In the era of foundation models and Large Language Models (LLMs), Euclidean space is the de facto geometric setting of our machine learning architectures. However, recent literature has demonstrated that this choice comes with fundamental limitations. To that end, non-Euclidean learning is quickly gaining traction, particularly in web-related applications where complex relationships and structures are prevalent. Non-Euclidean spaces, such as hyperbolic, spherical, and mixed-curvature spaces, have been shown to provide more efficient and effective representations for data with intrinsic geometric properties, including web-related data like social network topology, query-document relationships, and user-item interactions. Integrating foundation models with non-Euclidean geometries has great potential to enhance their ability to capture and model the underlying structures, leading to better performance in search, recommendations, and content understanding. This workshop focuses on the intersection of Non-Euclidean Foundation Models and Geometric Learning (NEGEL), exploring its potential benefits, including the potential benefits for advancing web-related technologies, challenges, and future directions. Workshop page: [https://hyperboliclearning.github.io/events/www2025workshop](https://hyperboliclearning.github.io/events/www2025workshop)

Knowledge tracing (KT) aims to predict learners' future performance based on historical learning interactions. However, existing KT models predominantly focus on data from a single course, limiting their ability to capture a comprehensive understanding of learners' knowledge states. In this paper, we propose TransKT, a contrastive cross-course knowledge tracing method that leverages concept graph guided knowledge transfer to model the relationships between learning behaviors across different courses, thereby enhancing knowledge state estimation. Specifically, TransKT constructs a cross-course concept graph by leveraging zero-shot Large Language Model (LLM) prompts to establish implicit links between related concepts across different courses. This graph serves as the foundation for knowledge transfer, enabling the model to integrate and enhance the semantic features of learners' interactions across courses. Furthermore, TransKT includes an LLM-to-LM pipeline for incorporating summarized semantic features, which significantly improves the performance of Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs) used for knowledge transfer. Additionally, TransKT employs a contrastive objective that aligns single-course and cross-course knowledge states, thereby refining the model's ability to provide a more robust and accurate representation of learners' overall knowledge states.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) gain expertise across diverse domains and modalities, scalable oversight becomes increasingly challenging, particularly when their capabilities may surpass human evaluators. Debate has emerged as a promising mechanism for enabling such oversight. In this work, we extend the debate paradigm to a multimodal setting, exploring its potential for weaker models to supervise and enhance the performance of stronger models. We focus on visual question answering (VQA), where two "sighted" expert vision-language models debate an answer, while a "blind" (text-only) judge adjudicates based solely on the quality of the arguments. In our framework, the experts defend only answers aligned with their beliefs, thereby obviating the need for explicit role-playing and concentrating the debate on instances of expert disagreement. Experiments on several multimodal tasks demonstrate that the debate framework consistently outperforms individual expert models. Moreover, judgments from weaker LLMs can help instill reasoning capabilities in vision-language models through finetuning.

Assessing Large Language Models (LLMs)' underlying value differences enables comprehensive comparison of their misalignment, cultural adaptability, and biases. Nevertheless, current value measurement datasets face the informativeness challenge: with often outdated, contaminated, or generic test questions, they can only capture the shared value orientations among different LLMs, leading to saturated and thus uninformative results. To address this problem, we introduce AdAEM, a novel, self-extensible assessment framework for revealing LLMs' inclinations. Distinct from previous static benchmarks, AdAEM can automatically and adaptively generate and extend its test questions. This is achieved by probing the internal value boundaries of a diverse set of LLMs developed across cultures and time periods in an in-context optimization manner. The optimization process theoretically maximizes an information-theoretic objective to extract the latest or culturally controversial topics, providing more distinguishable and informative insights about models' value differences. In this way, AdAEM is able to co-evolve with the development of LLMs, consistently tracking their value dynamics. Using AdAEM, we generate 12,310 questions grounded in Schwartz Value Theory, conduct an extensive analysis to manifest our method's validity and effectiveness, and benchmark the values of 16 LLMs, laying the groundwork for better value research.

Fine-tuning a language model often results in a degradation of its existing performance on other tasks, due to a shift in the model parameters; this phenomenon is often referred to as (catastrophic) forgetting. We are interested in mitigating this, in settings where we only have access to the model weights but no access to its training data/recipe. A natural approach is to penalize the KL divergence between the original model and the new one. Our main realization is that a simple process - which we term context-free generation - allows for an approximate unbiased estimation of this KL divergence. We show that augmenting a fine-tuning dataset with context-free generations mitigates forgetting, in two settings: (a) preserving the zero-shot performance of pretrained-only models, and (b) preserving the reasoning performance of thinking models. We show that contextual synthetic data, and even a portion of the pretraining data, are less effective. We also investigate the effect of choices like generation temperature, data ratios etc. We present our results for OLMo-1B for pretrained-only setting and R1-Distill-Llama-8B for the reasoning setting.

While LLMs have demonstrated impressive capabilities, their true level of intelligence and reasoning remains a subject of debate. The classical Turing Test proposes that a machine demonstrating human-like responses in conversation could be considered intelligent. Over the past few years, substantial efforts have been devoted to evaluating LLMs from various angles [Cha+24]. For example, LLMs can generate essays with their quality rated higher than those produced by humans [Her+23]; pass questions involving communication skills, ethics, empathy, and professionalism in a United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) [Bri+23]; achieve passing scores on the reading comprehension test of the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), a global standardized student assessment [V az+23]; and demonstrate strong performance in solving middle school-level math word problems, with multiple LLMs achieving passing scores and some exceeding 90% accuracy [Vid24]. However, existing evaluation protocols may fall short of comprehensively assessing their reasoning and problem-solving capabilities.

Modern deep neural networks exhibit heterogeneity across numerous layers of various types such as residuals, multi-head attention, etc., due to varying structures (dimensions, activation functions, etc.), distinct representation characteristics, which impact predictions. We develop a general layer-wise quantization framework with tight variance and code-length bounds, adapting to the heterogeneities over the course of training. We then apply a new layer-wise quantization technique within distributed variational inequalities (VIs), proposing a novel Quantized Optimistic Dual Averaging (QODA) algorithm with adaptive learning rates, which achieves competitive convergence rates for monotone VIs. We empirically show that QODA achieves up to a $150\%$ speedup over the baselines in end-to-end training time for training Wasserstein GAN on $12+$ GPUs.

Stochastic rising rested bandit (SRRB) is a setting where the arms' expected rewards increase as they are pulled. It models scenarios in which the performances of the different options grow as an effect of an underlying learning process (e.g., online model selection). Even if the bandit literature provides specifically crafted algorithms based on upper-confidence bounds for such a setting, no study about Thompson sampling TS-like algorithms has been performed so far. The strong regularity of the expected rewards in the SRRB setting suggests that specific instances may be tackled effectively using adapted and sliding-window TS approaches. This work provides novel regret analyses for such algorithms in SRRBs, highlighting the challenges and providing new technical tools of independent interest. Our results allow us to identify under which assumptions TS-like algorithms succeed in achieving sublinear regret and which properties of the environment govern the complexity of the regret minimization problem when approached with TS. Furthermore, we provide a regret lower bound based on a complexity index we introduce. Finally, we conduct numerical simulations comparing TS-like algorithms with state-of-the-art approaches for SRRBs in synthetic and real-world settings.

This study investigated potential scoring biases and disparities toward English Language Learners (ELLs) when using automatic scoring systems for middle school students' written responses to science assessments. We specifically focus on examining how unbalanced training data with ELLs contributes to scoring bias and disparities. We fine-tuned BERT with four datasets: responses from (1) ELLs, (2) non-ELLs, (3) a mixed dataset reflecting the real-world proportion of ELLs and non-ELLs (unbalanced), and (4) a balanced mixed dataset with equal representation of both groups. The study analyzed 21 assessment items: 10 items with about 30,000 ELL responses, five items with about 1,000 ELL responses, and six items with about 200 ELL responses. Scoring accuracy (Acc) was calculated and compared to identify bias using Friedman tests. We measured the Mean Score Gaps (MSGs) between ELLs and non-ELLs and then calculated the differences in MSGs generated through both the human and AI models to identify the scoring disparities. We found that no AI bias and distorted disparities between ELLs and non-ELLs were found when the training dataset was large enough (ELL = 30,000 and ELL = 1,000), but concerns could exist if the sample size is limited (ELL = 200).

Legal rules encompass not only codified statutes but also implicit adjudicatory principles derived from precedents that contain discretionary norms, social morality, and policy. While computational legal research has advanced in applying established rules to cases, inducing legal rules from judicial decisions remains understudied, constrained by limitations in model inference efficacy and symbolic reasoning capability. The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) offers unprecedented opportunities for automating the extraction of such latent principles, yet progress is stymied by the absence of formal task definitions, benchmark datasets, and methodologies. To address this gap, we formalize Legal Rule Induction (LRI) as the task of deriving concise, generalizable doctrinal rules from sets of analogous precedents, distilling their shared preconditions, normative behaviors, and legal consequences. We introduce the first LRI benchmark, comprising 5,121 case sets (38,088 Chinese cases in total) for model tuning and 216 expert-annotated gold test sets. Experimental results reveal that: 1) State-of-the-art LLMs struggle with over-generalization and hallucination; 2) Training on our dataset markedly enhances LLMs capabilities in capturing nuanced rule patterns across similar cases.