Large Language Models (LLMs) have been transformative across many domains. However, hallucination -- confidently outputting incorrect information -- remains one of the leading challenges for LLMs. This raises the question of how to accurately assess and quantify the uncertainty of LLMs. Extensive literature on traditional models has explored Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) to measure uncertainty and employed calibration techniques to address the misalignment between uncertainty and accuracy. While some of these methods have been adapted for LLMs, the literature lacks an in-depth analysis of their effectiveness and does not offer a comprehensive benchmark to enable insightful comparison among existing solutions. In this work, we fill this gap via a systematic survey of representative prior works on UQ and calibration for LLMs and introduce a rigorous benchmark. Using two widely used reliability datasets, we empirically evaluate six related methods, which justify the significant findings of our review. Finally, we provide outlooks for key future directions and outline open challenges. To the best of our knowledge, this survey is the first dedicated study to review the calibration methods and relevant metrics for LLMs.

Generative AI has recently had a profound impact on various fields, including daily life, research, and education. To explore its efficient utilization in data-driven materials science, we organized a hackathon -- AIMHack2024 -- in July 2024. In this hackathon, researchers from fields such as materials science, information science, bioinformatics, and condensed matter physics worked together to explore how generative AI can facilitate research and education. Based on the results of the hackathon, this paper presents topics related to (1) conducting AI-assisted software trials, (2) building AI tutors for software, and (3) developing GUI applications for software. While generative AI continues to evolve rapidly, this paper provides an early record of its application in data-driven materials science and highlights strategies for integrating AI into research and education.

Image captioning is a fundamental task that bridges the visual and linguistic domains, playing a critical role in pre-training Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs). Current state-of-the-art captioning models are typically trained with Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), a paradigm that relies on expensive, non-scalable data annotated by humans or proprietary models. This approach often leads to models that memorize specific ground-truth answers, limiting their generality and ability to generate diverse, creative descriptions. To overcome the limitation of SFT, we propose applying the Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) paradigm to the open-ended task of image captioning. A primary challenge, however, is designing an objective reward function for the inherently subjective nature of what constitutes a "good" caption. We introduce Captioning Reinforcement Learning (CapRL), a novel training framework that redefines caption quality through its utility: a high-quality caption should enable a non-visual language model to accurately answer questions about the corresponding image. CapRL employs a decoupled two-stage pipeline where an LVLM generates a caption, and the objective reward is derived from the accuracy of a separate, vision-free LLM answering Multiple-Choice Questions based solely on that caption. As the first study to apply RLVR to the subjective image captioning task, we demonstrate that CapRL significantly enhances multiple settings. Pretraining on the CapRL-5M caption dataset annotated by CapRL-3B results in substantial gains across 12 benchmarks. Moreover, within the Prism Framework for caption quality evaluation, CapRL achieves performance comparable to Qwen2.5-VL-72B, while exceeding the baseline by an average margin of 8.4%. Code is available here: https://github.com/InternLM/CapRL.

Deliberation plays a crucial role in shaping outcomes by weighing diverse perspectives before reaching decisions. With recent advancements in Natural Language Processing, it has become possible to computationally model deliberation by analyzing opinion shifts and predicting potential outcomes under varying scenarios. In this study, we present a comparative analysis of multiple NLP techniques to evaluate how effectively models interpret deliberative discourse and produce meaningful insights. Opinions from individuals of varied backgrounds were collected to construct a self-sourced dataset that reflects diverse viewpoints. Deliberation was simulated using product presentations enriched with striking facts, which often prompted measurable shifts in audience opinions. We have given comparative analysis between two models namely Frequency-Based Discourse Modulation and Quantum-Deliberation Framework which outperform the existing state of art models. Deliberation is the structured process of reasoning, dialogue, and weighing evidence before decisions are made. Unlike ordinary conversation, it emphasizes logical argumentation, inclusivity, and critical reflection.

Bilateral trade models the task of intermediating between two strategic agents, a seller and a buyer, willing to trade a good for which they hold private valuations. We study this problem from the perspective of a broker, in a regret minimization framework. At each time step, a new seller and buyer arrive, and the broker has to propose a mechanism that is incentive-compatible and individually rational, with the goal of maximizing profit. We propose a learning algorithm that guarantees a nearly tight $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$ regret in the stochastic setting when seller and buyer valuations are drawn i.i.d. from a fixed and possibly correlated unknown distribution. We further show that it is impossible to achieve sublinear regret in the non-stationary scenario where valuations are generated upfront by an adversary. Our ambitious benchmark for these results is the best incentive-compatible and individually rational mechanism. This separates us from previous works on efficiency maximization in bilateral trade, where the benchmark is a single number: the best fixed price in hindsight. A particular challenge we face is that uniform convergence for all mechanisms' profits is impossible. We overcome this difficulty via a careful chaining analysis that proves convergence for a provably near-optimal mechanism at (essentially) optimal rate. We further showcase the broader applicability of our techniques by providing nearly optimal results for the joint ads problem.

Workplace negotiations are undermined by psychological barriers, which can even derail well-prepared tactics. AI offers personalized and always -- available negotiation coaching, yet its effectiveness for negotiation preparedness remains unclear. We built Trucey, a prototype AI coach grounded in Brett's negotiation model. We conducted a between-subjects experiment (N=267), comparing Trucey, ChatGPT, and a traditional negotiation Handbook, followed by in-depth interviews (N=15). While Trucey showed the strongest reductions in fear relative to both comparison conditions, the Handbook outperformed both AIs in usability and psychological empowerment. Interviews revealed that the Handbook's comprehensive, reviewable content was crucial for participants' confidence and preparedness. In contrast, although participants valued AI's rehearsal capability, its guidance often felt verbose and fragmented -- delivered in bits and pieces that required additional effort -- leaving them uncertain or overwhelmed. These findings challenge assumptions of AI superiority and motivate hybrid designs that integrate structured, theory-driven content with targeted rehearsal, clear boundaries, and adaptive scaffolds to address psychological barriers and support negotiation preparedness.

Understanding how Large Language Models (LLMs) perform complex reasoning and their failure mechanisms is a challenge in interpretability research. To provide a measurable geometric analysis perspective, we define the concept of the Reasoning Manifold, a latent low-dimensional geometric structure formed by the internal representations corresponding to all correctly reasoned generations. This structure can be conceptualized as the embodiment of the effective thinking paths that the model has learned to successfully solve a given task. Based on this concept, we build REMA, a framework that explains the origins of failures by quantitatively comparing the spatial relationships of internal model representations corresponding to both erroneous and correct reasoning samples. Specifically, REMA first quantifies the geometric deviation of each erroneous representation by calculating its k-nearest neighbors distance to the approximated manifold formed by correct representations, thereby providing a unified failure signal. It then localizes the divergence points where these deviations first become significant by tracking this deviation metric across the model's layers and comparing it against a baseline of internal fluctuations from correct representations, thus identifying where the reasoning chain begins to go off-track. Our extensive experiments on diverse language and multimodal models and tasks demonstrate the low-dimensional nature of the reasoning manifold and the high separability between erroneous and correct reasoning representations. The results also validate the effectiveness of the REMA framework in analyzing the origins of reasoning failures. This research connects abstract reasoning failures to measurable geometric deviations in representations, providing new avenues for in-depth understanding and diagnosis of the internal computational processes of black-box models.

This paper introduces TrueGradeAI, an AI-driven digital examination framework that directly addresses the shortcomings of traditional paper assessments, namely excessive paper usage, logistical complexity, grading delays, and evaluator bias. The system preserves natural handwriting by capturing stylus input on secure tablets and applying transformer-based optical character recognition for transcription. Evaluation is performed through a retrieval-augmented pipeline that integrates faculty solutions, cache layers, and external references, enabling a large language model to assign scores with explicit, evidence-linked reasoning. By combining handwriting preservation with scalable and transparent evaluation, the framework reduces environmental costs, accelerates feedback cycles, and progressively builds a reusable knowledge base, while explicitly working to mitigate grading bias and ensure fairness in assessment. Despite advances in digital infrastructure, most institutions continue to rely on paper-based examinations as their primary mode of assessment.

Federated Learning (FL) has emerged as a promising decentralized learning (DL) approach that enables the use of distributed data without compromising user privacy. However, FL poses several key challenges. First, it is frequently assumed that every client can train the same machine learning models, however, not all clients are able to meet this assumption because of differences in their business needs and computational resources. Second, statistical heterogeneity (a.k.a. non-IID data) poses a major challenge in FL, which can lead to lower global model performance. Third, while addressing these challenges, there is a need for a cost-effective incentive mechanism to encourage clients to participate in FL training. In response to these challenges, we propose several methodologies: DL-SH, which facilitates efficient, privacy-preserving, and communication-efficient learning in the context of statistical heterogeneity; DL-MH, designed to manage fully heterogeneous models while tackling statistical disparities; and I-DL-MH, an incentive-based extension of DL-MH that promotes client engagement in federated learning training by providing incentives within this complex federated learning framework. Comprehensive experiments were carried out to assess the performance and scalability of the proposed approaches across a range of complex experimental settings. This involved utilizing various model architectures, in diverse data distributions, including IID and several non-IID scenarios, as well as multiple datasets. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed approaches significantly enhance accuracy and decrease communication costs while effectively addressing statistical heterogeneity and model heterogeneity in comparison to existing state-of-the-art approaches and baselines, with DL-SH improving global model accuracy by 153%, and I-DL-MH achieving a 225% improvement under non-IID conditions.

AI-powered companion chatbots (AICCs) such as Replika are increasingly popular, offering empathetic interactions, yet their psychosocial impacts remain unclear. We examined how engaging with AICCs shaped wellbeing and how users perceived these experiences. First, we conducted a large-scale quasi-experimental study of longitudinal Reddit data, applying stratified propensity score matching and Difference-in-Differences regression. Findings revealed mixed effects -- greater affective and grief expression, readability, and interpersonal focus, alongside increases in language about loneliness and suicidal ideation. Second, we complemented these results with 15 semi-structured interviews, which we thematically analyzed and contextualized using Knapp's relationship development model. We identified trajectories of initiation, escalation, and bonding, wherein AICCs provided emotional validation and social rehearsal but also carried risks of over-reliance and withdrawal. Triangulating across methods, we offer design implications for AI companions that scaffold healthy boundaries, support mindful engagement, support disclosure without dependency, and surface relationship stages -- maximizing psychosocial benefits while mitigating risks.