The mismatch between the growing demand for psychological counseling and the limited availability of services has motivated research into the application of Large Language Models (LLMs) in this domain. Consequently, there is a need for a robust and unified benchmark to assess the counseling competence of various LLMs. Existing works, however, are limited by unprofessional client simulation, static question-and-answer evaluation formats, and unidimensional metrics. These limitations hinder their effectiveness in assessing a model's comprehensive ability to handle diverse and complex clients. To address this gap, we introduce \textbf{CARE-Bench}, a dynamic and interactive automated benchmark. It is built upon diverse client profiles derived from real-world counseling cases and simulated according to expert guidelines. CARE-Bench provides a multidimensional performance evaluation grounded in established psychological scales. Using CARE-Bench, we evaluate several general-purpose LLMs and specialized counseling models, revealing their current limitations. In collaboration with psychologists, we conduct a detailed analysis of the reasons for LLMs' failures when interacting with clients of different types, which provides directions for developing more comprehensive, universal, and effective counseling models.

The impact of inference-time data perturbation (e.g., adversarial attacks) has been extensively studied in machine learning, leading to well-established certification techniques for adversarial robustness. In contrast, certifying models against training data perturbations remains a relatively under-explored area. These perturbations can arise in three critical contexts: adversarial data poisoning, where an adversary manipulates training samples to corrupt model performance; machine unlearning, which requires certifying model behavior under the removal of specific training data; and differential privacy, where guarantees must be given with respect to substituting individual data points. This work introduces Abstract Gradient Training (AGT), a unified framework for certifying robustness of a given model and training procedure to training data perturbations, including bounded perturbations, the removal of data points, and the addition of new samples. By bounding the reachable set of parameters, i.e., establishing provable parameter-space bounds, AGT provides a formal approach to analyzing the behavior of models trained via first-order optimization methods.

Current Multimodal Large Language Models exhibit very strong performance for several demanding tasks. While commercial MLLMs deliver acceptable performance in low-resource languages, comparable results remain unattained within the open science community. In this paper, we aim to develop a strong MLLM for a low-resource language, namely Basque. For that purpose, we develop our own training and evaluation image-text datasets. Using two different Large Language Models as backbones, the Llama-3.1-Instruct model and a Basque-adapted variant called Latxa, we explore several data mixtures for training. We show that: i) low ratios of Basque multimodal data (around 20%) are already enough to obtain solid results on Basque benchmarks, and ii) contrary to expected, a Basque instructed backbone LLM is not required to obtain a strong MLLM in Basque. Our results pave the way to develop MLLMs for other low-resource languages by openly releasing our resources.

Large language models have recently demonstrated remarkable abilities to self-correct their responses through iterative refinement, often referred to as self-consistency or self-reflection. However, the dynamics of this self-correction mechanism may differ substantially depending on whether the model is tasked with open-ended text generation or with selecting the most appropriate response from multiple predefined options. In this paper, we conduct a systematic investigation of these two paradigms by comparing performance trends and error-correction behaviors across various natural language understanding and reasoning tasks, covering language models of different scales and families. Our experimental results reveal distinct patterns of improvement and failure modes: \textit{While open-ended generation often benefits from the flexibility of re-interpretation and compositional refinement, multiple-choice selection can leverage clearer solution boundaries but may be limited by the provided options}. This contrast also reflects the dual demands faced by emerging agentic LLM applications: effective agents must not only generate and refine open-ended plans or explanations, but also make reliable discrete choices when operating within constrained action spaces. Our findings, therefore, highlight that the design of self-correction mechanisms should take into account the interaction between task structure and output space, with implications for both knowledge-intensive reasoning and decision-oriented applications of LLMs.

The capacity of Large Language Models (LLMs) for reasoning remains an active area of research, with the capabilities of frontier models continually advancing. We provide an updated evaluation of the end-to-end planning performance of three frontier LLMs as of 2025, where models are prompted to generate a plan from PDDL domain and task descriptions. We evaluate DeepSeek R1, Gemini 2.5 Pro, GPT-5 and as reference the planner LAMA on a subset of domains from the most recent Learning Track of the International Planning Competition. Our results show that on standard PDDL domains, the performance of GPT-5 in terms of solved tasks is competitive with LAMA. When the PDDL domains and tasks are obfuscated to test for pure reasoning, the performance of all LLMs degrades, though less severely than previously reported for other models. These results show substantial improvements over prior generations of LLMs, reducing the performance gap to planners on a challenging benchmark.

The use of large language models (LLMs) for evaluating outputs is becoming an increasingly effective and scalable approach. However, it remains uncertain whether this capability extends beyond task-specific evaluations to more general assessments of text quality, particularly in multilingual contexts. In this study, we introduce, MTQ-Eval, a novel framework for multilingual text quality evaluation that learns from examples of both high- and low-quality texts, adjusting its internal representations. To develop MTQ-Eval, we first automatically generate text quality preference data and then use it to train open-source base LLMs to align with ratings of high- and low-quality text. Our comprehensive evaluation across 115 languages demonstrates the improved performance of the proposed model. Upon further analysis, we find that this enhanced evaluation capability also leads to notable improvements in downstream tasks.

LLMs now tackle a wide range of software-related tasks, yet we show that their performance varies markedly both across and within these tasks. Routing user queries to the appropriate LLMs can therefore help improve response quality while reducing cost. Prior work, however, has focused mainly on general-purpose LLM routing via black-box models. We introduce Routesplain, the first LLM router for software-related tasks, including multilingual code generation and repair, input/output prediction, and computer science QA. Unlike existing routing approaches, Routesplain first extracts human-interpretable concepts from each query (e.g., task, domain, reasoning complexity) and only routes based on these concepts, thereby providing intelligible, faithful rationales. We evaluate Routesplain on 16 state-of-the-art LLMs across eight software-related tasks; Routesplain outperforms individual models both in terms of accuracy and cost, and equals or surpasses all black-box baselines, with concept-level intervention highlighting avenues for further router improvements.

Safety verification of dynamical systems via barrier certificates is essential for ensuring correctness in autonomous applications. Synthesizing these certificates involves discovering mathematical functions with current methods suffering from poor scalability, dependence on carefully designed templates, and exhaustive or incremental function-space searches. They also demand substantial manual expertise--selecting templates, solvers, and hyperparameters, and designing sampling strategies--requiring both theoretical and practical knowledge traditionally shared through linguistic reasoning rather than formalized methods. This motivates a key question: can such expert reasoning be captured and operationalized by language models? We address this by introducing an LLM-based agentic framework for barrier certificate synthesis. The framework uses natural language reasoning to propose, refine, and validate candidate certificates, integrating LLM-driven template discovery with SMT-based verification, and supporting barrier-controller co-synthesis to ensure consistency between safety certificates and controllers. To evaluate this capability, we introduce BarrierBench, a benchmark of 100 dynamical systems spanning linear, nonlinear, discrete-time, and continuous-time settings. Our experiments assess not only the effectiveness of LLM-guided barrier synthesis but also the utility of retrieval-augmented generation and agentic coordination strategies in improving its reliability and performance. Across these tasks, the framework achieves more than 90% success in generating valid certificates. By releasing BarrierBench and the accompanying toolchain, we aim to establish a community testbed for advancing the integration of language-based reasoning with formal verification in dynamical systems. The benchmark is publicly available at https://hycodev.com/dataset/barrierbench

Contemporary vision-language models (VLMs) perform well on existing multimodal reasoning benchmarks (78-85\% accuracy on MMMU, MathVista). Yet, these results fail to sufficiently distinguish true scientific reasoning articulation capabilities from pattern-matching. To address this gap, we introduce \textbf{mmJEE-Eval}, a multimodal bilingual (English and Hindi) benchmark comprising 1,460 questions from India's JEE Advanced examination (2019-2025) spanning pre-college Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics domains. Our evaluation of 17 state-of-the-art models reveals that while frontier VLMs (GPT-5, Gemini 2.5 Pro/Flash) achieve 77-84\% accuracy on held-out 2025 questions, open-source models plateau at 37-45\% despite scaling to 400B parameters, a significant difference not observed on existing benchmarks. While closed frontiers from Google and OpenAI show high problem-solving accuracies (up to 100\% pass@3 scores), they fully collapse when the reasoning load is increased meta-cognitively (GPT-5 fixes just 5.2\% errors). Systematic ablations show mmJEE-Eval's difficulty stems from complexity and reasoning depth rather than memorization. Effectively, our benchmark segregates superior training and reasoning methodologies where alternatives fail. We publicly release our code and data: https://mmjee-eval.github.io

Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLM) are reshaping science, with most recent advances culminating in fully-automated scientific discovery pipelines. But qualitative research has been left behind. Researchers in qualitative methods are hesitant about AI adoption. Yet when they are willing to use AI at all, they have little choice but to rely on general-purpose tools like ChatGPT to assist with interview interpretation, data annotation, and topic modeling - while simultaneously acknowledging these system's well-known limitations of being biased, opaque, irreproducible, and privacy-compromising. This creates a critical gap: while AI has substantially advanced quantitative methods, the qualitative dimensions essential for meaning-making and comprehensive scientific understanding remain poorly integrated. We argue for developing dedicated qualitative AI systems built from the ground up for interpretive research. Such systems must be transparent, reproducible, and privacy-friendly. We review recent literature to show how existing automated discovery pipelines could be enhanced by robust qualitative capabilities, and identify key opportunities where safe qualitative AI could advance multidisciplinary and mixed-methods research.