the first framework that adapts Quality of Experience (QoE) principles from networking and multimedia to the holistic assessment of human-AI interaction. QoNext identifies experiential factors that shape user experience and incorporates them into controlled experiments in simulated interaction scenarios, where human ratings are collected under diverse configurations. From these studies we construct the QoNext Database and train the QoNext Model, a neural predictor that estimates user experience directly from measurable system parameters. Our results demonstrate that QoNext effectively decodes the underlying mechanisms of user satisfaction and enables precise prediction of human sentiment across varied service conditions.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Exploring Solution Divergence and Its Effect on Large Language Model Problem Solving

Large language models (LLMs) have been widely used for problem-solving tasks. Most recent work improves their performance through supervised fine-tuning (SFT) with labeled data or reinforcement learning (RL) from task feedback. In this paper, we study a new perspective: the divergence in solutions generated by LLMs for a single problem. We show that higher solution divergence is positively related to better problem-solving abilities across various models. Based on this finding, we propose solution divergence as a novel metric that can support both SFT and RL strategies. We test this idea on three representative problem domains and find that using solution divergence consistently improves success rates. These results suggest that solution divergence is a simple but effective tool for advancing LLM training and evaluation.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Do Language Models Update their Forecasts with New Information?

Prior work has largely treated future event prediction as a static task, failing to consider how forecasts should evolve as new evidence emerges. To address this gap, we introduce EvolveCast, a framework for evaluating whether large language models (LLMs) appropriately revise their predictions in response to new information. In particular, EvolveCast assesses whether models adjust their forecasts when presented with evidence released after their training cutoff, using human forecasters as a comparative reference for prediction shifts and confidence calibration. We find that while models often track the correct update direction, their quantitative shifts remain heavily under-responsive. Furthermore, both verbalized and logits-based confidence estimates are poorly calibrated compared to the human reference standard. These findings suggest current LLMs are fundamentally limited in their response to new evidence; models treat new information as mere retrieval context rather than as variables that dynamically shift posterior probabilities. EvolveCast highlights the critical need for robust mechanisms to incorporate external knowledge into dynamic belief updating.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

GSM8K-V: Can Vision Language Models Solve Grade School Math Word Problems in Visual Contexts

Mathematical reasoning is a key capability for vision-language models (VLMs), yet current benchmarks mainly evaluate text-based or explicitly symbolic visual inputs. It remains unclear whether VLMs can reason mathematically when information must be perceived and inferred from images rather than read from explicit symbols. We introduce GSM8K-V, a benchmark transforming GSM8K into multi-image sequences with semantic equivalence preserved. By mapping text-based problems into visual form via an automated pipeline and human verification, we curate 1,319 high-quality samples. In GSM8K-V, quantities must be extracted through visual perception, and reasoning chains must be reconstructed by integrating implicit cues across scenes. Evaluation of 34 VLMs reveals a striking modality gap: while most models exceed 90\% on text, the best model achieves only 59\% on GSM8K-V, far below the 91\% human accuracy. Notably, models enhanced for visual math reasoning show no improvement on GSM8K-V despite large gains on existing benchmarks, confirming that it evaluates a distinct capability. Error analysis shows that the primary bottleneck lies in Implicit Visual Inference Error (IVIE), where models fail to recover visual semantics that are implied rather than explicitly stated. Our code and data are released at https://github.com/ZJU-REAL/GSM8K-V.

cs.CV↗
arXiv2026

The human-authorship halo: attribution bias in literary style evaluation by humans and AI

As AI writing tools become widespread, we need to understand how both humans and machines evaluate literary style, a domain where objective standards are elusive and judgments are inherently subjective. We conducted controlled experiments using Raymond Queneau's Exercises in Style (1947) to measure attribution bias across evaluators. Study 1 compared human participants (N=556) and AI models (N=13) evaluating literary passages from Queneau versus GPT-4-generated versions under three conditions: blind, accurately labeled, and counterfactually labeled. Study 2 tested bias generalization across a 14x14 matrix of AI evaluators and creators. Both studies revealed systematic pro-human attribution bias. Humans showed +13.7 percentage point (pp) bias (Cohen's h = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.19-0.37), while AI models showed +34.3 percentage point bias (h = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.62-0.78), a 2.5-fold stronger effect (P<0.001). Study 2 confirmed this bias operates across AI architectures (+25.8pp, 95% CI: 24.1-27.6%), demonstrating that AI systems systematically devalue creative content when labeled as "AI-generated" regardless of which AI created it. We also find that attribution labels lead evaluators to invert assessment criteria, with identical features receiving opposing evaluations based solely on perceived authorship. This suggests AI models have absorbed human cultural biases against artificial creativity during training, including through the preference signals on which they are aligned. Our study represents the first controlled comparison of attribution bias between human and artificial evaluators in aesthetic judgment, revealing that AI systems not only replicate but amplify this human tendency.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

ConsistencyAI: A Benchmark to Assess LLMs' Factual Consistency When Responding to Different Demographic Groups

Is an LLM telling you different facts than it's telling me? This paper introduces ConsistencyAI, an independent benchmark for measuring the factual consistency of large language models (LLMs) for different personas. ConsistencyAI tests whether, when users of different demographics ask identical questions, the model responds with factually inconsistent answers. Designed without involvement from LLM providers, this benchmark offers impartial evaluation and accountability. In our experiment, we queried 19 LLMs with prompts that requested 5 facts for each of 15 topics. We repeated this query 100 times for each LLM, each time adding prompt context from a different persona selected from a subset of personas modeling the general population. We processed the responses into sentence embeddings, computed cross-persona cosine similarity, and computed the weighted average of cross-persona cosine similarity to calculate factual consistency scores. In 100-persona experiments, scores ranged from 0.9065 to 0.7896, and the mean was 0.8656, which we adopt as a benchmark threshold. xAI's Grok-3 is most consistent, while several lightweight models rank lowest. Consistency varies by topic: the job market is least consistent, G7 world leaders most consistent, and issues like vaccines or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict diverge by provider. These results show that both the provider and the topic shape the factual consistency. We release our code and interactive demo to support reproducible evaluation and encourage persona-invariant prompting strategies.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Do Androids Dream of Unseen Puppeteers? Probing for a Conspiracy Tendencies in Large Language Models

We investigate whether Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit conspiratorial tendencies, whether they display socio-demographic biases in this domain, and how easily they can be conditioned into adopting conspiratorial perspectives. Conspiracy beliefs play a central role in the spread of misinformation and in shaping distrust toward institutions, making them an important testbed for assessing the social and psychological fidelity of LLMs and their potential to reproduce or reinforce harmful narratives. Although LLMs are often used as proxies for studying human behavior, it remains unclear whether they reproduce higher-order psychological constructs such as generalized conspiratorial beliefs. To bridge this research gap, we administer validated psychometric surveys measuring conspiratorial mindset to multiple models under different prompting and conditioning strategies. Our findings reveal that LLMs show partial agreement with elements of conspiracy belief, and conditioning with socio-demographic attributes produces uneven effects, exposing latent demographic biases. Moreover, targeted prompts can easily shift model responses toward conspiratorial directions, underscoring both the susceptibility of LLMs to manipulation and the potential risks of their deployment in sensitive contexts. These results highlight the importance of critically evaluating the psychological dimensions embedded in LLMs, both to advance computational social science and to inform possible mitigation strategies against harmful uses.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Reinforcement Learning Improves Traversal of Parametric Knowledge in LLMs

Reinforcement learning (RL) is often credited with improving reasoning at the expense of factual knowledge. We instead find that reasoning models outperform their instruction-tuned versions on factual recall by accessing existing parametric knowledge more effectively. Across five model families, structured prompting, which explicitly guides models through hierarchical traversal, recovers most of this gap, suggesting that much of the missing knowledge is latent rather than absent. Controlled RL experiments further support this: training on unseen, non-extractable facts improves recall of held-out, frequent but previously inaccessible facts, ruling out simple data exposure. Decomposing the training objective further attributes this gain to iterated on-policy exploration. The same mechanism appears behaviorally and internally: the reasoning advantage grows with retrieval depth, while layerwise analysis finds similar factual representations but divergent query representations. Distilled models, in contrast, often imitate self-correction without acquiring the exploration needed for navigation. Together, these findings suggest that improving factual recall in LLMs depends not only on expanding what models know but also on teaching them to navigate it, motivating future post-training methods that optimize traversal.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

TeleTables: A Benchmark for Large Language Models in Telecom Table Interpretation

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to telecom engineering tasks, yet perform poorly on 3GPP specifications. These standards encode much of their technical information in complex tables, but LLM knowledge and interpretation of such tables remain largely unexplored. We introduce TeleTables, a benchmark comprising 2,220 tables from 13 3GPP specifications in four formats and 500 human-verified MCQs spanning direct retrieval to multi-step reasoning. Evaluating 20 open-weight LLMs across non reasoning, multimodal, reasoning, and table specialized architectures reveals two distinct performance bottlenecks. In the closed-book setting, domain knowledge is the primary constraint, with no general-purpose model exceeding 41% accuracy. When the table is provided as context, the best models exceed 90%, but performance degrades systematically with reasoning depth, evidence scope, and structural complexity, with a 32.2pp spread across reasoning skills. Table specialization on non-telecom data provides no consistent benefit, while strong reasoning capabilities remain essential for reliable interpretation of complex technical tables.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

PROMPT2BOX:Improving LLM Weakness Discovery and Specificity Estimation by Uncovering Entailment Structure among Prompts

To discover the weaknesses of LLMs, researchers often embed prompts into a vector space and cluster them to extract insightful patterns. However, vector embeddings primarily capture topical similarity; as a result, prompts that share a topic but differ in specificity, and consequently in difficulty, are often represented similarly, making fine-grained weakness analysis difficult. To address this limitation, we propose Prompt2Box, which embeds prompts into a box embedding space using a trained encoder. The encoder, trained on existing and synthesized datasets, outputs box embeddings that capture not only semantic similarity but also specificity relations between prompts (e.g., "writing an adventure story" is more specific than "writing a story"). We further develop a novel dimension reduction technique for box embeddings to facilitate dataset visualization and comparison. Our experiments demonstrate that box embeddings consistently capture prompt specificity better than vector baselines and achieve 45% error reduction on average in predicting specificity compared to the prompt length baseline. On the downstream task of creating hierarchical clustering trees for 17 LLMs from the UltraFeedback dataset, Prompt2Box can identify 13.5% more LLM weaknesses than vector baselines and achieves an approximately 33% stronger correlation between hierarchical depth and instruction specificity. The code is available at https://github.com/zawedcvg/box_embeddings.

cs.CL↗