Analogical reasoning is an essential aspect of human cognition. In this paper, we summarize key theory about the processes underlying analogical reasoning from the cognitive science literature and relate it to current research in natural language processing. While these processes can be easily linked to concepts in NLP, they are generally not viewed through a cognitive lens. Furthermore, we show how these notions are relevant for several major challenges in NLP research, not directly related to analogy solving. This may guide researchers to better optimize relational understanding in text, as opposed to relying heavily on entity-level similarity.

As large language models increasingly rely on external data sources, compensating data contributors has become a central concern. But how should these payments be devised? We revisit data valuations from a $\textit{market-design perspective}$ where payments serve to compensate data owners for the $\textit{private}$ heterogeneous costs they incur for collecting and sharing data. We show that popular valuation methods-such as Leave-One-Out and Data Shapley-make for poor payments. They fail to ensure truthful reporting of the costs, leading to $\textit{inefficient market}$ outcomes. To address this, we adapt well-established payment rules from mechanism design, namely Myerson and Vickrey-Clarke-Groves (VCG), to the data market setting. We show that Myerson payment is the minimal truthful mechanism, optimal from the buyer's perspective. Additionally, we identify a condition under which both data buyers and sellers are utility-satisfied, and the market achieves efficiency. Our findings highlight the importance of incorporating incentive compatibility into data valuation design, paving the way for more robust and efficient data markets. Our data market framework is readily applicable to real-world scenarios. We illustrate this with simulations of contributor compensation in an LLM based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) marketplace tasked with challenging medical question answering.

The scaling of Large Language Models (LLMs) has exposed a critical gap between their performance on static benchmarks and their fragility in dynamic, information-rich environments. While models excel at isolated tasks, the computational limits that govern their reasoning under cognitive load remain poorly understood. In this work, we introduce a formal theory of computational cognitive load, positing that extraneous, task-irrelevant information (Context Saturation) and interference from task-switching (Attentional Residue) are key mechanisms that degrade performance. We designed the Interleaved Cognitive Evaluation (ICE), a deconfounded benchmark to systematically manipulate these load factors on challenging multi-hop reasoning tasks. A comprehensive study (N = 10 replications per item across 200 questions) revealed significant performance variations across five instruction-tuned models. Smaller open-source architectures (Llama-3-8B-Instruct, Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.2) exhibited baseline brittleness, achieving 0% accuracy (SEM = 0.0) across all conditions, including clean controls, on this high-intrinsic-load task. In contrast, Gemini-2.0-Flash-001 showed partial resilience, achieving 85% accuracy in control conditions, with a statistically significant degradation under context saturation ($β= -0.003$ per % load, $p < 0.001$). These findings provide preliminary evidence that cognitive load is a key contributor to reasoning failures, supporting theories of hallucination-as-guessing under uncertainty. We conclude that dynamic, cognitive-aware stress testing, as exemplified by the ICE benchmark, is essential for evaluating the true resilience and safety of advanced AI systems.

Current benchmarks for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) often do not exhibit enough writing style diversity, with many adhering primarily to standardized conventions. Such benchmarks do not fully capture the rich variety of communication patterns exhibited by humans. Thus, it is possible that LLMs, which are optimized on these benchmarks, may demonstrate brittle performance when faced with "non-standard" input. In this work, we test this hypothesis by rewriting evaluation prompts using persona-based LLM prompting, a low-cost method to emulate diverse writing styles. Our results show that, even with identical semantic content, variations in writing style and prompt formatting significantly impact the estimated performance of the LLM under evaluation. Notably, we identify distinct writing styles that consistently trigger either low or high performance across a range of models and tasks, irrespective of model family, size, and recency. Our work offers a scalable approach to augment existing benchmarks, improving the external validity of the assessments they provide for measuring LLM performance across linguistic variations.

Steganalysis methods based on deep learning (DL) often struggle with computational complexity and challenges in generalizing across different datasets. Incorporating a graph neural network (GNN) into steganalysis schemes enables the leveraging of relational data for improved detection accuracy and adaptability. This paper presents the first application of a Graph Neural Network (GNN), specifically the GraphSAGE architecture, for steganalysis of compressed voice over IP (VoIP) speech streams. The method involves straightforward graph construction from VoIP streams and employs GraphSAGE to capture hierarchical steganalysis information, including both fine grained details and high level patterns, thereby achieving high detection accuracy. Experimental results demonstrate that the developed approach performs well in uncovering quantization index modulation (QIM)-based steganographic patterns in VoIP signals. It achieves detection accuracy exceeding 98 percent even for short 0.5 second samples, and 95.17 percent accuracy under challenging conditions with low embedding rates, representing an improvement of 2.8 percent over the best performing state of the art methods. Furthermore, the model exhibits superior efficiency, with an average detection time as low as 0.016 seconds for 0.5-second samples an improvement of 0.003 seconds. This makes it efficient for online steganalysis tasks, providing a superior balance between detection accuracy and efficiency under the constraint of short samples with low embedding rates.

We use the notion of oracle machines and reductions from computability theory to formalise different Human-in-the-loop (HITL) setups for AI systems, distinguishing between trivial human monitoring (i.e., total functions), single endpoint human action (i.e., many-one reductions), and highly involved human-AI interaction (i.e., Turing reductions). We then proceed to show that the legal status and safety of different setups vary greatly. We present a taxonomy to categorise HITL failure modes, highlighting the practical limitations of HITL setups. We then identify omissions in UK and EU legal frameworks, which focus on HITL setups that may not always achieve the desired ethical, legal, and sociotechnical outcomes. We suggest areas where the law should recognise the effectiveness of different HITL setups and assign responsibility in these contexts, avoiding human "scapegoating". Our work shows an unavoidable trade-off between attribution of legal responsibility, and technical explainability. Overall, we show how HITL setups involve many technical design decisions, and can be prone to failures out of the humans' control. Our formalisation and taxonomy opens up a new analytic perspective on the challenges in creating HITL setups, helping inform AI developers and lawmakers on designing HITL setups to better achieve their desired outcomes.

Workplace negotiations are undermined by psychological barriers, which can even derail well-prepared tactics. AI offers personalized and always -- available negotiation coaching, yet its effectiveness for negotiation preparedness remains unclear. We built Trucey, a prototype AI coach grounded in Brett's negotiation model. We conducted a between-subjects experiment (N=267), comparing Trucey, ChatGPT, and a traditional negotiation Handbook, followed by in-depth interviews (N=15). While Trucey showed the strongest reductions in fear relative to both comparison conditions, the Handbook outperformed both AIs in usability and psychological empowerment. Interviews revealed that the Handbook's comprehensive, reviewable content was crucial for participants' confidence and preparedness. In contrast, although participants valued AI's rehearsal capability, its guidance often felt verbose and fragmented -- delivered in bits and pieces that required additional effort -- leaving them uncertain or overwhelmed. These findings challenge assumptions of AI superiority and motivate hybrid designs that integrate structured, theory-driven content with targeted rehearsal, clear boundaries, and adaptive scaffolds to address psychological barriers and support negotiation preparedness.

Federated Learning (FL) has emerged as a promising decentralized learning (DL) approach that enables the use of distributed data without compromising user privacy. However, FL poses several key challenges. First, it is frequently assumed that every client can train the same machine learning models, however, not all clients are able to meet this assumption because of differences in their business needs and computational resources. Second, statistical heterogeneity (a.k.a. non-IID data) poses a major challenge in FL, which can lead to lower global model performance. Third, while addressing these challenges, there is a need for a cost-effective incentive mechanism to encourage clients to participate in FL training. In response to these challenges, we propose several methodologies: DL-SH, which facilitates efficient, privacy-preserving, and communication-efficient learning in the context of statistical heterogeneity; DL-MH, designed to manage fully heterogeneous models while tackling statistical disparities; and I-DL-MH, an incentive-based extension of DL-MH that promotes client engagement in federated learning training by providing incentives within this complex federated learning framework. Comprehensive experiments were carried out to assess the performance and scalability of the proposed approaches across a range of complex experimental settings. This involved utilizing various model architectures, in diverse data distributions, including IID and several non-IID scenarios, as well as multiple datasets. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed approaches significantly enhance accuracy and decrease communication costs while effectively addressing statistical heterogeneity and model heterogeneity in comparison to existing state-of-the-art approaches and baselines, with DL-SH improving global model accuracy by 153%, and I-DL-MH achieving a 225% improvement under non-IID conditions.

Large language models deployed in sensitive applications increasingly require the ability to unlearn specific knowledge, such as user requests, copyrighted materials, or outdated information, without retraining from scratch to ensure regulatory compliance, user privacy, and safety. This task, known as machine unlearning, aims to remove the influence of targeted data (forgetting) while maintaining performance on the remaining data (retention). A common approach is to formulate this as a multi-objective problem and reduce it to a single-objective problem via scalarization, where forgetting and retention losses are combined using a weighted sum. However, this often results in unstable training dynamics and degraded model utility due to conflicting gradient directions. To address these challenges, we propose OFMU, a penalty-based bi-level optimization framework that explicitly prioritizes forgetting while preserving retention through a hierarchical structure. Our method enforces forgetting via an inner maximization step that incorporates a similarity-aware penalty to decorrelate the gradients of the forget and retention objectives, and restores utility through an outer minimization step. To ensure scalability, we develop a two-loop algorithm with provable convergence guarantees under both convex and non-convex regimes. We further provide a rigorous theoretical analysis of convergence rates and show that our approach achieves better trade-offs between forgetting efficacy and model utility compared to prior methods. Extensive experiments across vision and language benchmarks demonstrate that OFMU consistently outperforms existing unlearning methods in both forgetting efficacy and retained utility.

In an era dominated by Large Language Models (LLMs), understanding their capabilities and limitations, especially in high-stakes fields like law, is crucial. While LLMs such as Meta's LLaMA, OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, DeepSeek, and other emerging models are increasingly integrated into legal workflows, their performance in multilingual, jurisdictionally diverse, and adversarial contexts remains insufficiently explored. This work evaluates LLaMA and Gemini on multilingual legal and non-legal benchmarks, and assesses their adversarial robustness in legal tasks through character and word-level perturbations. We use an LLM-as-a-Judge approach for human-aligned evaluation. We moreover present an open-source, modular evaluation pipeline designed to support multilingual, task-diverse benchmarking of any combination of LLMs and datasets, with a particular focus on legal tasks, including classification, summarization, open questions, and general reasoning. Our findings confirm that legal tasks pose significant challenges for LLMs with accuracies often below 50% on legal reasoning benchmarks such as LEXam, compared to over 70% on general-purpose tasks like XNLI. In addition, while English generally yields more stable results, it does not always lead to higher accuracy. Prompt sensitivity and adversarial vulnerability is also shown to persist across languages. Finally, a correlation is found between the performance of a language and its syntactic similarity to English. We also observe that LLaMA is weaker than Gemini, with the latter showing an average advantage of about 24 percentage points across the same task. Despite improvements in newer LLMs, challenges remain in deploying them reliably for critical, multilingual legal applications.