The application scope of Large Language Models (LLMs) continues to expand, leading to increasing interest in personalized LLMs that align with human values. However, aligning these models with individual values raises significant safety concerns, as certain values may correlate with harmful information. In this paper, we identify specific safety risks associated with value-aligned LLMs and investigate the psychological principles behind these challenges. Our findings reveal two key insights. (1) Value-aligned LLMs are more prone to harmful behavior compared to non-fine-tuned models and exhibit slightly higher risks in traditional safety evaluations than other fine-tuned models. (2) These safety issues arise because value-aligned LLMs genuinely generate text according to the aligned values, which can amplify harmful outcomes. Using a dataset with detailed safety categories, we find significant correlations between value alignment and safety risks, supported by psychological hypotheses. This study offers insights into the "black box" of value alignment and proposes in-context alignment methods to enhance the safety of value-aligned LLMs.

The expansion of the Internet of Things (IoT) in the battlefield, Internet of Battlefield Things (IoBT), gives rise to new opportunities for enhancing situational awareness. To increase the potential of IoBT for situational awareness in critical decision making, the data from these devices must be processed into consumer-ready information objects, and made available to consumers on demand. To address this challenge we propose a workflow that makes use of natural language processing (NLP) to query a database technology and return a response in natural language. Our solution utilizes Large Language Models (LLMs) that are sized for edge devices to perform NLP as well as graphical databases which are well suited for dynamic connected networks which are pervasive in the IoBT. Our architecture employs LLMs for both mapping questions in natural language to Cypher database queries as well as to summarize the database output back to the user in natural language. We evaluate several medium sized LLMs for both of these tasks on a database representing publicly available data from the US Army's Multipurpose Sensing Area (MSA) at the Jornada Range in Las Cruces, NM. We observe that Llama 3.1 (8 billion parameters) outperforms the other models across all the considered metrics. Most importantly, we note that, unlike current methods, our two step approach allows the relaxation of the Exact Match (EM) requirement of the produced Cypher queries with ground truth code and, in this way, it achieves a 19.4% increase in accuracy. Our workflow lays the ground work for deploying LLMs on edge devices to enable natural language interactions with databases containing information objects for critical decision making.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used across sectors, yet their alignment with International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is not well understood. This study evaluates eight leading LLMs on their ability to refuse prompts that explicitly violate these legal frameworks, focusing also on helpfulness - how clearly and constructively refusals are communicated. While most models rejected unlawful requests, the clarity and consistency of their responses varied. By revealing the model's rationale and referencing relevant legal or safety principles, explanatory refusals clarify the system's boundaries, reduce ambiguity, and help prevent misuse. A standardised system-level safety prompt significantly improved the quality of the explanations expressed within refusals in most models, highlighting the effectiveness of lightweight interventions. However, more complex prompts involving technical language or requests for code revealed ongoing vulnerabilities. These findings contribute to the development of safer, more transparent AI systems and propose a benchmark to evaluate the compliance of LLM with IHL.

Extreme events, such as market crashes, natural disasters, and pandemics, are rare but catastrophic, often triggering cascading failures across interconnected systems. Accurate prediction and early warning can help minimize losses and improve preparedness. While data-driven methods offer powerful capabilities for extreme event modeling, they require abundant training data, yet extreme event data is inherently scarce, creating a fundamental challenge. Synthetic data generation has emerged as a powerful solution. However, existing surveys focus on general data with privacy preservation emphasis, rather than extreme events' unique performance requirements. This survey provides the first overview of synthetic data generation for extreme events. We systematically review generative modeling techniques and large language models, particularly those enhanced by statistical theory as well as specialized training and sampling mechanisms to capture heavy-tailed distributions. We summarize benchmark datasets and introduce a tailored evaluation framework covering statistical, dependence, visual, and task-oriented metrics. A central contribution is our in-depth analysis of each metric's applicability in extremeness and domain-specific adaptations, providing actionable guidance for model evaluation in extreme settings. We categorize key application domains and identify underexplored areas like behavioral finance, wildfires, earthquakes, windstorms, and infectious outbreaks. Finally, we outline open challenges, providing a structured foundation for advancing synthetic rare-event research.

Temporal Knowledge Graphs (TKGs) store temporal facts with quadruple formats (s, p, o, t). Existing Temporal Knowledge Graph Embedding (TKGE) models perform link prediction tasks in transductive or semi-inductive settings, which means the entities, relations, and temporal information in the test graph are fully or partially observed during training. Such reliance on seen elements during inference limits the models' ability to transfer to new domains and generalize to real-world scenarios. A central limitation is the difficulty in learning representations for entities, relations, and timestamps that are transferable and not tied to dataset-specific vocabularies. To overcome these limitations, we introduce the first fully-inductive approach to temporal knowledge graph link prediction. Our model employs sinusoidal positional encodings to capture fine-grained temporal patterns and generates adaptive entity and relation representations using message passing conditioned on both local and global temporal contexts. Our model design is agnostic to temporal granularity and time span, effectively addressing temporal discrepancies across TKGs and facilitating time-aware structural information transfer. As a pretrained, scalable, and transferable model, POSTRA demonstrates strong zero-shot performance on unseen temporal knowledge graphs, effectively generalizing to novel entities, relations, and timestamps. Extensive theoretical analysis and empirical results show that a single pretrained model can improve zero-shot performance on various inductive temporal reasoning scenarios, marking a significant step toward a foundation model for temporal KGs.

Natural Language Processing (NLP) has become an increasingly powerful tool in finance, transforming how researchers and practitioners extract predictive signals from unstructured text. With the rise of real-time news feeds and scalable NLP models, media content now plays a central role in market forecasting, risk management, and behavioral analysis. This paper contributes to that growing body of literature by introducing a novel framework for measuring media-driven attention in equities: the Hype Index. Our approach begins with the construction of a News Count-Based Hype Index, which quantifies the relative media exposure of each stock or sector by calculating its share of daily financial news coverage within the S&P 100 universe. This measure captures how disproportionately a given asset appears in financial media, independent of its economic footprint. To address size-related bias and better isolate disproportionate attention, we introduce the Capitalization Adjusted Hype Index. Defined as the ratio of a stock's or sector's news count weight to its market capitalization weight within its peer cluster, this adjusted index reflects deviations from a benchmark of proportionality. In doing so, it highlights assets that receive media attention in excess of what would be expected based on their economic size.

Is BERTopic Better than PLSA for Extracting Key Topics in Aviation Safety Reports? Abstract -- This study compares the effectiveness of BERTopic and Probabilistic Latent Semantic Analysis (PLSA) in extracting meaningful topics from aviation safety reports aiming to enhance the understanding of patterns in aviation incident data. Using a dataset of o ver 36,000 National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) reports from 2000 - 2020, BERTopic employed transformer - based embeddings and hierarchical clustering, while PLSA utilized probabilistic modelling through the Expectation - Maximization (EM) algori thm. Results showed that BERTopic outperformed PLSA in topic coherence, achieving a C_v score of 0.41 compared to PLSA's 0.37, while also demonstrating superior interpretability as validated by aviation safety experts. These findings underscore the advantages of modern transformer - based approaches in analyzing complex aviatio n datasets, paving the way for enhanced insights and informed decision - making in aviation safety. Future work will explore hybrid models, multilingual datasets, and advanced clustering techniques to further improve topic modelling in this domain . The analysis of aviation safety reports is critical for identifying recurring issues and implementing measures to improve flight safety [1] .

We aim at designing language agents with greater autonomy for crystal materials discovery. While most of existing studies restrict the agents to perform specific tasks within predefined workflows, we aim to automate workflow planning given high-level goals and scientist intuition. To this end, we propose Materials Agent unifying Planning, Physics, and Scientists, known as MAPPS. MAPPS consists of a Workflow Planner, a Tool Code Generator, and a Scientific Mediator. The Workflow Planner uses large language models (LLMs) to generate structured and multi-step workflows. The Tool Code Generator synthesizes executable Python code for various tasks, including invoking a force field foundation model that encodes physics. The Scientific Mediator coordinates communications, facilitates scientist feedback, and ensures robustness through error reflection and recovery. By unifying planning, physics, and scientists, MAPPS enables flexible and reliable materials discovery with greater autonomy, achieving a five-fold improvement in stability, uniqueness, and novelty rates compared with prior generative models when evaluated on the MP-20 data. We provide extensive experiments across diverse tasks to show that MAPPS is a promising framework for autonomous materials discovery.

Can LLMs accurately adjust their confidence when facing opposition? Building on previous studies measuring calibration on static fact-based question-answering tasks, we evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) in a dynamic, adversarial debate setting, uniquely combining two realistic factors: (a) a multi-turn format requiring models to update beliefs as new information emerges, and (b) a zero-sum structure to control for task-related uncertainty, since mutual high-confidence claims imply systematic overconfidence. We organized 60 three-round policy debates among ten state-of-the-art LLMs, with models privately rating their confidence (0-100) in winning after each round. We observed five concerning patterns: (1) Systematic overconfidence: models began debates with average initial confidence of 72.9% vs. a rational 50% baseline. (2) Confidence escalation: rather than reducing confidence as debates progressed, debaters increased their win probabilities, averaging 83% by the final round. (3) Mutual overestimation: in 61.7% of debates, both sides simultaneously claimed >=75% probability of victory, a logical impossibility. (4) Persistent self-debate bias: models debating identical copies increased confidence from 64.1% to 75.2%; even when explicitly informed their chance of winning was exactly 50%, confidence still rose (from 50.0% to 57.1%). (5) Misaligned private reasoning: models' private scratchpad thoughts sometimes differed from their public confidence ratings, raising concerns about faithfulness of chain-of-thought reasoning. These results suggest LLMs lack the ability to accurately self-assess or update their beliefs in dynamic, multi-turn tasks; a major concern as LLMs are now increasingly deployed without careful review in assistant and agentic roles. Code for our experiments is available at https://github.com/pradyuprasad/llms_overconfidence

As Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly participate in human-AI interactions, evaluating their Theory of Mind (ToM) capabilities - particularly their ability to track dynamic mental states - becomes crucial. While existing benchmarks assess basic ToM abilities, they predominantly focus on static snapshots of mental states, overlooking the temporal evolution that characterizes real-world social interactions. We present \textsc{DynToM}, a novel benchmark specifically designed to evaluate LLMs' ability to understand and track the temporal progression of mental states across interconnected scenarios. Through a systematic four-step framework, we generate 1,100 social contexts encompassing 5,500 scenarios and 78,100 questions, each validated for realism and quality. Our comprehensive evaluation of ten state-of-the-art LLMs reveals that their average performance underperforms humans by 44.7\%, with performance degrading significantly when tracking and reasoning about the shift of mental states. This performance gap highlights fundamental limitations in current LLMs' ability to model the dynamic nature of human mental states.