Models (LLMs) can sometimes surpass those annotated by experts, such as journalists, according to human evaluations. However, there is limited research on whether these generic summaries meet the individual needs of ordinary people.

Language models (LMs) are increasingly being deployed to perform autonomous data analyses. However, their data awareness -- the ability to recognize, reason over, and appropriately handle data artifacts such as missing values, outliers, and logical inconsistencies -- remains underexplored. These artifacts are especially common in real-world tabular data and, if mishandled, can significantly compromise the validity of analytical conclusions. To address this gap, we present RADAR, a benchmark for systematically evaluating data-aware reasoning on tabular data. We develop a framework to simulate data artifacts via programmatic perturbations to enable targeted evaluation of model behavior. RADAR comprises 2980 table query pairs, grounded in real-world data spanning 9 domains and 5 data artifact types. In addition to evaluating artifact handling, RADAR systematically varies table size to study how reasoning performance holds when increasing table size. Our evaluation reveals that, despite decent performance on tables without data artifacts, frontier models degrade significantly when data artifacts are introduced, exposing critical gaps in their capacity for robust, data-aware analysis. Designed to be flexible and extensible, RADAR supports diverse perturbation types and controllable table sizes, offering a valuable resource for advancing tabular reasoning.

We present ACADATA, a high-quality parallel dataset for academic translation, that consists of two subsets: ACAD-TRAIN, which contains approximately 1.5 million author-generated paragraph pairs across 96 language directions and ACAD-BENCH, a curated evaluation set of almost 6,000 translations covering 12 directions. To validate its utility, we fine-tune two Large Language Models (LLMs) on ACAD-TRAIN and benchmark them on ACAD-BENCH against specialized machine-translation systems, general-purpose, open-weight LLMs, and several large-scale proprietary models. Experimental results demonstrate that fine-tuning on ACAD-TRAIN leads to improvements in academic translation quality by +6.1 and +12.4 d-BLEU points on average for 7B and 2B models respectively, while also improving long-context translation in a general domain by up to 24.9% when translating out of English. The fine-tuned top-performing model surpasses the best propietary and open-weight models on academic translation domain. By releasing ACAD-TRAIN, ACAD-BENCH and the fine-tuned models, we provide the community with a valuable resource to advance research in academic domain and long-context translation.

Models (LLMs) can sometimes surpass those annotated by experts, such as journalists, according to human evaluations. However, there is limited research on whether these generic summaries meet the individual needs of ordinary people.

Temporal reasoning about historical events is a critical skill for NLP tasks like event extraction, historical entity linking, temporal question answering, timeline summarization, temporal event clustering and temporal natural language inference. Yet efforts on benchmarking temporal reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) are rather limited. Existing temporal reasoning datasets are limited in scale, lack multilingual coverage and focus more on contemporary events. To address these limitations, we present HistoryBank, a multilingual database of 10M+ historical events extracted from Wikipedia timeline pages and article infoboxes. Our database provides unprecedented coverage in both historical depth and linguistic breadth with 10 languages. Additionally, we construct a comprehensive question answering benchmark for temporal reasoning across all languages. This benchmark covers a diverse set of 6 temporal QA reasoning tasks, and we evaluate a suite of popular language models (LLaMA-3-8B, Mistral-7B, Gemma-2-9b, Qwen3-8B, GPT4o) to assess their performance on these tasks. As expected GPT4o performs best across all answer types and languages; Gemma-2 outperforms the other small language models. Our work aims to provide a comprehensive resource for advancing multilingual and temporally-aware natural language understanding of historical events. To facilitate further research, we will make our code and datasets publicly available upon acceptance of this paper.

Language models traditionally used for cross-domain generalization have recently demonstrated task-specific reasoning. However, their top-down training approach on general corpora is insufficient for acquiring abstractions needed for deep domain expertise. This may require a bottom-up approach that acquires expertise by learning to compose simple domain concepts into more complex ones. A knowledge graph (KG) provides this compositional structure, where domain primitives are represented as head-relation-tail edges and their paths encode higher-level concepts. We present a task generation pipeline that synthesizes tasks directly from KG primitives, enabling models to acquire and compose them for reasoning. We fine-tune language models on the resultant KG-grounded curriculum to demonstrate domain-specific superintelligence. While broadly applicable, we validate our approach in medicine, where reliable KGs exist. Using a medical KG, we curate 24,000 reasoning tasks paired with thinking traces derived from diverse medical primitives. We fine-tune the QwQ-32B model on this curriculum to obtain QwQ-Med-3 that takes a step towards medical superintelligence. We also introduce ICD-Bench, an evaluation suite to quantify reasoning abilities across 15 medical domains. Our experiments demonstrate that QwQ-Med-3 significantly outperforms state-of-the-art reasoning models on ICD-Bench categories. Further analysis reveals that QwQ-Med-3 utilizes acquired primitives to widen the performance gap on the hardest tasks of ICD-Bench. Finally, evaluation on medical question-answer benchmarks shows that QwQ-Med-3 transfers acquired expertise to enhance the base model's performance. While the industry's approach to artificial general intelligence (AGI) emphasizes broad expertise, we envision a future in which AGI emerges from the composable interaction of efficient domain-specific superintelligent agents.

This work revisits and extends synthetic query generation pipelines for Neural Information Retrieval (NIR) by leveraging the InPars Toolkit, a reproducible, end-to-end framework for generating training data using large language models (LLMs). We first assess the reproducibility of the original InPars, InPars-V2, and Promptagator pipelines on the SciFact benchmark and validate their effectiveness using open-source reranker and generator models. Building on this foundation, we introduce two key extensions to the pipeline: (1) fine-tuning a query generator LLM via Contrastive Preference Optimization (CPO) to improve the signal quality in generated queries, and (2) replacing static prompt templates with dynamic, Chain-of-Thought (CoT) optimized prompts using the DSPy framework. Our results show that both extensions reduce the need for aggressive filtering while improving retrieval performance. All code, models, and synthetic datasets are publicly released to support further research at: \href{https://github.com/danilotpnta/IR2-project}{this https URL}.

Reliable digital twins of lithium-ion batteries must achieve high physical fidelity with sub-millisecond speed. In this work, we benchmark three operator-learning surrogates for the Single Particle Model (SPM): Deep Operator Networks (DeepONets), Fourier Neural Operators (FNOs) and a newly proposed parameter-embedded Fourier Neural Operator (PE-FNO), which conditions each spectral layer on particle radius and solid-phase diffusivity. Models are trained on simulated trajectories spanning four current families (constant, triangular, pulse-train, and Gaussian-random-field) and a full range of State-of-Charge (SOC) (0 % to 100 %). DeepONet accurately replicates constant-current behaviour but struggles with more dynamic loads. The basic FNO maintains mesh invariance and keeps concentration errors below 1 %, with voltage mean-absolute errors under 1.7 mV across all load types. Introducing parameter embedding marginally increases error, but enables generalisation to varying radii and diffusivities. PE-FNO executes approximately 200 times faster than a 16-thread SPM solver. Consequently, PE-FNO's capabilities in inverse tasks are explored in a parameter estimation task with Bayesian optimisation, recovering anode and cathode diffusivities with 1.14 % and 8.4 % mean absolute percentage error, respectively, and 0.5918 percentage points higher error in comparison with classical methods. These results pave the way for neural operators to meet the accuracy, speed and parametric flexibility demands of real-time battery management, design-of-experiments and large-scale inference. PE-FNO outperforms conventional neural surrogates, offering a practical path towards high-speed and high-fidelity electrochemical digital twins.

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in consequential decision - making contexts, systematically assessing their ethical reasoning capabilities becomes a critical imperative. This paper introduces the Priorities in Reasoning and Intrinsi c Moral Evaluation (PRIME) framework -- a comprehensive methodology for analyzing moral priorities across foundational ethical dimensions including consequentialist - deontological reasoning, moral foundations theory, and Kohlberg's developmental stages. We app ly this framework to six leading LLMs through a dual - protocol approach combining direct questioning and response analysis to established ethical dilemmas. Our analysis reveals striking patterns of convergence: all evaluated models demonstrate strong priori tization of care/harm and fairness/cheating foundations while consistently underweighting authority, loyalty, and sanctity dimensions. Through detailed examination of confidence metrics, response reluctance patterns, and reasoning consistency, we establish that contemporary LLMs (1) produce decisive ethical judgments, (2) demonstrate notable cross - model alignment in moral decision - making, and (3) generally correspond with empirically established human moral preferences. This research contributes a scalable, extensible methodology for ethical benchmarking while highlighting both the promising capabilities and systematic limitations in current AI moral reasoning architectures -- insights critical for responsible development as these systems assume increasingly si gnificant societal roles. The rapid evolution of generative large language models (LLMs) has brought the alignment issue to the forefront of AI ethics discussions - specifically, whether these models are appropriately aligned with human values (Bostrom, 2014; Tegmark 2017; Russell 2019; Kosinski, 2024). As these powerful models are increasingly integrated into decision - making processes across various societal domains (Salazar, A., & Kunc, M., 2025), understanding whether and how their operational logic aligns with fundamental human values becomes not just an academic question, but a critical societal imperative. In this paper we will present an analytical framework and findings to address the first two questions, and a preliminary exploratory analysis of the third. We will make the case that the answers to these questions are: yes, yes and yes. There are caveats and exceptions, of course, but the broad pattern, we believe, is clear. Our methodology permits us to explore not just what choices they make, but the reasoning chain of thought that leads to those decisions.

As generative AI models become increasingly integrated into high-stakes domains, the need for robust methods to evaluate their ethical reasoning becomes increasingly important. This paper introduces a five-dimensional audit model -- assessing Analytic Quality, Breadth of Ethical Considerations, Depth of Explanation, Consistency, and Decisiveness -- to evaluate the ethical logic of leading large language models (LLMs). Drawing on traditions from applied ethics and higher-order thinking, we present a multi-battery prompt approach, including novel ethical dilemmas, to probe the models' reasoning across diverse contexts. We benchmark seven major LLMs finding that while models generally converge on ethical decisions, they vary in explanatory rigor and moral prioritization. Chain-of-Thought prompting and reasoning-optimized models significantly enhance performance on our audit metrics. This study introduces a scalable methodology for ethical benchmarking of AI systems and highlights the potential for AI to complement human moral reasoning in complex decision-making contexts.