This short paper gives an overview of the XCSP3 solver implemented in Picat. Picat provides several constraint modules, and the Picat XCSP3 solver uses the sat module. The XCSP3 solver mainly consists of a parser implemented in Picat, which converts constraints from XCSP3 format to Picat. The solver demonstrates the strengths of Picat, a logic-based language, in parsing, modeling, and encoding constraints into SAT. The high performance of the solver in recent XCSP competitions demonstrates the viability of using a SAT solver to solve general constraint satisfaction and optimization problems.

Smart contracts are essential for managing digital assets in blockchain networks, highlighting the need for effective security measures. This paper introduces SmartLLMSentry, a novel framework that leverages large language models (LLMs), specifically ChatGPT with in-context training, to advance smart contract vulnerability detection. Traditional rule-based frameworks have limitations in integrating new detection rules efficiently. In contrast, SmartLLMSentry utilizes LLMs to streamline this process. We created a specialized dataset of five randomly selected vulnerabilities for model training and evaluation. Our results show an exact match accuracy of 91.1% with sufficient data, although GPT-4 demonstrated reduced performance compared to GPT-3 in rule generation. This study illustrates that SmartLLMSentry significantly enhances the speed and accuracy of vulnerability detection through LLMdriven rule integration, offering a new approach to improving Blockchain security and addressing previously underexplored vulnerabilities in smart contracts.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional performance across a wide variety of domains. Nonetheless, generalist LLMs continue to fall short in reasoning tasks necessitating specialized knowledge. Prior investigations into specialized LLMs focused on domain-specific training, which entails substantial efforts in domain data acquisition and model parameter fine-tuning. To address these challenges, this paper proposes the Way-to-Specialist (WTS) framework, which synergizes retrieval-augmented generation with knowledge graphs (KGs) to enhance the specialized capability of LLMs in the absence of specialized training. In distinction to existing paradigms that merely utilize external knowledge from general KGs or static domain KGs to prompt LLM for enhanced domain-specific reasoning, WTS proposes an innovative "LLM$\circlearrowright$KG" paradigm, which achieves bidirectional enhancement between specialized LLM and domain knowledge graph (DKG). The proposed paradigm encompasses two closely coupled components: the DKG-Augmented LLM and the LLM-Assisted DKG Evolution. The former retrieves question-relevant domain knowledge from DKG and uses it to prompt LLM to enhance the reasoning capability for domain-specific tasks; the latter leverages LLM to generate new domain knowledge from processed tasks and use it to evolve DKG. WTS closes the loop between DKG-Augmented LLM and LLM-Assisted DKG Evolution, enabling continuous improvement in the domain specialization as it progressively answers and learns from domain-specific questions. We validate the performance of WTS on 6 datasets spanning 5 domains. The experimental results show that WTS surpasses the previous SOTA in 4 specialized domains and achieves a maximum performance improvement of 11.3%.

Visual abstract reasoning tasks present challenges for deep neural networks, exposing limitations in their capabilities. In this work, we present a neural network model that addresses the challenges posed by Raven's Progressive Matrices (RPM). Inspired by the two-stream hypothesis of visual processing, we introduce the Dual-stream Reasoning Network (DRNet), which utilizes two parallel branches to capture image features. On top of the two streams, a reasoning module first learns to merge the high-level features of the same image. Then, it employs a rule extractor to handle combinations involving the eight context images and each candidate image, extracting discrete abstract rules and utilizing an multilayer perceptron (MLP) to make predictions. Empirical results demonstrate that the proposed DRNet achieves state-of-the-art average performance across multiple RPM benchmarks. Furthermore, DRNet demonstrates robust generalization capabilities, even extending to various out-of-distribution scenarios. The dual streams within DRNet serve distinct functions by addressing local or spatial information. They are then integrated into the reasoning module, leveraging abstract rules to facilitate the execution of visual reasoning tasks. These findings indicate that the dual-stream architecture could play a crucial role in visual abstract reasoning.

Modern LLMs can now produce highly readable abstractive summaries, to the point where traditional automated metrics for evaluating summary quality, such as ROUGE, have become saturated. However, LLMs still sometimes introduce unwanted content into summaries, i.e., information inconsistent with or unsupported by their source. Measuring the occurrence of these often subtle ``hallucinations'' automatically has proved to be challenging. This in turn has motivated development of a variety of metrics intended to measure the factual consistency of generated summaries against their source. But are these approaches measuring what they purport to do? In this work, we stress-test automatic factuality metrics. Specifically, we investigate whether and to what degree superficial attributes of summary texts suffice to predict ``factuality'', finding that a (supervised) model using only such shallow features is reasonably competitive with SOTA factuality scoring methods. We then evaluate how factuality metrics respond to factual corrections in inconsistent summaries and find that only a few show meaningful improvements. In contrast, some metrics are more sensitive to benign, non-factual edits. Motivated by these insights, we show that one can ``game'' (most) automatic factuality metrics, i.e., reliably inflate ``factuality'' scores by appending innocuous sentences to generated summaries. Taken together, our results raise questions about the degree to which we should rely on existing automated factuality metrics and what exactly we want ``factuality metrics'' to measure.

Understanding public perception of artificial intelligence (AI) and the tradeoffs between potential risks and benefits is crucial, as these perceptions might shape policy decisions, influence innovation trajectories for successful market strategies, and determine individual and societal acceptance of AI technologies. Using a representative sample of 1100 participants from Germany, this study examines mental models of AI. Participants quantitatively evaluated 71 statements about AI's future capabilities (e.g., autonomous driving, medical care, art, politics, warfare, and societal divides), assessing the expected likelihood of occurrence, perceived risks, benefits, and overall value. We present rankings of these projections alongside visual mappings illustrating public risk-benefit tradeoffs. While many scenarios were deemed likely, participants often associated them with high risks, limited benefits, and low overall value. Across all scenarios, 96.4% ($r^2=96.4\%$) of the variance in value assessment can be explained by perceived risks ($\beta=-.504$) and perceived benefits ($\beta=+.710$), with no significant relation to expected likelihood. Demographics and personality traits influenced perceptions of risks, benefits, and overall evaluations, underscoring the importance of increasing AI literacy and tailoring public information to diverse user needs. These findings provide actionable insights for researchers, developers, and policymakers by highlighting critical public concerns and individual factors essential to align AI development with individual values.

The Scholarly Hybrid Question Answering over Linked Data (QALD) Challenge at the International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC) 2024 focuses on Question Answering (QA) over diverse scholarly sources: DBLP, SemOpenAlex, and Wikipedia-based texts. This paper describes a methodology that combines SPARQL queries, divide and conquer algorithms, and a pre-trained extractive question answering model. It starts with SPARQL queries to gather data, then applies divide and conquer to manage various question types and sources, and uses the model to handle personal author questions. The approach, evaluated with Exact Match and F-score metrics, shows promise for improving QA accuracy and efficiency in scholarly contexts. Keywords: Scholarly Question Answering, Large Language Models, Divide and conquer.

Context: Machine Learning (ML) significantly impacts Software Engineering (SE), but studies mainly focus on practitioners, neglecting researchers. This overlooks practices and challenges in teaching, researching, or reviewing ML applications in SE. Objective: This study aims to contribute to the knowledge, about the synergy between ML and SE from the perspective of SE researchers, by providing insights into the practices followed when researching, teaching, and reviewing SE studies that apply ML. Method: We analyzed SE researchers familiar with ML or who authored SE articles using ML, along with the articles themselves. We examined practices, SE tasks addressed with ML, challenges faced, and reviewers' and educators' perspectives using grounded theory coding and qualitative analysis. Results: We found diverse practices focusing on data collection, model training, and evaluation. Some recommended practices (e.g., hyperparameter tuning) appeared in less than 20\% of literature. Common challenges involve data handling, model evaluation (incl. non-functional properties), and involving human expertise in evaluation. Hands-on activities are common in education, though traditional methods persist. Conclusion: Despite accepted practices in applying ML to SE, significant gaps remain. By enhancing guidelines, adopting diverse teaching methods, and emphasizing underrepresented practices, the SE community can bridge these gaps and advance the field.

Hierarchical Text Classification (HTC) is a natural language processing task with the objective to classify text documents into a set of classes from a structured class hierarchy. Many HTC approaches have been proposed which attempt to leverage the class hierarchy information in various ways to improve classification performance. Machine learning-based classification approaches require large amounts of training data and are most-commonly compared through three established benchmark datasets, which include the Web Of Science (WOS), Reuters Corpus Volume 1 Version 2 (RCV1-V2) and New York Times (NYT) datasets. However, apart from the RCV1-V2 dataset which is well-documented, these datasets are not accompanied with detailed description methodologies. In this paper, we introduce three new HTC benchmark datasets in the domain of research publications which comprise the titles and abstracts of papers from the Web of Science publication database. We first create two baseline datasets which use existing journal-and citation-based classification schemas. Due to the respective shortcomings of these two existing schemas, we propose an approach which combines their classifications to improve the reliability and robustness of the dataset. We evaluate the three created datasets with a clustering-based analysis and show that our proposed approach results in a higher quality dataset where documents that belong to the same class are semantically more similar compared to the other datasets. Finally, we provide the classification performance of four state-of-the-art HTC approaches on these three new datasets to provide baselines for future studies on machine learning-based techniques for scientific publication classification.

Human-annotated content is often used to train machine learning (ML) models. However, recently, language and multi-modal foundational models have been used to replace and scale-up human annotator's efforts. This study compares human-generated and ML-generated annotations of images representing diverse socio-economic contexts. We aim to understand differences in perception and identify potential biases in content interpretation. Our dataset comprises images of people from various geographical regions and income levels washing their hands. We compare human and ML-generated annotations semantically and evaluate their impact on predictive models. Our results show low similarity between human and machine annotations from a low-level perspective, i.e., types of words that appear and sentence structures, but are alike in how similar or dissimilar they perceive images across different regions. Additionally, human annotations resulted in best overall and most balanced region classification performance on the class level, while ML Objects and ML Captions performed best for income regression. Humans and machines' similarity in their lack of bias when perceiving images highlights how they are more alike than what was initially perceived. The superior and fairer performance of using human annotations for region classification and machine annotations for income regression show how important the quality of the images and the discriminative features in the annotations are.