Language model users often embed personal and social context in their questions. The asker's role -- implicit in how the question is framed -- creates specific needs for an appropriate response. However, most evaluations, while capturing the model's capability to respond, often ignore who is asking. This gap is especially critical in stigmatized domains such as opioid use disorder (OUD), where accounting for users' contexts is essential to provide accessible, stigma-free responses. We propose CoRUS (COmmunity-driven Roles for User-centric Question Simulation), a framework for simulating role-based questions. Drawing on role theory and posts from an online OUD recovery community (r/OpiatesRecovery), we first build a taxonomy of asker roles -- patients, caregivers, practitioners. Next, we use it to simulate 15,321 questions that embed each role's goals, behaviors, and experiences. Our evaluations show that these questions are both highly believable and comparable to real-world data. When used to evaluate five LLMs, for the same question but differing roles, we find systematic differences: vulnerable roles, such as patients and caregivers, elicit more supportive responses (+17%) and reduced knowledge content (-19%) in comparison to practitioners. Our work demonstrates how implicitly signaling a user's role shapes model responses, and provides a methodology for role-informed evaluation of conversational AI.

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated sophisticated capabilities, including the ability to process and comprehend extended contexts. These emergent capabilities necessitate rigorous evaluation methods to effectively assess their performance in long-context understanding. In this paper, we present \textbf{LC-Eval}, a bilingual, multi-task evaluation benchmark designed to evaluate long-context understanding in English and Arabic, targeting context lengths ranging from 4k to over 128k tokens. LC-Eval introduces four novel and challenging tasks: multi-document question answering, bilingual question answering, claim verification within a paragraph, and multiple-choice questions based on long contexts. These tasks are designed to assess LLMs' abilities in deep reasoning, document comprehension, information tracing, and bilingual information extraction and understanding. The benchmark includes datasets in both Arabic and English for each task, allowing for a comparative analysis of their performance across different text genres. Evaluations were conducted on both open-weight and closed LLMs, with results indicating that LC-Eval presents significant challenges. Even high-performing models, such as GPT-4o, struggled with certain tasks, highlighting the complexity and rigor of the benchmark.

Chain-of-thought (CoT) rationales, which provide step-by-step reasoning to derive final answers, benefit LLMs in both inference and training. Incorporating rationales, either by generating them before answering during inference, or by placing them before or after the original answers during training - significantly improves model performance on mathematical, symbolic and commonsense reasoning tasks. However, most work focuses on the role of rationales in these reasoning tasks, overlooking their potential impact on other important tasks like natural language understanding (NLU) tasks. In this work, we raise the question: Can rationales similarly benefit NLU tasks? To conduct a systematic exploration, we construct NLURC, a comprehensive and high-quality NLU dataset collection with rationales, and develop various rationale-augmented methods. Through exploring the applicability of these methods on NLU tasks using the dataset, we uncover several potentially surprising findings: (1) CoT inference shifts from hindering NLU performance to surpassing direct label prediction as model size grows, indicating a positive correlation. (2) Most rationale-augmented training methods perform worse than label-only training, with one specially designed method consistently achieving improvements. (3) LLMs trained with rationales achieve significant performance gains on unseen NLU tasks, rivaling models ten times their size, while delivering interpretability on par with commercial LLMs.

Recent advances in natural language processing with large neural models have opened new possibilities for syntactic analysis based on machine learning. This work explores a novel approach to phrase-structure analysis by fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) to translate an input sentence into its corresponding syntactic structure. The main objective is to extend the capabilities of MiSintaxis, a tool designed for teaching Spanish syntax. Several models from the Hugging Face repository were fine-tuned using training data generated from the AnCora-ES corpus, and their performance was evaluated using the F1 score. The results demonstrate high accuracy in phrase-structure analysis and highlight the potential of this methodology.

We present a typed computer language, Doug, in which all typed programs may be proved to halt in polynomial time, encoded in a vector-symbolic architecture (VSA). Doug is just an encoding of the light linear functional programming language (LLFPL) described by (Schimanski2009, ch. 7). The types of Doug are encoded using a slot-value encoding scheme based on holographic declarative memory (HDM; Kelly, 2020). The terms of Doug are encoded using a variant of the Lisp VSA defined by (Flanagan, 2024). Doug allows for some points on the embedding space of a neural network to be interpreted as types, where the types of nearby points are similar both in structure and content. Types in Doug are therefore learnable by a neural network. Following (Chollet, 2019), (Card, 1983), and (Newell, 1981), we view skill as the application of a procedure, or program of action, that causes a goal to be satisfied. Skill acquisition may therefore be expressed as program synthesis. Using Doug, we hope to describe a form of learning of skilled behaviour that follows a human-like pace of skill acquisition (i.e., substantially faster than brute force; Heathcote, 2000), exceeding the efficiency of all currently existing approaches (Kaplan, 2020; Jones, 2021; Chollet, 2024). Our approach brings us one step closer to modeling human mental representations, as they must actually exist in the brain, and those representations' acquisition, as they are actually learned.

In the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT), the frequent transmission of large amounts of data over wireless networks should meet the stringent timeliness requirements. Particularly, the freshness of packet status updates has a significant impact on the system performance. In this paper, we propose an age-of-information (AoI)-aware multi-base station (BS) real-time monitoring framework to support extensive IIoT deployments. To meet the freshness requirements of IIoT, we formulate a joint task offloading and resource allocation optimization problem with the goal of minimizing long-term average AoI. Tackling the core challenges of combinatorial explosion in multi-BS decision spaces and the stochastic dynamics of IIoT systems is crucial, as these factors render traditional optimization methods intractable. Firstly, an innovative branching-based Dueling Double Deep Q-Network (Branching-D3QN) algorithm is proposed to effectively implement task offloading, which optimizes the convergence performance by reducing the action space complexity from exponential to linear levels. Then, an efficient optimization solution to resource allocation is proposed by proving the semi-definite property of the Hessian matrix of bandwidth and computation resources. Finally, we propose an iterative optimization algorithm for efficient joint task offloading and resource allocation to achieve optimal average AoI performance. Extensive simulations demonstrate that our proposed Branching-D3QN algorithm outperforms both state-of-the-art DRL methods and classical heuristics, achieving up to a 75% enhanced convergence speed and at least a 22% reduction in the long-term average AoI.

As AI systems progress, we rely more on them to make decisions with us and for us. To ensure that such decisions are aligned with human values, it is imperative for us to understand not only what decisions they make but also how they come to those decisions. Reasoning language models, which provide both final responses and (partially transparent) intermediate thinking traces, present a timely opportunity to study AI procedural reasoning. Unlike math and code problems which often have objectively correct answers, moral dilemmas are an excellent testbed for process-focused evaluation because they allow for multiple defensible conclusions. To do so, we present MoReBench: 1,000 moral scenarios, each paired with a set of rubric criteria that experts consider essential to include (or avoid) when reasoning about the scenarios. MoReBench contains over 23 thousand criteria including identifying moral considerations, weighing trade-offs, and giving actionable recommendations to cover cases on AI advising humans moral decisions as well as making moral decisions autonomously. Separately, we curate MoReBench-Theory: 150 examples to test whether AI can reason under five major frameworks in normative ethics. Our results show that scaling laws and existing benchmarks on math, code, and scientific reasoning tasks fail to predict models' abilities to perform moral reasoning. Models also show partiality towards specific moral frameworks (e.g., Benthamite Act Utilitarianism and Kantian Deontology), which might be side effects of popular training paradigms. Together, these benchmarks advance process-focused reasoning evaluation towards safer and more transparent AI.

Abstract--Argument Mining (AM) helps in automating the extraction of complex argumentative structures such as Argument Components (ACs) like Premise, Claim etc. and Argumentative Relations (ARs) like Support, Attack etc. in an argumentative text. Due to the inherent complexity of reasoning involved with this task, modelling dependencies between ACs and ARs is challenging. Most of the recent approaches formulate this task through a generative paradigm by flattening the argumentative structures. In contrast to that, this study jointly formulates the key tasks of AM in an end-to-end fashion using Autoregressive Argumentative Structure Prediction (AASP) framework. The proposed AASP framework is based on the autoregressive structure prediction framework that has given good performance for several NLP tasks. AASP framework models the argumentative structures as constrained pre-defined sets of actions with the help of a conditional pre-trained language model. These actions build the argumentative structures step-by-step in an autoregressive manner to capture the flow of argumentative reasoning in an efficient way. Extensive experiments conducted on three standard AM benchmarks demonstrate that AASP achieves state-of-the-art (SoT A) results across all AM tasks in two benchmarks and delivers strong results in one benchmark.

Abstract--Graph Contrastive Learning (GCL) has emerged as a powerful tool for extracting consistent representations from graphs, independent of labeled information. However, existing methods predominantly focus on undirected graphs, disregarding the pivotal directional information that is fundamental and indispensable in real-world networks (e.g., social networks and recommendations). In this paper, we introduce S2-DiGCL, a novel framework that emphasizes spatial insights from complex and real domain perspectives for directed graph (digraph) contrastive learning. From the complex-domain perspective, S2-DiGCL introduces personalized perturbations into the magnetic Laplacian to adaptively modulate edge phases and directional semantics. From the real-domain perspective, it employs a path-based subgraph augmentation strategy to capture fine-grained local asymmetries and topological dependencies. Extensive experiments on 7 real-world digraph datasets demonstrate the superiority of our approach, achieving SOT A performance with 4.41% improvement in node classification and 4.34% in link prediction under both supervised and unsupervised settings. Graph has become a fundamental data structure for modeling pairwise relationships across diverse domains, such as social interactions [1], [2], transportation networks [3], [4], and recommendation systems [5], [6]. This widespread use has spurred the rapid development of GNNs [7], [8], which effectively capture topological dependencies and node interactions. Despite advancements, conventional supervised GNNs face inherent limitations due to their reliance on extensive labeled data, posing a critical bottleneck as the volume of real-world graphs continues to grow while annotated data remain scarce and expensive to obtain. To mitigate this limitation, GCL [9], [10] has emerged as a promising self-supervised paradigm that learns robust and transferable node representations by enforcing consistency across multiple augmented graph views. While current GCL methodologies have demonstrated remarkable success on undirected graphs, their applicability to digraphs remains largely unexplored.

While Artificial Intelligence (AI) shows promise in healthcare applications, existing conversational systems often falter in complex and sensitive medical domains such as Sexual and Reproductive Health (SRH). These systems frequently struggle with hallucination and lack the specialized knowledge required, particularly for sensitive SRH topics. Furthermore, current AI approaches in healthcare tend to prioritize diagnostic capabilities over comprehensive patient care and education. Addressing these gaps, this work at the UNC School of Nursing introduces SARHAchat, a proof-of-concept Large Language Model (LLM)- based chatbot. SARHAchat is designed as a reliable, user-centered system integrating medical expertise with empathetic communication to enhance SRH care delivery. Our evaluation demonstrates SARHAchat's ability to provide accurate and contextually appropriate contraceptive counseling while maintaining a natural conversational flow. The demo is available at https://sarhachat.com/.