The remarkable language ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) stems from extensive training on vast datasets, often including copyrighted material, which raises serious concerns about unauthorized use. While Membership Inference Attacks (MIAs) offer potential solutions for detecting such violations, existing approaches face critical limitations and challenges due to LLMs' inherent overconfidence, limited access to ground truth training data, and reliance on empirically determined thresholds. We present COPYCHECK, a novel framework that leverages uncertainty signals to detect whether copyrighted content was used in LLM training sets. Our method turns LLM overconfidence from a limitation into an asset by capturing uncertainty patterns that reliably distinguish between ``seen" (training data) and ``unseen" (non-training data) content. COPYCHECK further implements a two-fold strategy: (1) strategic segmentation of files into smaller snippets to reduce dependence on large-scale training data, and (2) uncertainty-guided unsupervised clustering to eliminate the need for empirically tuned thresholds. Experiment results show that COPYCHECK achieves an average balanced accuracy of 90.1% on LLaMA 7b and 91.6% on LLaMA2 7b in detecting seen files. Compared to the SOTA baseline, COPYCHECK achieves over 90% relative improvement, reaching up to 93.8\% balanced accuracy. It further exhibits strong generalizability across architectures, maintaining high performance on GPT-J 6B. This work presents the first application of uncertainty for copyright detection in LLMs, offering practical tools for training data transparency.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong reasoning abilities across specialized domains, motivating research into their application to legal reasoning. However, existing legal benchmarks often conflate factual recall with genuine inference, fragment the reasoning process, and overlook the quality of reasoning. To address these limitations, we introduce MSLR, the first Chinese multi-step legal reasoning dataset grounded in real-world judicial decision making. MSLR adopts the IRAC framework (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) to model structured expert reasoning from official legal documents. In addition, we design a scalable Human-LLM collaborative annotation pipeline that efficiently produces fine-grained step-level reasoning annotations and provides a reusable methodological framework for multi-step reasoning datasets. Evaluation of multiple LLMs on MSLR shows only moderate performance, highlighting the challenges of adapting to complex legal reasoning. Further experiments demonstrate that Self-Initiated Chain-of-Thought prompts generated by models autonomously improve reasoning coherence and quality, outperforming human-designed prompts. MSLR contributes to advancing LLM reasoning and Chain-of-Thought strategies and offers open resources for future research. The dataset and code are available at https://github.com/yuwenhan07/MSLR-Bench and https://law.sjtu.edu.cn/flszyjzx/index.html.

Frontier AI systems require governance mechanisms that can verify internal alignment, not just behavioral compliance. Private governance mechanisms audits, certification, insurance, and procurement are emerging to complement public regulation, but they require technical substrates that generate verifiable causal evidence about model behavior. This paper argues that mechanistic interpretability provides this substrate. We frame interpretability not as post-hoc explanation but as a design constraint embedding auditability, provenance, and bounded transparency within model architectures. Integrating causal abstraction theory and empirical benchmarks such as MIB and LoBOX, we outline how interpretability-first models can underpin private assurance pipelines and role-calibrated transparency frameworks. This reframing situates interpretability as infrastructure for private AI governance bridging the gap between technical reliability and institutional accountability.

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world applications, the need to selectively remove unwanted knowledge while preserving model utility has become paramount. Recent work has explored sparse autoencoders (SAEs) to perform precise interventions on monosemantic features. However, most SAE-based methods operate at inference time, which does not create persistent changes in the model's parameters. Such interventions can be bypassed or reversed by malicious actors with parameter access. We introduce CRISP, a parameter-efficient method for persistent concept unlearning using SAEs. CRISP automatically identifies salient SAE features across multiple layers and suppresses their activations. We experiment with two LLMs and show that our method outperforms prior approaches on safety-critical unlearning tasks from the WMDP benchmark, successfully removing harmful knowledge while preserving general and in-domain capabilities. Feature-level analysis reveals that CRISP achieves semantically coherent separation between target and benign concepts, allowing precise suppression of the target features.

Argument summarization aims to generate concise, structured representations of complex, multi-perspective debates. While recent work has advanced the identification and clustering of argumentative components, the generation stage remains underexplored. Existing approaches typically rely on single-pass generation, offering limited support for factual correction or structural refinement. To address this gap, we introduce Arg-LLaDA, a novel large language diffusion framework that iteratively improves summaries via sufficiency-guided remasking and regeneration. Our method combines a flexible masking controller with a sufficiency-checking module to identify and revise unsupported, redundant, or incomplete spans, yielding more faithful, concise, and coherent outputs. Empirical results on two benchmark datasets demonstrate that Arg-LLaDA surpasses state-of-the-art baselines in 7 out of 10 automatic evaluation metrics. In addition, human evaluations reveal substantial improvements across core dimensions, coverage, faithfulness, and conciseness, validating the effectiveness of our iterative, sufficiency-aware generation strategy.

Following the successful paradigm shift of large language models, leveraging pre-training on a massive corpus of data and fine-tuning on different downstream tasks, generalist models have made their foray into computer vision. The introduction of Segment Anything Model (SAM) set a milestone on segmentation of natural images, inspiring the design of a multitude of architectures for medical image segmentation. In this survey we offer a comprehensive and in-depth investigation on generalist models for medical image segmentation. We start with an introduction on the fundamentals concepts underpinning their development. Then, we provide a taxonomy on the different declinations of SAM in terms of zero-shot, few-shot, fine-tuning, adapters, on the recent SAM 2, on other innovative models trained on images alone, and others trained on both text and images. We thoroughly analyze their performances at the level of both primary research and best-in-literature, followed by a rigorous comparison with the state-of-the-art task-specific models. We emphasize the need to address challenges in terms of compliance with regulatory frameworks, privacy and security laws, budget, and trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI). Finally, we share our perspective on future directions concerning synthetic data, early fusion, lessons learnt from generalist models in natural language processing, agentic AI and physical AI, and clinical translation.

Estimation of causal effects is critical to a range of scientific disciplines. Existing methods for this task either require interventional data, knowledge about the ground truth causal graph, or rely on assumptions such as unconfoundedness, restricting their applicability in real-world settings. In the domain of tabular machine learning, Prior-data fitted networks (PFNs) have achieved state-of-the-art predictive performance, having been pre-trained on synthetic data to solve tabular prediction problems via in-context learning. To assess whether this can be transferred to the harder problem of causal effect estimation, we pre-train PFNs on synthetic data drawn from a wide variety of causal structures, including interventions, to predict interventional outcomes given observational data. Through extensive experiments on synthetic case studies, we show that our approach allows for the accurate estimation of causal effects without knowledge of the underlying causal graph. We also perform ablation studies that elucidate Do-PFN's scalability and robustness across datasets with a variety of causal characteristics.

Retrieval of legal knowledge by the general public is a challenging problem due to the technicality of the professional knowledge and the lack of fundamental understanding by laypersons on the subject. Traditional information retrieval techniques assume that users are capable of formulating succinct and precise queries for effective document retrieval. In practice, however, the wide gap between the highly technical contents and untrained users makes legal knowledge retrieval very difficult. We propose a methodology, called QBR, which employs a Questions Bank (QB) as an effective medium for bridging the knowledge gap. We show how the QB is used to derive training samples to enhance the embedding of knowledge units within documents, which leads to effective fine-grained knowledge retrieval. We discuss and evaluate through experiments various advantages of QBR over traditional methods. These include more accurate, efficient, and explainable document retrieval, better comprehension of retrieval results, and highly effective fine-grained knowledge retrieval. We also present some case studies and show that QBR achieves social impact by assisting citizens to resolve everyday legal concerns.

Clinical trials face mounting challenges: fragmented patient populations, slow enrollment, and unsustainable costs, particularly for late phase trials in oncology and rare diseases. While external control arms built from real-world data have been explored, a promising alternative is the generation of synthetic control arms using generative AI. A central challenge is the generation of time-to-event outcomes, which constitute primary endpoints in oncology and rare disease trials, but are difficult to model under censoring and small sample sizes. Existing generative approaches, largely GAN-based, are data-hungry, unstable, and rely on strong assumptions such as independent censoring. We introduce a variational autoencoder (VAE) that jointly generates mixed-type covariates and survival outcomes within a unified latent variable framework, without assuming independent censoring. Across synthetic and real trial datasets, we evaluate our model in two realistic scenarios: (i) data sharing under privacy constraints, where synthetic controls substitute for original data, and (ii) control-arm augmentation, where synthetic patients mitigate imbalances between treated and control groups. Our method outperforms GAN baselines on fidelity, utility, and privacy metrics, while revealing systematic miscalibration of type I error and power. We propose a post-generation selection procedure that improves calibration, highlighting both progress and open challenges for generative survival modeling.

The Equalized Odds (for short, EO) is one of the most popular measures of discrimination used in the supervised learning setting. It ascertains fairness through the balance of the misclassification rates (false positive and negative) across the protected groups -- e.g., in the context of law enforcement, an African-American defendant who would not commit a future crime will have an equal opportunity of being released, compared to a non-recidivating Caucasian defendant. Despite this noble goal, it has been acknowledged in the literature that statistical tests based on the EO are oblivious to the underlying causal mechanisms that generated the disparity in the first place (Hardt et al. 2016). This leads to a critical disconnect between statistical measures readable from the data and the meaning of discrimination in the legal system, where compelling evidence that the observed disparity is tied to a specific causal process deemed unfair by society is required to characterize discrimination. The goal of this paper is to develop a principled approach to connect the statistical disparities characterized by the EO and the underlying, elusive, and frequently unobserved, causal mechanisms that generated such inequality. We start by introducing a new family of counterfactual measures that allows one to explain the misclassification disparities in terms of the underlying mechanisms in an arbitrary, non-parametric structural causal model. This will, in turn, allow legal and data analysts to interpret currently deployed classifiers through causal lens, linking the statistical disparities found in the data to the corresponding causal processes. Leveraging the new family of counterfactual measures, we develop a learning procedure to construct a classifier that is statistically efficient, interpretable, and compatible with the basic human intuition of fairness. We demonstrate our results through experiments in both real (COMPAS) and synthetic datasets.