Syllogistic reasoning is crucial for sound legal decision-making, allowing legal professionals to draw logical conclusions by applying general principles to specific case facts. While large language models (LLMs) can answer legal questions, they often struggle with explicit syllogistic reasoning. Their outputs tend to be implicit, unstructured, and consequently, less explainable and trustworthy. To overcome these limitations, we introduce SyLeR, a novel framework designed to enable LLMs to perform explicit syllogistic legal reasoning. SyLeR employs a tree-structured hierarchical retrieval mechanism to synthesize relevant legal statutes and precedents, thereby constructing comprehensive major premises. This is followed by a two-stage fine-tuning process: an initial supervised fine-tuning warm-up establishes a foundational understanding of syllogistic reasoning, while reinforcement learning, guided by a structure-aware reward mechanism, refines the model's capacity to generate diverse, logically sound, and well-structured reasoning paths. We conducted extensive experiments to evaluate SyLeR's performance. Our evaluations spanned diverse dimensions, including both in-domain and cross-domain user groups (legal laypersons and practitioners), multiple languages (Chinese and French), and various LLM backbones (legal-specific and open-domain LLMs). The results consistently demonstrate that SyLeR significantly enhances response accuracy and reliably produces explicit, explainable, and trustworthy legal reasoning.

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in various natural language processing tasks but remain vulnerable to generating harmful content or being exploited for malicious purposes. Although safety alignment datasets have been introduced to mitigate such risks through supervised fine-tuning (SFT), these datasets often lack comprehensive risk coverage. Most existing datasets focus primarily on lexical diversity while neglecting other critical dimensions. To address this limitation, we propose a novel analysis framework to systematically measure the risk coverage of alignment datasets across three essential dimensions: Lexical Diversity, Malicious Intent, and Jailbreak Tactics. We further introduce TRIDENT, an automated pipeline that leverages persona-based, zero-shot LLM generation to produce diverse and comprehensive instructions spanning these dimensions. Each harmful instruction is paired with an ethically aligned response, resulting in two datasets: TRIDENT-Core, comprising 26,311 examples, and TRIDENT-Edge, with 18,773 examples. Fine-tuning Llama 3.1-8B on TRIDENT-Edge demonstrates substantial improvements, achieving an average 14.29% reduction in Harm Score, and a 20% decrease in Attack Success Rate compared to the best-performing baseline model fine-tuned on the WildBreak dataset.

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit remarkable capabilities across a spectrum of tasks in financial services, including report generation, chatbots, sentiment analysis, regulatory compliance, investment advisory, financial knowledge retrieval, and summarization. However, their intrinsic complexity and lack of transparency pose significant challenges, especially in the highly regulated financial sector, where interpretability, fairness, and accountability are critical. As far as we are aware, this paper presents the first application in the finance domain of understanding and utilizing the inner workings of LLMs through mechanistic interpretability, addressing the pressing need for transparency and control in AI systems. Mechanistic interpretability is the most intuitive and transparent way to understand LLM behavior by reverse-engineering their internal workings. By dissecting the activations and circuits within these models, it provides insights into how specific features or components influence predictions - making it possible not only to observe but also to modify model behavior. In this paper, we explore the theoretical aspects of mechanistic interpretability and demonstrate its practical relevance through a range of financial use cases and experiments, including applications in trading strategies, sentiment analysis, bias, and hallucination detection. While not yet widely adopted, mechanistic interpretability is expected to become increasingly vital as adoption of LLMs increases. Advanced interpretability tools can ensure AI systems remain ethical, transparent, and aligned with evolving financial regulations. In this paper, we have put special emphasis on how these techniques can help unlock interpretability requirements for regulatory and compliance purposes - addressing both current needs and anticipating future expectations from financial regulators globally.

Semantic Text Embedding is a fundamental NLP task that encodes textual content into vector representations, where proximity in the embedding space reflects semantic similarity. While existing embedding models excel at capturing general meaning, they often overlook ideological nuances, limiting their effectiveness in tasks that require an understanding of political bias. To address this gap, we introduce PRISM, the first framework designed to Produce inteRpretable polItical biaS eMbeddings. PRISM operates in two key stages: (1) Controversial Topic Bias Indicator Mining, which systematically extracts fine-grained political topics and their corresponding bias indicators from weakly labeled news data, and (2) Cross-Encoder Political Bias Embedding, which assigns structured bias scores to news articles based on their alignment with these indicators. This approach ensures that embeddings are explicitly tied to bias-revealing dimensions, enhancing both interpretability and predictive power. Through extensive experiments on two large-scale datasets, we demonstrate that PRISM outperforms state-of-the-art text embedding models in political bias classification while offering highly interpretable representations that facilitate diversified retrieval and ideological analysis. The source code is available at https://github.com/dukesun99/ACL-PRISM.

Reinforcement learning (RL) in autonomous driving employs a trial-and-error mechanism, enhancing robustness in unpredictable environments. However, crafting effective reward functions remains challenging, as conventional approaches rely heavily on manual design and demonstrate limited efficacy in complex scenarios. To address this issue, this study introduces a responsibility-oriented reward function that explicitly incorporates traffic regulations into the RL framework. Specifically, we introduced a Traffic Regulation Knowledge Graph and leveraged Vision-Language Models alongside Retrieval-Augmented Generation techniques to automate reward assignment. This integration guides agents to adhere strictly to traffic laws, thus minimizing rule violations and optimizing decision-making performance in diverse driving conditions. Experimental validations demonstrate that the proposed methodology significantly improves the accuracy of assigning accident responsibilities and effectively reduces the agent's liability in traffic incidents.

Large Language Model (LLM) agents show considerable promise for automating complex tasks using contextual reasoning; however, interactions involving multiple agents and the system's susceptibility to prompt injection and other forms of context manipulation introduce new vulnerabilities related to privacy leakage and system exploitation. This position paper argues that the well-established design principles in information security, which are commonly referred to as security principles, should be employed when deploying LLM agents at scale. Design principles such as defense-in-depth, least privilege, complete mediation, and psychological acceptability have helped guide the design of mechanisms for securing information systems over the last five decades, and we argue that their explicit and conscientious adoption will help secure agentic systems. To illustrate this approach, we introduce AgentSandbox, a conceptual framework embedding these security principles to provide safeguards throughout an agent's life-cycle. We evaluate with state-of-the-art LLMs along three dimensions: benign utility, attack utility, and attack success rate. AgentSandbox maintains high utility for its intended functions under both benign and adversarial evaluations while substantially mitigating privacy risks. By embedding secure design principles as foundational elements within emerging LLM agent protocols, we aim to promote trustworthy agent ecosystems aligned with user privacy expectations and evolving regulatory requirements.

This study introduces a novel conceptual framework distinguishing problem-seeking from problem-solving to clarify the unique features of human intelligence in contrast to AI. Problem-seeking refers to the embodied, emotionally grounded process by which humans identify and set goals, while problem-solving denotes the execution of strategies aimed at achieving such predefined objectives. The framework emphasizes that while AI excels at efficiency and optimization, it lacks the orientation derived from experiential grounding and the embodiment flexibility intrinsic to human cognition. To empirically explore this distinction, the research analyzes metadata from 157 YouTube videos discussing AI. Conducting a thematic analysis combining qualitative insights with keyword-based quantitative metrics, this mixed-methods approach uncovers recurring themes in public discourse, including privacy, job displacement, misinformation, optimism, and ethical concerns. The results reveal a dual sentiment: public fascination with AI's capabilities coexists with anxiety and skepticism about its societal implications. The discussion critiques the orthogonality thesis, which posits that intelligence is separable from goal content, and instead argues that human intelligence integrates goal-setting and goal-pursuit. It underscores the centrality of embodied cognition in human reasoning and highlights how AI's limitations come from its current reliance on computational processing. The study advocates for enhancing emotional and digital literacy to foster responsible AI engagement. It calls for reframing public discourse to recognize AI as a tool that augments -- rather than replaces -- human intelligence. By positioning problem seeking at the core of cognition and as a critical dimension of intelligence, this research offers new perspectives on ethically aligned and human-centered AI development.

Large language models (LLMs) commonly risk copyright infringement by reproducing protected content verbatim or with insufficient transformative modifications, posing significant ethical, legal, and practical concerns. Current inference-time safeguards predominantly rely on restrictive refusal-based filters, often compromising the practical utility of these models. To address this, we collaborated closely with intellectual property experts to develop FUA-LLM (Fair Use Aligned Language Models), a legally-grounded framework explicitly designed to align LLM outputs with fair-use doctrine. Central to our method is FairUseDB, a carefully constructed dataset containing 18,000 expert-validated examples covering nine realistic infringement scenarios. Leveraging this dataset, we apply Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) to fine-tune open-source LLMs, encouraging them to produce legally compliant and practically useful alternatives rather than resorting to blunt refusal. Recognizing the shortcomings of traditional evaluation metrics, we propose new measures: Weighted Penalty Utility and Compliance Aware Harmonic Mean (CAH) to balance infringement risk against response utility. Extensive quantitative experiments coupled with expert evaluations confirm that FUA-LLM substantially reduces problematic outputs (up to 20\%) compared to state-of-the-art approaches, while preserving real-world usability.

Conventional AI evaluation approaches concentrated within the AI stack exhibit systemic limitations for exploring, navigating and resolving the human and societal factors that play out in real world deployment such as in education, finance, healthcare, and employment sectors. AI capability evaluations can capture detail about first-order effects, such as whether immediate system outputs are accurate, or contain toxic, biased or stereotypical content, but AI's second-order effects, i.e. any long-term outcomes and consequences that may result from AI use in the real world, have become a significant area of interest as the technology becomes embedded in our daily lives. These secondary effects can include shifts in user behavior, societal, cultural and economic ramifications, workforce transformations, and long-term downstream impacts that may result from a broad and growing set of risks. This position paper argues that measuring the indirect and secondary effects of AI will require expansion beyond static, single-turn approaches conducted in silico to include testing paradigms that can capture what actually materializes when people use AI technology in context. Specifically, we describe the need for data and methods that can facilitate contextual awareness and enable downstream interpretation and decision making about AI's secondary effects, and recommend requirements for a new ecosystem.

The Utah court of appeals has sanctioned a lawyer after he was discovered to have used ChatGPT for a filing he made in which he referenced a nonexistent court case. Earlier this week, the Utah court of appeals made the decision to sanction Richard Bednar over claims that he filed a brief which included false citations. According to court documents reviewed by ABC4, Bednar and Douglas Durbano, another Utah-based lawyer who was serving as the petitioner's counsel, filed a "timely petition for interlocutory appeal". Upon reviewing the brief which was written by a law clerk, the respondent's counsel found several false citations of cases. "It appears that at least some portions of the Petition may be AI-generated, including citations and even quotations to at least one case that does not appear to exist in any legal database (and could only be found in ChatGPT and references to cases that are wholly unrelated to the referenced subject matter," the respondent's counsel said in documents reviewed by ABC4.