Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly being adopted in conservation to address the biodiversity crisis, yet their reliability for species evaluation is uncertain. This study systematically validates five leading models on 21,955 species across four core IUCN Red List assessment components: taxonomy, conservation status, distribution, and threats. A critical paradox was revealed: models excelled at taxonomic classification (94.9%) but consistently failed at conservation reasoning (27.2% for status assessment). This knowledge-reasoning gap, evident across all models, suggests inherent architectural constraints, not just data limitations. Furthermore, models exhibited systematic biases favoring charismatic vertebrates, potentially amplifying existing conservation inequities. These findings delineate clear boundaries for responsible LLM deployment: they are powerful tools for information retrieval but require human oversight for judgment-based decisions. A hybrid approach is recommended, where LLMs augment expert capacity while human experts retain sole authority over risk assessment and policy.

Facial emotion perception in the vision large language model (VLLM) is crucial for achieving natural human-machine interaction. However, creating high-quality annotations for both coarse- and fine-grained facial emotion analysis demands costly expertise. The lack of such high-quality instruction data limits the performance of VLLMs in facial emotion perception. To address this, we propose a self-verification approach with emotion knowledge enhancement (SEKE), which generates high-quality instruction data for multi-grained emotion analysis cost-effectively using closed-source VLLM. This approach integrates prior human knowledge to VLLM inference, guided by the inherent correlations between three grained levels of emotion descriptions, i.e., discrete expression, valence-arousal, and action unit, to reliably generate comprehensive annotations. A self-verification strategy with Uncertainty-Aware Monte Carlo sampling (SV-UAMC) is further embedded to efficiently extract more accurate VLLM predictions, further improving annotation reliability. Consequently, we construct a facial emotion instruction dataset (FEID) containing three comprehensive descriptions, which provides coarse- and fine-grained emotional information for effective model training. Additionally, we introduce a facial emotion analysis benchmark (FEAB) to measure the VLLM's corresponding ability. Our method significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods on three downstream facial emotion analysis tasks.

Emotion recognition is a critical component of affective computing. Training accurate machine learning models for emotion recognition typically requires a large amount of labeled data. Due to the subtleness and complexity of emotions, multiple evaluators are usually needed for each affective sample to obtain its ground-truth label, which is expensive. To save the labeling cost, this paper proposes an inconsistency-based active learning approach for cross-task transfer between emotion classification and estimation. Affective norms are utilized as prior knowledge to connect the label spaces of categorical and dimensional emotions. Then, the prediction inconsistency on the two tasks for the unlabeled samples is used to guide sample selection in active learning for the target task. Experiments on within-corpus and cross-corpus transfers demonstrated that cross-task inconsistency could be a very valuable metric in active learning. To our knowledge, this is the first work that utilizes prior knowledge on affective norms and data in a different task to facilitate active learning for a new task, even the two tasks are from different datasets.

Large language models (LLMs) often produce errors, including factual inaccuracies, biases, and reasoning failures, collectively referred to as "hallucinations". Recent studies have demonstrated that LLMs' internal states encode information regarding the truthfulness of their outputs, and that this information can be utilized to detect errors. In this work, we show that the internal representations of LLMs encode much more information about truthfulness than previously recognized. We first discover that the truthfulness information is concentrated in specific tokens, and leveraging this property significantly enhances error detection performance. Yet, we show that such error detectors fail to generalize across datasets, implying that -- contrary to prior claims -- truthfulness encoding is not universal but rather multifaceted. Next, we show that internal representations can also be used for predicting the types of errors the model is likely to make, facilitating the development of tailored mitigation strategies. Lastly, we reveal a discrepancy between LLMs' internal encoding and external behavior: they may encode the correct answer, yet consistently generate an incorrect one. Taken together, these insights deepen our understanding of LLM errors from the model's internal perspective, which can guide future research on enhancing error analysis and mitigation.

As part of a broader look at the impact of generative AI, this study investigated the emotional responses of journalists to the release of ChatGPT at the time of its launch. By analyzing nearly 1 million Tweets from journalists at major U.S. news outlets, we tracked changes in emotional tone and sentiment before and after the introduction of ChatGPT in November 2022. Using various computational and natural language processing techniques to measure emotional shifts in response to ChatGPT's release, we found an increase in positive emotion and a more favorable tone post-launch, suggesting initial optimism toward AI's potential. This research underscores the pivotal role of journalists as interpreters of technological innovation and disruption, highlighting how their emotional reactions may shape public narratives around emerging technologies. The study contributes to understanding the intersection of journalism, emotion, and AI, offering insights into the broader societal impact of generative AI tools.

Since the introduction of Generative AI (GenAI) in 2022, its ability to simulate human intelligence and generate content has sparked both enthusiasm and concern. While much of the criticism focuses on AI's potential to perpetuate bias, create emotional dissonance, displace jobs, and raise ethical questions, these concerns often overlook the practical benefits of AI, particularly in legal contexts. This article examines the integration of AI into arbitration, arguing that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) allows parties to contractually choose AI-driven arbitration, despite traditional reservations. The article makes three key contributions: (1) It shifts the focus from debates over AI's personhood to the practical aspects of incorporating AI into arbitration, asserting that AI can effectively serve as an arbitrator if both parties agree; (2) It positions arbitration as an ideal starting point for broader AI adoption in the legal field, given its flexibility and the autonomy it grants parties to define their standards of fairness; and (3) It outlines future research directions, emphasizing the importance of empirically comparing AI and human arbitration, which could lead to the development of distinct systems. By advocating for the use of AI in arbitration, this article underscores the importance of respecting contractual autonomy and creating an environment that allows AI's potential to be fully realized. Drawing on the insights of Judge Richard Posner, the article argues that the ethical obligations of AI in arbitration should be understood within the context of its technological strengths and the voluntary nature of arbitration agreements. Ultimately, it calls for a balanced, open-minded approach to AI in arbitration, recognizing its potential to enhance the efficiency, fairness, and flexibility of dispute resolution.

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have empowered LLM agents to autonomously collect world information, over which to conduct reasoning to solve complex problems. Given this capability, increasing interests have been put into employing LLM agents for predicting international events, which can influence decision-making and shape policy development on an international scale. Despite such a growing interest, there is a lack of a rigorous benchmark of LLM agents' forecasting capability and reliability. To address this gap, we introduce MIRAI, a novel benchmark designed to systematically evaluate LLM agents as temporal forecasters in the context of international events. Our benchmark features an agentic environment with tools for accessing an extensive database of historical, structured events and textual news articles. We refine the GDELT event database with careful cleaning and parsing to curate a series of relational prediction tasks with varying forecasting horizons, assessing LLM agents' abilities from short-term to long-term forecasting. We further implement APIs to enable LLM agents to utilize different tools via a code-based interface. In summary, MIRAI comprehensively evaluates the agents' capabilities in three dimensions: 1) autonomously source and integrate critical information from large global databases; 2) write codes using domain-specific APIs and libraries for tool-use; and 3) jointly reason over historical knowledge from diverse formats and time to accurately predict future events. Through comprehensive benchmarking, we aim to establish a reliable framework for assessing the capabilities of LLM agents in forecasting international events, thereby contributing to the development of more accurate and trustworthy models for international relation analysis.

In this paper, we present our submission to the SemEval-2023 Task~3 "The Competition of Multimodal Emotion Cause Analysis in Conversations", focusing on extracting emotion-cause pairs from dialogs. Specifically, our approach relies on combining fine-tuned GPT-3.5 for emotion classification and a BiLSTM-based neural network to detect causes. We score 2nd in the ranking for Subtask 1, demonstrating the effectiveness of our approach through one of the highest weighted-average proportional F1 scores recorded at 0.264.

Computer-based scene understanding has influenced fields ranging from urban planning to autonomous vehicle performance, yet little is known about how well these technologies work across social differences. We investigate the biases of deep convolutional neural networks (dCNNs) in scene classification, using nearly one million images from global and US sources, including user-submitted home photographs and Airbnb listings. We applied statistical models to quantify the impact of socioeconomic indicators such as family income, Human Development Index (HDI), and demographic factors from public data sources (CIA and US Census) on dCNN performance. Our analyses revealed significant socioeconomic bias, where pretrained dCNNs demonstrated lower classification accuracy, lower classification confidence, and a higher tendency to assign labels that could be offensive when applied to homes (e.g., "ruin", "slum"), especially in images from homes with lower socioeconomic status (SES). This trend is consistent across two datasets of international images and within the diverse economic and racial landscapes of the United States. This research contributes to understanding biases in computer vision, emphasizing the need for more inclusive and representative training datasets. By mitigating the bias in the computer vision pipelines, we can ensure fairer and more equitable outcomes for applied computer vision, including home valuation and smart home security systems. There is urgency in addressing these biases, which can significantly impact critical decisions in urban development and resource allocation. Our findings also motivate the development of AI systems that better understand and serve diverse communities, moving towards technology that equitably benefits all sectors of society.

Augmenting large language models (LLM) to use external tools enhances their performance across a variety of tasks. However, prior works over-rely on task-specific demonstration of tool use that limits their generalizability and computational cost due to making many calls to large-scale LLMs. We introduce GEAR, a computationally efficient query-tool grounding algorithm that is generalizable to various tasks that require tool use while not relying on task-specific demonstrations. GEAR achieves better efficiency by delegating tool grounding and execution to small language models (SLM) and LLM, respectively; while leveraging semantic and pattern-based evaluation at both question and answer levels for generalizable tool grounding. We evaluate GEAR on 14 datasets across 6 downstream tasks, demonstrating its strong generalizability to novel tasks, tools and different SLMs. Despite offering more efficiency, GEAR achieves higher precision in tool grounding compared to prior strategies using LLM prompting, thus improving downstream accuracy at a reduced computational cost. For example, we demonstrate that GEAR-augmented GPT-J and GPT-3 outperform counterpart tool-augmented baselines because of better tool use.