Warning: This paper contains potentially offensive and harmful text. Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have recently extended their powerful reasoning capabilities to safety checks--using chain-of-thought reasoning to decide whether a request should be answered. While this new approach offers a promising route for balancing model utility and safety, its robustness remains underexplored. To address this gap, we introduce Malicious-Educator, a benchmark that disguises extremely dangerous or malicious requests beneath seemingly legitimate educational prompts. Our experiments reveal severe security flaws in popular commercial-grade LRMs, including OpenAI o1/o3, DeepSeek-R1, and Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking. For instance, although OpenAI's o1 model initially maintains a high refusal rate of about 98%, subsequent model updates significantly compromise its safety; and attackers can easily extract criminal strategies from DeepSeek-R1 and Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking without any additional tricks. To further highlight these vulnerabilities, we propose Hijacking Chain-of-Thought (H-CoT), a universal and transferable attack method that leverages the model's own displayed intermediate reasoning to jailbreak its safety reasoning mechanism. Under H-CoT, refusal rates sharply decline--dropping from 98% to below 2%--and, in some instances, even transform initially cautious tones into ones that are willing to provide harmful content. We hope these findings underscore the urgent need for more robust safety mechanisms to preserve the benefits of advanced reasoning capabilities without compromising ethical standards.

With the power of LLMs, we now have the ability to query data that was previously impossible to query, including text, images, and video. However, despite this enormous potential, most present-day data systems that leverage LLMs are reactive, reflecting our community's desire to map LLMs to known abstractions. Most data systems treat LLMs as an opaque black box that operates on user inputs and data as is, optimizing them much like any other approximate, expensive UDFs, in conjunction with other relational operators. Such data systems do as they are told, but fail to understand and leverage what the LLM is being asked to do (i.e. the underlying operations, which may be error-prone), the data the LLM is operating on (e.g., long, complex documents), or what the user really needs. They don't take advantage of the characteristics of the operations and/or the data at hand, or ensure correctness of results when there are imprecisions and ambiguities. We argue that data systems instead need to be proactive: they need to be given more agency -- armed with the power of LLMs -- to understand and rework the user inputs and the data and to make decisions on how the operations and the data should be represented and processed. By allowing the data system to parse, rewrite, and decompose user inputs and data, or to interact with the user in ways that go beyond the standard single-shot query-result paradigm, the data system is able to address user needs more efficiently and effectively. These new capabilities lead to a rich design space where the data system takes more initiative: they are empowered to perform optimization based on the transformation operations, data characteristics, and user intent. We discuss various successful examples of how this framework has been and can be applied in real-world tasks, and present future directions for this ambitious research agenda.

Patent analysis highly relies on concise and interpretable document representations, referred to as patent portraits. Keyphrases, both present and absent, are ideal candidates for patent portraits due to their brevity, representativeness, and clarity. In this paper, we introduce KAPPA, an integrated framework designed to construct keyphrase-based patent portraits and enhance patent analysis. KAPPA operates in two phases: patent portrait construction and portrait-based analysis. To ensure effective portrait construction, we propose a semantic-calibrated keyphrase generation paradigm that integrates pre-trained language models with a prompt-based hierarchical decoding strategy to leverage the multi-level structural characteristics of patents. For portrait-based analysis, we develop a comprehensive framework that employs keyphrase-based patent portraits to enable efficient and accurate patent analysis. Extensive experiments on benchmark datasets of keyphrase generation, the proposed model achieves significant improvements compared to state-of-the-art baselines. Further experiments conducted on real-world patent applications demonstrate that our keyphrase-based portraits effectively capture domain-specific knowledge and enrich semantic representation for patent analysis tasks.

We present an ethical decision-making framework that refines a pre-trained reinforcement learning (RL) model using a task-agnostic ethical layer. Following initial training, the RL model undergoes ethical fine-tuning, where human feedback is replaced by feedback generated from a large language model (LLM). The LLM embodies consequentialist, deontological, virtue, social justice, and care ethics as moral principles to assign belief values to recommended actions during ethical decision-making. An ethical layer aggregates belief scores from multiple LLM-derived moral perspectives using Belief Jensen-Shannon Divergence and Dempster-Shafer Theory into probability scores that also serve as the shaping reward, steering the agent toward choices that align with a balanced ethical framework. This integrated learning framework helps the RL agent navigate moral uncertainty in complex environments and enables it to make morally sound decisions across diverse tasks. Our approach, tested across different LLM variants and compared with other belief aggregation techniques, demonstrates improved consistency, adaptability, and reduced reliance on handcrafted ethical rewards. This method is especially effective in dynamic scenarios where ethical challenges arise unexpectedly, making it well-suited for real-world applications.

Canceling is a morally-driven phenomenon that hinders the development of safe social media platforms and contributes to ideological polarization. To address this issue we present the Canceling Attitudes Detection (CADE) dataset, an annotated corpus of canceling incidents aimed at exploring the factors of disagreements in evaluating people canceling attitudes on social media. Specifically, we study the impact of annotators' morality in their perception of canceling, showing that morality is an independent axis for the explanation of disagreement on this phenomenon. Annotator's judgments heavily depend on the type of controversial events and involved celebrities. This shows the need to develop more event-centric datasets to better understand how harms are perpetrated in social media and to develop more aware technologies for their detection.

Per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), chemicals found in products like non-stick cookware, are unfortunately persistent environmental pollutants with severe health risks. Accurately mapping PFAS contamination is crucial for guiding targeted remediation efforts and protecting public and environmental health, yet detection across large regions remains challenging due to the cost of testing and the difficulty of simulating their spread. In this work, we introduce FOCUS, a geospatial deep learning framework with a label noise-aware loss function, to predict PFAS contamination in surface water over large regions. By integrating hydrological flow data, land cover information, and proximity to known PFAS sources, our approach leverages both spatial and environmental context to improve prediction accuracy. We evaluate the performance of our approach through extensive ablation studies and comparative analyses against baselines like sparse segmentation, as well as existing scientific methods, including Kriging and pollutant transport simulations. Results highlight our framework's potential for scalable PFAS monitoring.

Decades of research in machine learning have given us powerful tools for making accurate predictions. But when used in social settings and on human inputs, better accuracy does not immediately translate to better social outcomes. This may not be surprising given that conventional learning frameworks are not designed to express societal preferences -- let alone promote them. This position paper argues that machine learning is currently missing, and can gain much from incorporating, a proper notion of social welfare. The field of welfare economics asks: how should we allocate limited resources to self-interested agents in a way that maximizes social benefit? We argue that this perspective applies to many modern applications of machine learning in social contexts, and advocate for its adoption. Rather than disposing of prediction, we aim to leverage this forte of machine learning for promoting social welfare. We demonstrate this idea by proposing a conceptual framework that gradually transitions from accuracy maximization (with awareness to welfare) to welfare maximization (via accurate prediction). We detail applications and use-cases for which our framework can be effective, identify technical challenges and practical opportunities, and highlight future avenues worth pursuing.

We propose a novel paradigm for automatic fact-checking that leverages frame semantics to enhance the structured understanding of claims and guide the process of fact-checking them. To support this, we introduce a pilot dataset of real-world claims extracted from PolitiFact, specifically annotated for large-scale structured data. This dataset underpins two case studies: the first investigates voting-related claims using the Vote semantic frame, while the second explores various semantic frames based on data sources from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Our findings demonstrate the effectiveness of frame semantics in improving evidence retrieval and explainability for fact-checking. Finally, we conducted a survey of frames evoked in fact-checked claims, identifying high-impact frames to guide future work in this direction.

Fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) based on human preferences, commonly achieved through reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), has been effective in improving their performance. However, maintaining LLM safety throughout the fine-tuning process remains a significant challenge, as resolving conflicts between safety and helpfulness can be non-trivial. Typically, the safety alignment of LLM is trained on data with safety-related categories. However, our experiments find that naively increasing the scale of safety training data usually leads the LLMs to an ``overly safe'' state rather than a ``truly safe'' state, boosting the refusal rate through extensive safety-aligned data without genuinely understanding the requirements for safe responses. Such an approach can inadvertently diminish the models' helpfulness. To understand the phenomenon, we first investigate the role of safety data by categorizing them into three different groups, and observe that each group behaves differently as training data scales up. To boost the balance between safety and helpfulness, we propose an Equilibrate RLHF framework including a Fine-grained Data-centric (FDC) approach that achieves better safety alignment even with fewer training data, and an Adaptive Message-wise Alignment (AMA) approach, which selectively highlight the key segments through a gradient masking strategy. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that our approach significantly enhances the safety alignment of LLMs while balancing safety and helpfulness.

This paper is a collaborative effort between Linguistics, Law, and Computer Science to evaluate stereotypes and biases in automated translation systems. We advocate gender-neutral translation as a means to promote gender inclusion and improve the objectivity of machine translation. Our approach focuses on identifying gender bias in English-to-Italian translations. First, we define gender bias following human rights law and linguistics literature. Then we proceed by identifying gender-specific terms such as she/lei and he/lui as key elements. We then evaluate the cosine similarity between these target terms and others in the dataset to reveal the model's perception of semantic relations. Using numerical features, we effectively evaluate the intensity and direction of the bias. Our findings provide tangible insights for developing and training gender-neutral translation algorithms.