In real-word scenarios, person re-identification (ReID) expects to identify a personof-interest via the descriptive query, regardless of whether the query is a single modality or a combination of multiple modalities. However, existing methods and datasets remain constrained to limited modalities, failing to meet this requirement. Therefore, we investigate a new challenging problem called Omni Multi-modal Person Re-identification (OM-ReID), which aims to achieve effective retrieval with varying multi-modal queries. To address dataset scarcity, we construct ORBench, the first high-quality multi-modal dataset comprising 1,000 unique identities across five modalities: RGB, infrared, color pencil, sketch, and textual description. This dataset also has significant superiority in terms of diversity, such as the painting perspectives and textual information. It could serve as an ideal platform for followup investigations in OM-ReID.

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have significantly enhanced text generation capabilities, yet evaluating their performance in generative writing remains a challenge. Existing benchmarks primarily focus on generic text generation or limited in writing tasks, failing to capture the diverse requirements of high-quality written contents across various domains. To bridge this gap, we present WritingBench, a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs across 6 core writing domains and 100 subdomains.We further propose a querydependent evaluation framework that empowers LLMs to dynamically generate instance-specific assessment criteria. This framework is complemented by a finetuned critic model for criteria-aware scoring, enabling evaluations in style, format and length. The framework's validity is further demonstrated by its data curation capability, which enables a 7B-parameter model to outperform the performance of GPT-4o in writing. We open-source the benchmark, along with evaluation tools and modular framework components, to advance the development of LLMs in writing.

Patent examination remains an ongoing challenge in the NLP literature even after the advent of large language models (LLMs), as it requires an extensive yet nuanced human judgment on whether a submitted claim meets the statutory standards of novelty and non-obviousness against previously granted claims--prior art--in expert domains. Previous NLP studies have approached this challenge as a prediction task (e.g., forecasting grant outcomes) with high-level proxies such as similarity metrics or classifiers trained on historical labels. However, this approach often overlooks the step-by-step evaluations that examiners must make with profound information, including rationales for the decisions provided in office actions documents, which also makes it harder to measure the current state of techniques in patent review processes. To fill this gap, we construct PANORAMA, a dataset of 8,143 U.S. patent examination records that preserves the full decision trails, including original applications, all cited references, Non-Final Rejections, and Notices of Allowance. Also, PANORAMA decomposes the trails into sequential benchmarks that emulate patent professionals' patent review processes and allow researchers to examine large language models' capabilities at each step of them. Our findings indicate that, although LLMs are relatively effective at retrieving relevant prior art and pinpointing the pertinent paragraphs, they struggle to assess the novelty and non-obviousness of patent claims. We discuss these results and argue that advancing NLP, including LLMs, in the patent domain requires a deeper understanding of real-world patent examination.

Multimodal symbolic logical reasoning, which aims to deduce new facts from multimodal input via formal logic, is critical in high-stakes applications such as autonomous driving and medical diagnosis, as its rigorous, deterministic reasoning helps prevent serious consequences. To evaluate such capabilities of current state-of-the-art vision language models (VLMs), we introduce MuSLR, the first multimodal symbolic logical reasoning grounded in formal logical rules. We curate a benchmark dataset for MuSLR comprising 1,093 instances across 7 domains, including 35 atomic symbolic logic and 976 logical combinations, with reasoning depths ranging from 2 to 9. We evaluate 7 state-of-the-art VLMs on our benchmark and find that they all struggle with multimodal symbolic reasoning, with the best model, GPT-4.1, achieving only 46.8%. Thus, we propose LogiCAM, a modular framework that applies formal logical rules to multimodal inputs, boosting GPT-4.1's

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world applications, ensuring the safety of their outputs during decoding has become a critical challenge.

Large Language Model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems show promise for automating real-world tasks but struggle to transfer across domains due to their domain-specific nature. Current approaches face two critical shortcomings: they require complete architectural redesign and full retraining of all components when applied to new domains. We introduce WORKFORCE, a hierarchical multi-agent framework that decouples strategic planning from specialized execution through a modular architecture comprising: (i) a domain-agnostic Planner for task decomposition, (ii) a Coordinator for subtask management, and (iii) specialized Workers with domain-specific tool-calling capabilities.

Mediation analysis is essential for decomposing the causal effect of a treatment into direct and indirect pathways. However, many practical settings rely on the stringent assumption that recanting witnesses, defined as treatment-induced mediator-outcome confounders, are either absent or fully known a priori. Such a requirement is often untenable, especially when these variables remain unobservable due to measurement difficulties or privacy constraints. In this paper, we leverage proximal causal inference to develop three novel identification strategies to address the challenge of identifying path-specific effects in the presence of unknown recanting witnesses. Building on this, we develop a semiparametric inference framework that derives the efficient influence function and proposes a proximal multiply robust estimator, which remains consistent if at least one set of nuisance models is correctly specified. When all nuisance models are correctly specified and converge at appropriate rates, the estimator is asymptotically normal and achieves the semiparametric efficiency bound. We provide a minimax optimization-based debiased machine learning procedure for point estimation and constructing valid confidence intervals. The performance of the proposed methods is demonstrated by simulation studies and a real data application.

Graph Machine Learning is essential for understanding and analyzing relational data. However, privacy-sensitive applications demand the ability to efficiently remove sensitive information from trained graph neural networks (GNNs), avoiding the unnecessary time and space overhead caused by retraining models from scratch. To address this issue, Graph Unlearning (GU) has emerged as a critical solution to support dynamic graph updates while ensuring privacy compliance. Unlike machine unlearning in computer vision or other fields, GU faces unique difficulties due to the non-Euclidean nature of graph data and the recursive message-passing mechanism of GNNs. Additionally, the diversity of downstream tasks and the complexity of unlearning requests further amplify these challenges. Despite the proliferation of diverse GU strategies, the absence of a benchmark providing fair comparisons for GU, and the limited flexibility in combining downstream tasks and unlearning requests, have yielded inconsistencies in evaluations, hindering the development of this domain. To fill this gap, we present OpenGU, the first GU benchmark, where 16 SOTAGU algorithms and 37 multi-domain datasets are integrated, enabling various downstream tasks with 13 GNN backbones when responding to flexible unlearning requests. Through extensive experimentation, we have drawn 10crucial conclusions about existing GU methods, while also gaining valuable insights into their limitations, shedding light on potential avenues for future research.

Despite the impressive performance of general-purpose large language models (LLMs), they often require fine-tuning or post-training to excel at specific tasks. For instance, large reasoning models (LRMs), such as the DeepSeek-R1 series, demonstrate strong reasoning capabilities after post-training different general large language models on diverse chain-of-thought (CoT) datasets. However, this additional training frequently comes at the cost of reduced safety, as the fine-tuned or post-trained models tend to exhibit more harmful behaviors compared with the regular LLMs before post-training or fine-tuning, potentially leading to harmful outcomes due to their enhanced capabilities. Taking LRMs as an example, we first investigate the underlying cause of this safety degradation in this paper. Our analysis reveals that post-training can mask the original safety mechanisms of the base LLM, while over-amplifying representations related to their post-training ability. But luckily, we also find that LRMs' safety mechanisms still exist instead of being removed during their post-training. Based on these findings, we propose a lightweight and cost-effective solution called SafeReAct that restores the suppressed safety behaviors by aligning with LoRA adapters on a few layers. Experiments on four state-of-the-art LRMs show that our method significantly improves safety on harmful prompts without compromising reasoning performance. Besides LRMs, additional results on other domain-specific LLMs, like medical models, further confirm the generality and effectiveness of our approach.

We study a two-institution stable matching model in which candidates from two distinct groups are evaluated using partially correlated signals that are groupbiased. This extends prior work (which assumes institutions evaluate candidates in an identical manner) to a more realistic setting in which institutions rely on overlapping, but independently processed, criteria. These evaluations could consist of a variety of informative tools such as standardized tests, shared recommendation systems, or AI-based assessments with local noise. Two key parameters govern evaluations: the bias parameter β (0,1], which models systematic disadvantage faced by one group, and the correlation parameter γ [0,1], which captures the alignment between institutional rankings. We study the representation ratio R(β,γ), i.e., the ratio of disadvantaged to advantaged candidates selected by the matching process in this setting.