In specialized domains, humans often compare new problems against similar examples, highlight nuances, and draw conclusions instead of analyzing information in isolation. When applying reasoning in specialized contexts with LLMs on top of a RAG, the pipeline can capture contextually relevant information, but it is not designed to retrieve comparable cases or related problems. While RAG is effective at extracting factual information, its outputs in specialized reasoning tasks often remain generic, reflecting broad facts rather than context-specific insights. In finance, it results in generic risks that are true for the majority of companies. To address this limitation, we propose a peer-aware comparative inference layer on top of RAG. Our contrastive approach outperforms baseline RAG in text generation metrics such as ROUGE and BERTScore in comparison with human-generated equity research and risk.

Ensuring safety is a foundational requirement for large language models (LLMs). Achieving an appropriate balance between enhancing the utility of model outputs and mitigating their potential for harm is a complex and persistent challenge. Contemporary approaches frequently formalize this problem within the framework of Constrained Markov Decision Processes (CMDPs) and employ established CMDP optimization techniques. However, these methods exhibit two notable limitations. First, their reliance on reward and cost functions renders performance highly sensitive to the underlying scoring mechanism, which must capture semantic meaning rather than being triggered by superficial keywords. Second, CMDP-based training entails tuning dual-variable, a process that is both computationally expensive and does not provide any provable safety guarantee for a fixed dual variable that can be exploitable through adversarial jailbreaks. To overcome these limitations, we introduce Certifiable Safe-RLHF (CS-RLHF) that introduces a cost model trained on a large-scale corpus to assign semantically grounded safety scores. In contrast to the lagrangian-based approach, CS-RLHF adopts a rectified penalty-based formulation. This design draws on the theory of exact penalty functions in constrained optimization, wherein constraint satisfaction is enforced directly through a suitably chosen penalty term. With an appropriately scaled penalty, feasibility of the safety constraints can be guaranteed at the optimizer, eliminating the need for dual-variable updates. Empirical evaluation demonstrates that CS-RLHF outperforms state-of-the-art LLM model responses rendering at-least 5 times efficient against nominal and jail-breaking prompts

As military organisations consider integrating large language models (LLMs) into command and control (C2) systems for planning and decision support, understanding their behavioural tendencies is critical. This study develops a benchmarking framework for evaluating aspects of legal and moral risk in targeting behaviour by comparing LLMs acting as agents in multi-turn simulated conflict. We introduce four metrics grounded in International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and military doctrine: Civilian Target Rate (CTR) and Dual-use Target Rate (DTR) assess compliance with legal targeting principles, while Mean and Max Simulated Non-combatant Casualty Value (SNCV) quantify tolerance for civilian harm. We evaluate three frontier models, GPT-4o, Gemini-2.5, and LLaMA-3.1, through 90 multi-agent, multi-turn crisis simulations across three geographic regions. Our findings reveal that off-the-shelf LLMs exhibit concerning and unpredictable targeting behaviour in simulated conflict environments. All models violated the IHL principle of distinction by targeting civilian objects, with breach rates ranging from 16.7% to 66.7%. Harm tolerance escalated through crisis simulations with MeanSNCV increasing from 16.5 in early turns to 27.7 in late turns. Significant inter-model variation emerged: LLaMA-3.1 selected an average of 3.47 civilian strikes per simulation with MeanSNCV of 28.4, while Gemini-2.5 selected 0.90 civilian strikes with MeanSNCV of 17.6. These differences indicate that model selection for deployment constitutes a choice about acceptable legal and moral risk profiles in military operations. This work seeks to provide a proof-of-concept of potential behavioural risks that could emerge from the use of LLMs in Decision Support Systems (AI DSS) as well as a reproducible benchmarking framework with interpretable metrics for standardising pre-deployment testing.

The rapid growth of the Internet of Things (IoT) has expanded opportunities for innovation but also increased exposure to botnet-driven cyberattacks. Conventional detection methods often struggle with scalability, privacy, and adaptability in resource-constrained IoT environments. To address these challenges, we present a lightweight and privacy-preserving botnet detection framework based on federated learning. This approach enables distributed devices to collaboratively train models without exchanging raw data, thus maintaining user privacy while preserving detection accuracy. A communication-efficient aggregation strategy is introduced to reduce overhead, ensuring suitability for constrained IoT networks. Experiments on benchmark IoT botnet datasets demonstrate that the framework achieves high detection accuracy while substantially reducing communication costs. These findings highlight federated learning as a practical path toward scalable, secure, and privacy-aware intrusion detection for IoT ecosystems.

LLM-based agents are rapidly proliferating, yet the infrastructure for discovering, evaluating, and governing them remains fragmented compared to mature ecosystems like software package registries (e.g., npm) and model hubs (e.g., Hugging Face). Recent research and engineering works have begun to consider the requisite infrastructure, but so far they focus narrowly -- on distribution, naming, or protocol negotiation. However, considering broader software engineering requirements would improve open-source distribution and ease reuse. We therefore propose AgentHub, a research agenda for agent sharing. By framing the key challenges of capability clarity, lifecycle transparency, interoperability, governance, security, and workflow integration, AgentHub charts a community-wide agenda for building reliable and scalable agent ecosystems. Our vision is a future where agents can be shared, trusted, and composed as seamlessly as today's software libraries.

Humans are black boxes -- we cannot observe their neural processes, yet society functions by evaluating verifiable arguments. AI explainability should follow this principle: stakeholders need verifiable reasoning chains, not mechanistic transparency. We propose using structured argumentation to provide a level of explanation and verification neither interpretability nor LLM-generated explanation is able to offer. Our pipeline achieves state-of-the-art 94.44 macro F1 on the AAEC published train/test split (5.7 points above prior work) and $0.81$ macro F1, $\sim$0.07 above previous published results with comparable data setups, for Argumentative MicroTexts relation classification, converting LLM text into argument graphs and enabling verification at each inferential step. We demonstrate this idea on multi-agent risk assessment using the Structured What-If Technique, where specialized agents collaborate transparently to carry out risk assessment otherwise achieved by humans alone. Using Bipolar Assumption-Based Argumentation, we capture support/attack relationships, thereby enabling automatic hallucination detection via fact nodes attacking arguments. We also provide a verification mechanism that enables iterative refinement through test-time feedback without retraining. For easy deployment, we provide a Docker container for the fine-tuned AMT model, and the rest of the code with the Bipolar ABA Python package on GitHub.

A successful deep learning network is highly dependent not only on the training dataset, but the training algorithm used to condition the network for a given task. The loss function, dataset, and tuning of hyperparameters all play an essential role in training a network, yet there is not much discussion on the reliability or reproducibility of a training algorithm. With the rise in popularity of physics-informed loss functions, this raises the question of how reliable one's loss function is in conditioning a network to enforce a particular boundary condition. Reporting the model variation is needed to assess a loss function's ability to consistently train a network to obey a given boundary condition, and provides a fairer comparison among different methods. In this work, a Pix2Pix network predicting the stress fields of high elastic contrast composites is used as a case study. Several different loss functions enforcing stress equilibrium are implemented, with each displaying different levels of variation in convergence, accuracy, and enforcing stress equilibrium across many training sessions. Suggested practices in reporting model variation are also shared.

This paper examines the assessment challenges of Responsible AI (RAI) governance efforts in globally decentralized organizations through a case study collaboration between a leading research university and a multinational enterprise. While there are many proposed frameworks for RAI, their application in complex organizational settings with distributed decision-making authority remains underexplored. Our RAI assessment, conducted across multiple business units and AI use cases, reveals four key patterns that shape RAI implementation: (1) complex interplay between group-level guidance and local interpretation, (2) challenges translating abstract principles into operational practices, (3) regional and functional variation in implementation approaches, and (4) inconsistent accountability in risk oversight. Based on these findings, we propose an Adaptive RAI Governance (ARGO) Framework that balances central coordination with local autonomy through three interdependent layers: shared foundation standards, central advisory resources, and contextual local implementation. We contribute insights from academic-industry collaboration for RAI assessments, highlighting the importance of modular governance approaches that accommodate organizational complexity while maintaining alignment with responsible AI principles. These lessons offer practical guidance for organizations navigating the transition from RAI principles to operational practice within decentralized structures.

With the rapid growth of the aviation industry, there is a need for a large number of flight crew. How to select the right pilots in a cost-efficient manner has become an important research question. In the current study, twenty-three pilots were recruited from China Eastern Airlines, and 23 novices were from the community of Tsinghua University. A novel approach incorporating machine learning and virtual reality technology was applied to distinguish features between these participants with different flight skills. Results indicate that SVM with the MIC feature selection method consistently achieved the highest prediction performance on all metrics with an Accuracy of 0.93, an AUC of 0.96, and an F1 of 0.93, which outperforms four other classifier algorithms and two other feature selection methods. From the perspective of feature selection methods, the MIC method can select features with a nonlinear relationship to sampling labels, instead of a simple filter-out. Our new implementation of the SVM + MIC algorithm outperforms all existing pilot selection algorithms and perhaps provides the first implementation based on eye tracking and flight dynamics data. This study's VR simulation platforms and algorithms can be used for pilot selection and training.

Abstract--The United States spends more on healthcare than any other nation - nearly 17% of GDP as of the early 2020s - yet struggles with uneven access and outcomes [1] [2]. This paradox of high cost, variable quality, and inequitable access is often described by the "Iron Triangle" of healthcare [3], which posits that improvements in one dimension (access, cost, or quality) often come at the expense of the others. This paper explores how an Intelligent Healthcare Ecosystem (iHE) - an integrated system leveraging advanced technologies and data-driven innovation - can "bend" or even break this iron triangle, enabling simultaneous enhancements in access, cost-efficiency, and quality of care. We review historical and current trends in U.S. healthcare spending, including persistent waste and international comparisons, to underscore the need for transformative change. We then propose a conceptual model and strategic framework for iHE, incorporating emerging technologies such as generative AI and large language models (LLMs), federated learning, interoperability standards (FHIR) and nationwide networks (TEFCA), and digital twins. We introduce an updated healthcare value equation that integrates all three corners of the iron triangle, and we hypothesize that an intelligently coordinated ecosystem can maximize this value by delivering high-quality care to more people at lower cost. Methods include a narrative synthesis of recent literature and policy reports, and Results highlight key components and enabling technologies of an iHE. We discuss how such ecosystems can reduce waste, personalize care, enhance interoperability, and support value-based models, all while addressing challenges like privacy, bias, and stakeholder adoption. The paper is formatted per MDPI guidelines, with APA-style numbered references, illustrative figures (U.S. spending trends, waste breakdown, international spending comparison, conceptual models), equations, and a structured layout. Our findings suggest that embracing an Intelligent Healthcare Ecosystem is pivotal for optimizing the long-standing trade-offs in healthcare's iron triangle, moving towards a system that is more accessible, affordable, and of higher quality for all.