Integrating structured information has long improved the quality of abstractive summarization, particularly in retaining salient content. In this work, we focus on a specific form of structure: argument roles, which are crucial for summarizing documents in high-stakes domains such as law. We investigate whether instruction-tuned large language models (LLMs) adequately preserve this information. To this end, we introduce Argument Representation Coverage (ARC), a framework for measuring how well LLM-generated summaries capture salient arguments. Using ARC, we analyze summaries produced by three open-weight LLMs in two domains where argument roles are central: long legal opinions and scientific articles. Our results show that while LLMs cover salient argument roles to some extent, critical information is often omitted in generated summaries, particularly when arguments are sparsely distributed throughout the input. Further, we use ARC to uncover behavioral patterns -- specifically, how the positional bias of LLM context windows and role-specific preferences impact the coverage of key arguments in generated summaries, emphasizing the need for more argument-aware summarization strategies.

Refusal is a key safety behavior in aligned language models, yet the internal mechanisms driving refusals remain opaque. In this work, we conduct a mechanistic study of refusal in instruction-tuned LLMs using sparse autoencoders to identify latent features that causally mediate refusal behaviors. We apply our method to two open-source chat models and intervene on refusal-related features to assess their influence on generation, validating their behavioral impact across multiple harmful datasets. This enables a fine-grained inspection of how refusal manifests at the activation level and addresses key research questions such as investigating upstream-downstream latent relationship and understanding the mechanisms of adversarial jailbreaking techniques. We also establish the usefulness of refusal features in enhancing generalization for linear probes to out-of-distribution adversarial samples in classification tasks. We open source our code in https://github.com/wj210/refusal_sae.

--Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) governance is the practice of establishing frameworks, policies, and procedures to ensure the responsible, ethical, and safe development and deployment of AI systems. Although AI governance is a core pillar of Responsible AI, current literature still lacks synthesis across such governance frameworks and practices. Objective: T o identify which frameworks, principles, mechanisms, and stakeholder roles are emphasized in secondary literature on AI governance. Method: We conducted a rapid tertiary review of nine peer-reviewed secondary studies from IEEE and ACM (2020-2024), using structured inclusion criteria and thematic-semantic synthesis. Results: The most cited frameworks include the EU AI Act and NIST RMF; transparency and accountability are the most common principles. Conclusion: The review consolidates key directions in AI governance and highlights gaps in empirical validation and inclusivity. Findings inform both academic inquiry and practical adoption in organizations. The increasing deployment of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems across critical domains, such as healthcare, finance, public administration, has raised urgent concerns about their ethical, legal, and social implications [1]. In response, the notion of Responsible AI (RAI) has emerged as a multidimensional paradigm that seeks to ensure fairness, transparency, accountability, privacy, safety, and human oversight in the development and use of AI technologies [1].

Not Safe/Suitable for Work (NSFW) content is rampant on social networks and poses serious harm to citizens, especially minors. Current detection methods mainly rely on deep learning-based image recognition and classification. However, NSFW images are now presented in increasingly sophisticated ways, often using image details and complex semantics to obscure their true nature or attract more views. Although still understandable to humans, these images often evade existing detection methods, posing a significant threat. Further complicating the issue, varying regulations across platforms and regions create additional challenges for effective moderation, leading to detection bias and reduced accuracy. To address this, we propose VModA, a general and effective framework that adapts to diverse moderation rules and handles complex, semantically rich NSFW content across categories. Experimental results show that VModA significantly outperforms existing methods, achieving up to a 54.3% accuracy improvement across NSFW types, including those with complex semantics. Further experiments demonstrate that our method exhibits strong adaptability across categories, scenarios, and base VLMs. We also identified inconsistent and controversial label samples in public NSFW benchmark datasets, re-annotated them, and submitted corrections to the original maintainers. Two datasets have confirmed the updates so far. Additionally, we evaluate VModA in real-world scenarios to demonstrate its practical effectiveness.

Large language models (LLMs) are widely used for long-form text generation. However, factual errors in the responses would undermine their reliability. Despite growing attention to LLM factuality, the effect of response length on factuality remains underexplored. In this work, we systematically investigate this relationship by first introducing an automatic and bi-level long-form factuality evaluation framework, which achieves high agreement with human annotations while being cost-effective. Using this framework, we conduct controlled experiments and find that longer responses exhibit lower factual precision, confirming the presence of length bias. To explain this phenomenon, we empirically examine three hypotheses: error propagation, long context, and facts exhaustion. Our results reveal that facts exhaustion, where the model gradually exhausts more reliable knowledge, is the primary cause of factual degradation, rather than the other two hypotheses.

Land cover and land use (LULC) changes are key applications of satellite imagery, and they have critical roles in resource management, urbanization, protection of soils and the environment, and enhancing sustainable development. The literature has heavily utilized multispectral spatiotemporal satellite data alongside advanced machine learning algorithms to monitor and predict LULC changes. This study analyzes and compares LULC changes across various governorates (provinces) of the Sultanate of Oman from 2016 to 2021 using annual time steps. For the chosen region, multispectral spatiotemporal data were acquired from the open-source Sentinel-2 satellite dataset. Supervised machine learning algorithms were used to train and classify different land covers, such as water bodies, crops, urban, etc. The constructed model was subsequently applied within the study region, allowing for an effective comparative evaluation of LULC changes within the given timeframe.

Recent studies provide large language models (LLMs) with textual task-solving experiences via prompts to improve their performance. However, previous methods rely on substantial human labor or time to gather such experiences for each task, which is impractical given the growing variety of task types in user queries to LLMs. To address this issue, we design an autonomous experience transfer framework to explore whether LLMs can mimic human cognitive intelligence to autonomously transfer experience from existing source tasks to newly encountered target tasks. This not only allows the acquisition of experience without extensive costs of previous methods, but also offers a novel path for the generalization of LLMs. Experimental results on 13 datasets demonstrate that our framework effectively improves the performance of LLMs. Furthermore, we provide a detailed analysis of each module in the framework.

Conventional bag-of-words approaches for topic modeling, like latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA), struggle with literary text. Literature challenges lexical methods because narrative language focuses on immersive sensory details instead of abstractive description or exposition: writers are advised to "show, don't tell." We propose Retell, a simple, accessible topic modeling approach for literature. Here, we prompt resource-efficient, generative language models (LMs) to tell what passages show, thereby translating narratives' surface forms into higher-level concepts and themes. By running LDA on LMs' retellings of passages, we can obtain more precise and informative topics than by running LDA alone or by directly asking LMs to list topics. To investigate the potential of our method for cultural analytics, we compare our method's outputs to expert-guided annotations in a case study on racial/cultural identity in high school English language arts books.

The acquisition of agentic capabilities has transformed LLMs from "knowledge providers" to "action executors", a trend that while expanding LLMs' capability boundaries, significantly increases their susceptibility to malicious use. Previous work has shown that current LLM-based agents execute numerous malicious tasks even without being attacked, indicating a deficiency in agentic use safety alignment during the post-training phase. To address this gap, we propose AgentAlign, a novel framework that leverages abstract behavior chains as a medium for safety alignment data synthesis. By instantiating these behavior chains in simulated environments with diverse tool instances, our framework enables the generation of highly authentic and executable instructions while capturing complex multi-step dynamics. The framework further ensures model utility by proportionally synthesizing benign instructions through non-malicious interpretations of behavior chains, precisely calibrating the boundary between helpfulness and harmlessness. Evaluation results on AgentHarm demonstrate that fine-tuning three families of open-source models using our method substantially improves their safety (35.8% to 79.5% improvement) while minimally impacting or even positively enhancing their helpfulness, outperforming various prompting methods. The dataset and code have both been open-sourced.

Generative artificial intelligence is developing rapidly, impacting humans' interaction with information and digital media. It is increasingly used to create deceptively realistic misinformation, so lawmakers have imposed regulations requiring the disclosure of AI-generated content. However, only little is known about whether these labels reduce the risks of AI-generated misinformation. Our work addresses this research gap. Focusing on AI-generated images, we study the implications of labels, including the possibility of mislabeling. Assuming that simplicity, transparency, and trust are likely to impact the successful adoption of such labels, we first qualitatively explore users' opinions and expectations of AI labeling using five focus groups. Second, we conduct a pre-registered online survey with over 1300 U.S. and EU participants to quantitatively assess the effect of AI labels on users' ability to recognize misinformation containing either human-made or AI-generated images. Our focus groups illustrate that, while participants have concerns about the practical implementation of labeling, they consider it helpful in identifying AI-generated images and avoiding deception. However, considering security benefits, our survey revealed an ambiguous picture, suggesting that users might over-rely on labels. While inaccurate claims supported by labeled AI-generated images were rated less credible than those with unlabeled AI-images, the belief in accurate claims also decreased when accompanied by a labeled AI-generated image. Moreover, we find the undesired side effect that human-made images conveying inaccurate claims were perceived as more credible in the presence of labels.