The focus on'food as medicine' is gaining traction in the field of health and several studies conducted in the past few years discussed this aspect of food in the literature. However, very little research has been done on representing the relationship between food and health in a standardized, machine - readable fo rmat using a semantic web that can help us leverage this knowledge effectively. To address this gap, this study aims to create a knowledge graph to link food and health through the knowledge graphs' ability to combine information from various platforms foc using on flavonoid contents of food found in the USDA's databases and cancer connections found in the literature. We looked closely at these relationships using KNARM methodology and represented them in machine - operable format. The proposed knowledge graph serves as an example for researchers, enabling them to explore the complex interplay between dietary choices and disease management. Future work for this study involves expanding the scope of the knowledge graph by capturing nuances, adding more related d ata, and performing inferences on the acquired knowledge to uncover hidden relationships.

Large language models excel on math benchmarks, but their math reasoning robustness to linguistic variation is underexplored. While recent work increasingly treats high-difficulty competitions like the IMO as the gold standard for evaluating reasoning, we believe in comprehensive benchmarking of high school-level math problems in real educational settings. We introduce MathRobust-LV, a test set and evaluation methodology that mirrors how instructors rephrase problems across assessments while keeping difficulty constant: we change surface details (names, contexts, variables) while preserving numerical structure and answers. In contrast to prior efforts that alter problem content or emphasize IMO-level tasks, we focus on high-school-level dataset problems at the difficulty level where models are currently deployed in educational settings: tutoring and assessment systems. In these applications, instructors rephrase identical concepts in varied ways, making linguistic robustness essential for reliable deployment. Although MATH data benchmarking is often regarded as saturated, our experiment on 34 models reveals that accuracy declines when moving from the baseline to the variants. These drops are severe for smaller models (9-11%) while stronger models also show measurable degradation. Frontier models like GPT-5, Gemini-2.5pro remain comparatively stable. Our results highlight that robustness to linguistic variation is a fundamental challenge, exposing reasoning vulnerabilities in models.

Virtual Labs offer valuable opportunities for hands-on, inquiry-based science learning, yet teachers often struggle to adapt them to fit their instructional goals. Third-party materials may not align with classroom needs, and developing custom resources can be time-consuming and difficult to scale. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) offer a promising avenue for addressing these limitations. In this paper, we introduce a novel alignment framework for instructional goal-aligned question generation, enabling teachers to leverage LLMs to produce simulation-aligned, pedagogically meaningful questions through natural language interaction. The framework integrates four components: instructional goal understanding via teacher-LLM dialogue, lab understanding via knowledge unit and relationship analysis, a question taxonomy for structuring cognitive and pedagogical intent, and the TELeR taxonomy for controlling prompt detail. Early design choices were informed by a small teacher-assisted case study, while our final evaluation analyzed over 1,100 questions from 19 open-source LLMs. With goal and lab understanding grounding questions in teacher intent and simulation context, the question taxonomy elevates cognitive demand (open-ended formats and relational types raise quality by 0.29-0.39 points), and optimized TELeR prompts enhance format adherence (80% parsability, >90% adherence). Larger models yield the strongest gains: parsability +37.1%, adherence +25.7%, and average quality +0.8 Likert points.

Post - merger integration states unique challenges for professionals responsible for information system integration aimed on alignment and combination diverse system architectures of merging organizations . Although the theoretical and practical guidance exists for post - merger integration on the business level, there is a significant gap in training for information system integration in this context. In prior research specific methods AMILI ( Support method for informed decision identification) and AMILP ( Support method for informed decision - making) were introduced for the support of information system integration decisions in the post - merger integration. But during the practical application was reported high learning curve and low learner motivation. This paper explores how game - based learning design can address these limitations by transforming static method training into engaging learning experience. The study analyzes foundational learning theories, cognitive load and motivation models, and serious game design frameworks to identify the essential requirements for a game - based learning design framework tailored to information system integration in post - merger integration. Requirements are struct ured in two components: the transformation process and resulting learning experience. The paper concludes with a plan for developing and evaluating the proposed framework through iterative design and real - world validation. Keywords: Post - merger integration, Information systems, Game - based learning, Instructional design, Serious games .

Recent progress has pushed AI frontiers from pattern recognition tasks toward problems that require step by step, System2 style reasoning, especially with large language models. Yet, unlike learning, where generalization and out of distribution (OoD) evaluation concepts are well formalized, there is no clear, consistent definition or metric for reasoning ability. We propose Complexity Out of Distribution (Complexity OoD) generalization as a framework and problem setting to define and measure reasoning. A model exhibits Complexity OoD generalization when it maintains performance on test instances whose minimal required solution complexity, either representational (richer solution structure) or computational (more reasoning steps/program length), exceeds that of all training examples. We formalize complexity via solution description Kolmogorov complexity and operational proxies (e.g., object/relation counts; reasoning step counts), clarifying how Complexity OoD differs from length and compositional OoD. This lens unifies learning and reasoning: many cases solvable with System1 like processing at low complexity become System2 like under complexity pressure, while System2 can be viewed as generalization over solution structures. We translate this perspective into practice with recommendations for operationalizing Complexity OoD across the stack: incorporating complexity into benchmark and evaluation metric design, rethinking supervision to target solution traces, seeking and designing inductive biases for Complexity OoD generalization, addressing learning to reason spillovers such as spurious shortcuts, semantic robustness, catastrophic forgetting, and step wise calibration. Because Complexity OoD cannot be solved by scaling data alone, progress toward robust reasoning will require architectures and training regimes that explicitly model and allocate computation with respect to complexity.

This dataset provides responses to a standardized, bilingual (English-Hindi) Prakriti Assessment Questionnaire designed to evaluate the physical, physiological, and psychological characteristics of individuals according to classical Ayurvedic principles. The questionnaire consists of 24 multiple-choice items covering body features, appetite, sleep patterns, energy levels, and temperament. It was developed following AYUSH/CCRAS guidelines to ensure comprehensive and accurate data collection. All questions are mandatory and neutrally phrased to minimize bias, and dosha labels (Vata, Pitta, Kapha) are hidden from participants. Data were collected via a Google Forms deployment, enabling automated scoring of responses to map individual traits to dosha-specific scores. The resulting dataset provides a structured platform for research in computational intelligence, Ayurvedic studies, and personalized health analytics, supporting analysis of trait distributions, correlations, and predictive modeling. It can also serve as a reference for future Prakriti-based studies and the development of intelligent health applications.

We present AlphaApollo, a self-evolving agentic reasoning system that aims to address two bottlenecks in foundation model (FM) reasoning-limited model-intrinsic capacity and unreliable test-time iteration. AlphaApollo orchestrates multiple models with professional tools to enable deliberate, verifiable reasoning. It couples (i) a computation tool (Python with numerical and symbolic libraries) and (ii) a retrieval tool (task-relevant external information) to execute exact calculations and ground decisions. The system further supports multi-round, multi-model solution evolution via a shared state map that records candidates, executable checks, and feedback for iterative refinement. In evaluations on AIME 2024/2025 across multiple models, AlphaApollo delivers consistent gains: +5.15% Average@32 and +23.34% Pass@32 for Qwen2.5-14B-Instruct, and +8.91% Average@32 with +26.67% Pass@32 for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct. Tool-use analysis shows that more than 80% of tool calls are successfully executed, with consistent outperformance of non-tool baselines, thereby lifting the capability ceiling of FMs. More empirical results and implementation details will be updated at https://github.com/tmlr-group/AlphaApollo.

As online education platforms continue to expand, there is a growing need for assessment methods that not only measure answer accuracy but also capture the depth of students' cognitive processes in alignment with curriculum objectives. This study proposes and evaluates a rubric-based assessment framework powered by a large language model (LLM) for measuring algebraic competence, real-world-context block coding tasks. The problem set, designed by mathematics education experts, aligns each problem segment with five predefined rubric dimensions, enabling the LLM to assess both correctness and quality of students' problem-solving processes. The system was implemented on an online platform that records all intermediate responses and employs the LLM for rubric-aligned achievement evaluation. To examine the practical effectiveness of the proposed framework, we conducted a field study involving 42 middle school students engaged in multi-stage quadratic equation tasks with block coding. The study integrated learner self-assessments and expert ratings to benchmark the system's outputs. The LLM-based rubric evaluation showed strong agreement with expert judgments and consistently produced rubric-aligned, process-oriented feedback. These results demonstrate both the validity and scalability of incorporating LLM-driven rubric assessment into online mathematics and STEM education platforms.

We present OpenStaxQA, an evaluation benchmark specific to college-level educational applications based on 43 open-source college textbooks in English, Spanish, and Polish, available under a permissive Creative Commons license. We finetune and evaluate large language models (LLMs) with approximately 7 billion parameters on this dataset using quantized low rank adapters (QLoRa). Additionally we also perform a zero-shot evaluation on the AI2 reasoning challenge dev dataset in order to check if OpenStaxQA can lead to an improved performance on other tasks. We also discuss broader impacts relevant to datasets such as OpenStaxQA.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance on single-turn text-to-SQL tasks, but real-world database applications predominantly require multi-turn interactions to handle ambiguous queries, execution errors, and evolving user requirements. Existing multi-turn benchmarks fall short by treating conversation histories as static context or limiting evaluation to read-only operations, failing to reflect production-grade database assistant challenges. We introduce BIRD-INTERACT, a benchmark that restores this realism through: (1) a comprehensive interaction environment coupling each database with a hierarchical knowledge base, metadata files, and a function-driven user simulator, enabling models to solicit clarifications, retrieve knowledge, and recover from errors without human supervision; (2) two evaluation settings consisting of a pre-defined conversational protocol (c-Interact) and an open-ended agentic setting (a-Interact) where models autonomously decide when to query the user simulator or explore the environment; (3) a challenging task suite covering the full CRUD spectrum for business-intelligence and operational use cases, guarded by executable test cases. Each task features ambiguous and follow-up sub-tasks requiring dynamic interaction. The suite comprises BIRD-INTERACT-FULL (600 tasks, up to 11,796 interactions) for comprehensive performance assessment, and BIRD-INTERACT-LITE (300 tasks with simplified databases) for detailed behavioral analysis and rapid method development. Our empirical results highlight BIRD-INTERACT's difficulty: GPT-5 completes only 8.67% of tasks in c-Interact and 17.00% in a-Interact. Analysis via memory grafting and Interaction Test-time Scaling validates the importance of effective interaction for complex, dynamic text-to-SQL tasks.