As connected and automated transportation systems evolve, there is a growing need for federal and state authorities to revise existing laws and develop new statutes to address emerging cybersecurity and data privacy challenges. This study introduces a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) based Large Language Model (LLM) framework designed to support policymakers by extracting relevant legal content and generating accurate, inquiry-specific responses. The framework focuses on reducing hallucinations in LLMs by using a curated set of domain-specific questions to guide response generation. By incorporating retrieval mechanisms, the system enhances the factual grounding and specificity of its outputs. Our analysis shows that the proposed RAG-based LLM outperforms leading commercial LLMs across four evaluation metrics: AlignScore, ParaScore, BERTScore, and ROUGE, demonstrating its effectiveness in producing reliable and context-aware legal insights. This approach offers a scalable, AI-driven method for legislative analysis, supporting efforts to update legal frameworks in line with advancements in transportation technologies.

AI systems have increasingly become our gateways to the Internet. We argue that just as advertising has driven the monetization of web search and social media, so too will commercial incentives shape the content served by AI. Unlike traditional media, however, the outputs of these systems are dynamic, personalized, and lack clear provenance -- raising concerns for transparency and regulation. In this paper, we envision how commercial content could be delivered through generative AI-based systems. Based on the requirements of key stakeholders -- advertisers, consumers, and platforms -- we propose design principles for commercially-influenced AI systems. We then outline high-level strategies for end users to identify and mitigate commercial biases from model outputs. Finally, we conclude with open questions and a call to action towards these goals.

Large Language Models (LLMs), despite their advancements, are fundamentally limited by their static parametric knowledge, hindering performance on tasks requiring open-domain up-to-date information. While enabling LLMs to interact with external knowledge environments is a promising solution, current efforts primarily address closed-end problems. Open-ended questions, which characterized by lacking a standard answer or providing non-unique and diverse answers, remain underexplored. To bridge this gap, we present O$^2$-Searcher, a novel search agent leveraging reinforcement learning to effectively tackle both open-ended and closed-ended questions in the open domain. O$^2$-Searcher leverages an efficient, locally simulated search environment for dynamic knowledge acquisition, effectively decoupling the external world knowledge from model's sophisticated reasoning processes. It employs a unified training mechanism with meticulously designed reward functions, enabling the agent to identify problem types and adapt different answer generation strategies. Furthermore, to evaluate performance on complex open-ended tasks, we construct O$^2$-QA, a high-quality benchmark featuring 300 manually curated, multi-domain open-ended questions with associated web page caches. Extensive experiments show that O$^2$-Searcher, using only a 3B model, significantly surpasses leading LLM agents on O$^2$-QA. It also achieves SOTA results on various closed-ended QA benchmarks against similarly-sized models, while performing on par with much larger ones.

Efficient multi-hop reasoning requires Large Language Models (LLMs) based agents to acquire high-value external knowledge iteratively. Previous work has explored reinforcement learning (RL) to train LLMs to perform search-based document retrieval, achieving notable improvements in QA performance, but underperform on complex, multi-hop QA resulting from the sparse rewards from global signal only. To address this gap in existing research, we introduce StepSearch, a framework for search LLMs that trained with step-wise proximal policy optimization method. It consists of richer and more detailed intermediate search rewards and token-level process supervision based on information gain and redundancy penalties to better guide each search step. We constructed a fine-grained question-answering dataset containing sub-question-level search trajectories based on open source datasets through a set of data pipeline method. On standard multi-hop QA benchmarks, it significantly outperforms global-reward baselines, achieving 11.2% and 4.2% absolute improvements for 3B and 7B models over various search with RL baselines using only 19k training data, demonstrating the effectiveness of fine-grained, stepwise supervision in optimizing deep search LLMs. Our code will be released on https://github.com/Zillwang/StepSearch.

The safety and reliability of Automated Driving Systems (ADS) are paramount, necessitating rigorous testing methodologies to uncover potential failures before deployment. Traditional testing approaches often prioritize either natural scenario sampling or safety-critical scenario generation, resulting in overly simplistic or unrealistic hazardous tests. In practice, the demand for natural scenarios (e.g., when evaluating the ADS's reliability in real-world conditions), critical scenarios (e.g., when evaluating safety in critical situations), or somewhere in between (e.g., when testing the ADS in regions with less civilized drivers) varies depending on the testing objectives. To address this issue, we propose the On-demand Scenario Generation (OSG) Framework, which generates diverse scenarios with varying risk levels. Achieving the goal of OSG is challenging due to the complexity of quantifying the criticalness and naturalness stemming from intricate vehicle-environment interactions, as well as the need to maintain scenario diversity across various risk levels. OSG learns from real-world traffic datasets and employs a Risk Intensity Regulator to quantitatively control the risk level. It also leverages an improved heuristic search method to ensure scenario diversity. We evaluate OSG on the Carla simulators using various ADSs. We verify OSG's ability to generate scenarios with different risk levels and demonstrate its necessity by comparing accident types across risk levels. With the help of OSG, we are now able to systematically and objectively compare the performance of different ADSs based on different risk levels.

While Large Language Models have shown promise in cybersecurity applications, their effectiveness in identifying security threats within cloud deployments remains unexplored. This paper introduces AWS Cloud Security Engineering Eval, a novel dataset for evaluating LLMs cloud security threat modeling capabilities. ACSE-Eval contains 100 production grade AWS deployment scenarios, each featuring detailed architectural specifications, Infrastructure as Code implementations, documented security vulnerabilities, and associated threat modeling parameters. Our dataset enables systemic assessment of LLMs abilities to identify security risks, analyze attack vectors, and propose mitigation strategies in cloud environments. Our evaluations on ACSE-Eval demonstrate that GPT 4.1 and Gemini 2.5 Pro excel at threat identification, with Gemini 2.5 Pro performing optimally in 0-shot scenarios and GPT 4.1 showing superior results in few-shot settings. While GPT 4.1 maintains a slight overall performance advantage, Claude 3.7 Sonnet generates the most semantically sophisticated threat models but struggles with threat categorization and generalization. To promote reproducibility and advance research in automated cybersecurity threat analysis, we open-source our dataset, evaluation metrics, and methodologies.

Ensuring the safety of large language models (LLMs) is critical for responsible deployment, yet existing evaluations often prioritize performance over identifying failure modes. We introduce Phare, a multilingual diagnostic framework to probe and evaluate LLM behavior across three critical dimensions: hallucination and reliability, social biases, and harmful content generation. Our evaluation of 17 state-of-the-art LLMs reveals patterns of systematic vulnerabilities across all safety dimensions, including sycophancy, prompt sensitivity, and stereotype reproduction. By highlighting these specific failure modes rather than simply ranking models, Phare provides researchers and practitioners with actionable insights to build more robust, aligned, and trustworthy language systems.

We present GeoGrid-Bench, a benchmark designed to evaluate the ability of foundation models to understand geo-spatial data in the grid structure. Geo-spatial datasets pose distinct challenges due to their dense numerical values, strong spatial and temporal dependencies, and unique multimodal representations including tabular data, heatmaps, and geographic visualizations. To assess how foundation models can support scientific research in this domain, GeoGrid-Bench features large-scale, real-world data covering 16 climate variables across 150 locations and extended time frames. The benchmark includes approximately 3,200 question-answer pairs, systematically generated from 8 domain expert-curated templates to reflect practical tasks encountered by human scientists. These range from basic queries at a single location and time to complex spatiotemporal comparisons across regions and periods. Our evaluation reveals that vision-language models perform best overall, and we provide a fine-grained analysis of the strengths and limitations of different foundation models in different geo-spatial tasks. This benchmark offers clearer insights into how foundation models can be effectively applied to geo-spatial data analysis and used to support scientific research.

Recent studies have uncovered a troubling vulnerability in the fine-tuning stage of large language models (LLMs): even fine-tuning on entirely benign datasets can lead to a significant increase in the harmfulness of LLM outputs. Building on this finding, our red teaming study takes this threat one step further by developing a more effective attack. Specifically, we analyze and identify samples within benign datasets that contribute most to safety degradation, then fine-tune LLMs exclusively on these samples. We approach this problem from an outlier detection perspective and propose Self-Inf-N, to detect and extract outliers for fine-tuning. Our findings reveal that fine-tuning LLMs on 100 outlier samples selected by Self-Inf-N in the benign datasets severely compromises LLM safety alignment. Extensive experiments across seven mainstream LLMs demonstrate that our attack exhibits high transferability across different architectures and remains effective in practical scenarios. Alarmingly, our results indicate that most existing mitigation strategies fail to defend against this attack, underscoring the urgent need for more robust alignment safeguards. Codes are available at https://github.com/GuanZihan/Benign-Samples-Matter.

As large language models (LLMs) continue to advance in capabilities, it is essential to assess how they perform on established benchmarks. In this study, we present a suite of experiments to assess the performance of modern LLMs (ranging from 3B to 90B+ parameters) on CaseHOLD, a legal benchmark dataset for identifying case holdings. Our experiments demonstrate scaling effects - performance on this task improves with model size, with more capable models like GPT4o and AmazonNovaPro achieving macro F1 scores of 0.744 and 0.720 respectively. These scores are competitive with the best published results on this dataset, and do not require any technically sophisticated model training, fine-tuning or few-shot prompting. To ensure that these strong results are not due to memorization of judicial opinions contained in the training data, we develop and utilize a novel citation anonymization test that preserves semantic meaning while ensuring case names and citations are fictitious. Models maintain strong performance under these conditions (macro F1 of 0.728), suggesting the performance is not due to rote memorization. These findings demonstrate both the promise and current limitations of LLMs for legal tasks with important implications for the development and measurement of automated legal analytics and legal benchmarks.