"I teach computer science, and that is all," wrote Boaz Barak, of Harvard University, in a recent op-ed in The New York Times.a The main point of the op-ed was to protest the growing politicization of U.S. higher education, especially at elite universities, where we have seen many faculty members proceed from scholarship to advocacy. But in spite of the provocative title, the content of Barak's op-ed is quite more nuanced. "We should not normalize bringing one's ideology to the classroom," wrote Barak, and I could not agree more. But he also wrote that "The interaction of computer science and policy sometimes arises in my classes, and I make sure to present multiple perspectives." Here, Barak is advocating fairness and balance, rather than neutrality and avoidance of non-technical topics.

Unsupervised reinforcement learning (URL) aims to learn general skills for unseen downstream tasks. Mutual Information Skill Learning (MISL) addresses URL by maximizing the mutual information between states and skills but lacks sufficient theoretical analysis, e.g., how well its learned skills can initialize a downstream task's policy. Our new theoretical analysis in this paper shows that the diversity and separability of learned skills are fundamentally critical to downstream task adaptation but MISL does not necessarily guarantee these properties. To complement MISL, we propose a novel disentanglement metric LSEPIN. Moreover, we build an information-geometric connection between LSEPIN and downstream task adaptation cost. For better geometric properties, we investigate a new strategy that replaces the KL divergence in information geometry with Wasserstein distance. We extend the geometric analysis to it, which leads to a novel skill-learning objective WSEP. It is theoretically justified to be helpful to downstream task adaptation and it is capable of discovering more initial policies for downstream tasks than MISL. We finally propose another Wasserstein distance-based algorithm PWSEP that can theoretically discover all optimal initial policies.

This paper presents our system for Track 1: Mistake Identification in the BEA 2025 Shared Task on Pedagogical Ability Assessment of AI-powered Tutors. The task involves evaluating whether a tutor's response correctly identifies a mistake in a student's mathematical reasoning. We explore four approaches: (1) an ensemble of machine learning models over pooled token embeddings from multiple pretrained language models (LMs); (2) a frozen sentence-transformer using [CLS] embeddings with an MLP classifier; (3) a history-aware model with multi-head attention between token-level history and response embeddings; and (4) a retrieval-augmented few-shot prompting system with a large language model (LLM) i.e. GPT 4o. Our final system retrieves semantically similar examples, constructs structured prompts, and uses schema-guided output parsing to produce interpretable predictions. It outperforms all baselines, demonstrating the effectiveness of combining example-driven prompting with LLM reasoning for pedagogical feedback assessment. Our code is available at https://github.com/NaumanNaeem/BEA_2025.

We introduce Magistral, Mistral's first reasoning model and our own scalable reinforcement learning (RL) pipeline. Instead of relying on existing implementations and RL traces distilled from prior models, we follow a ground up approach, relying solely on our own models and infrastructure. Notably, we demonstrate a stack that enabled us to explore the limits of pure RL training of LLMs, present a simple method to force the reasoning language of the model, and show that RL on text data alone maintains most of the initial checkpoint's capabilities. We find that RL on text maintains or improves multimodal understanding, instruction following and function calling. We present Magistral Medium, trained for reasoning on top of Mistral Medium 3 with RL alone, and we open-source Magistral Small (Apache 2.0) which further includes cold-start data from Magistral Medium.

Online learning has experienced rapid growth due to its flexibility and accessibility. Personalization, adapted to the needs of individual learners, is crucial for enhancing the learning experience, particularly in online settings. A key aspect of personalization is providing learners with answers customized to their specific questions. This paper therefore explores the potential of Large Language Models ( LLMs) to generate personalized answers to learners' questions, thereby enhancing engagement and reducing the workload on educators. To evaluate the effectiveness of LLMs in this context, we conducted a comprehensive study using the StackExchange platform in two distinct areas: language learning and programming. We developed a framework and a dataset for validating automatically generated personalized answers. Subsequently, we generated personalized answers using different strategies, including 0-shot, 1-shot, and few-shot scenarios. The generated answers were evaluated using three methods: 1. BERTScore, 2. LLM evaluation, and 3. human evaluation. Our findings indicated that providing LLMs with examples of desired answers (from the learner or similar learners) can significantly enhance the LLMs' ability to tailor responses to individual learners' needs.

Test-time scaling paradigms have significantly advanced the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) on complex tasks. Despite their empirical success, theoretical understanding of the sample efficiency of various test-time strategies -- such as self-consistency, best-of-$n$, and self-correction -- remains limited. In this work, we first establish a separation result between two repeated sampling strategies: self-consistency requires $Θ(1/Δ^2)$ samples to produce the correct answer, while best-of-$n$ only needs $Θ(1/Δ)$, where $Δ< 1$ denotes the probability gap between the correct and second most likely answers. Next, we present an expressiveness result for the self-correction approach with verifier feedback: it enables Transformers to simulate online learning over a pool of experts at test time. Therefore, a single Transformer architecture can provably solve multiple tasks without prior knowledge of the specific task associated with a user query, extending the representation theory of Transformers from single-task to multi-task settings. Finally, we empirically validate our theoretical results, demonstrating the practical effectiveness of self-correction methods.

Determining whether an algorithmic decision-making system discriminates against a specific demographic typically involves comparing a single point estimate of a fairness metric against a predefined threshold. This practice is statistically brittle: it ignores sampling error and treats small demographic subgroups the same as large ones. The problem intensifies in intersectional analyses, where multiple sensitive attributes are considered jointly, giving rise to a larger number of smaller groups. As these groups become more granular, the data representing them becomes too sparse for reliable estimation, and fairness metrics yield excessively wide confidence intervals, precluding meaningful conclusions about potential unfair treatments. In this paper, we introduce a unified, size-adaptive, hypothesis-testing framework that turns fairness assessment into an evidence-based statistical decision. Our contribution is twofold. (i) For sufficiently large subgroups, we prove a Central-Limit result for the statistical parity difference, leading to analytic confidence intervals and a Wald test whose type-I (false positive) error is guaranteed at level $α$. (ii) For the long tail of small intersectional groups, we derive a fully Bayesian Dirichlet-multinomial estimator; Monte-Carlo credible intervals are calibrated for any sample size and naturally converge to Wald intervals as more data becomes available. We validate our approach empirically on benchmark datasets, demonstrating how our tests provide interpretable, statistically rigorous decisions under varying degrees of data availability and intersectionality.

Human capital (HC) is increasingly important to corporate value creation. Unlike other assets, however, HC is not currently subject to well-defined measurement or disclosure rules. We use a machine learning algorithm (word2vec) trained on a confirmed set of HC disclosures to develop a comprehensive list of HC-related keywords classified into five subcategories (DEI; health and safety; labor relations and culture; compensation and benefits; and demographics and other) that capture the multidimensional nature of HC management. We share our lexicon, corporate HC disclosures, and the Python code used to develop the lexicon, and we provide detailed examples of using our data and code, including for fine-tuning a BERT model. Researchers can use our HC lexicon (or modify the code to capture another construct of interest) with their samples of corporate communications to address pertinent HC questions. We close with a discussion of future research opportunities related to HC management and disclosure.

Recent advances in deep learning have significantly enhanced generative AI capabilities across text, images, and audio. However, automatically evaluating the quality of these generated outputs presents ongoing challenges. Although numerous automatic evaluation methods exist, current research lacks a systematic framework that comprehensively organizes these methods across text, visual, and audio modalities. To address this issue, we present a comprehensive review and a unified taxonomy of automatic evaluation methods for generated content across all three modalities; We identify five fundamental paradigms that characterize existing evaluation approaches across these domains. Our analysis begins by examining evaluation methods for text generation, where techniques are most mature. We then extend this framework to image and audio generation, demonstrating its broad applicability. Finally, we discuss promising directions for future research in cross-modal evaluation methodologies.

In this paper we present a sample treebank for Old English based on the UD Cairo sentences, collected and annotated as part of a classroom curriculum in Historical Linguistics. To collect the data, a sample of 20 sentences illustrating a range of syntactic constructions in the world's languages, we employ a combination of LLM prompting and searches in authentic Old English data. For annotation we assigned sentences to multiple students with limited prior exposure to UD, whose annotations we compare and adjudicate. Our results suggest that while current LLM outputs in Old English do not reflect authentic syntax, this can be mitigated by post-editing, and that although beginner annotators do not possess enough background to complete the task perfectly, taken together they can produce good results and learn from the experience. We also conduct preliminary parsing experiments using Modern English training data, and find that although performance on Old English is poor, parsing on annotated features (lemma, hyperlemma, gloss) leads to improved performance.