Modern generative models excel at producing realistic samples--images, text, molecules-- but often lack guarantees about structural properties. A protein generator may produce plausible sequences that violate stability constraints; a network topology generator may create graphs that fail connectivity requirements; a molecule generator may output structures violating chemical valence rules. Standard GAN discriminators provide a global "real vs. fake" signal, but they cannot pinpoint which specific structural constraint failed or guarantee that generated samples satisfy formal specifications. Meanwhile, mathematical logic has developed precise tools for reasoning about structural properties. Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé (EF) games [1, 2] characterize when two structures are indistinguishable by logical formulas up to a given complexity (quantifier depth k). First-order (FO) and monadic second-order (MSO) logics can express rich structural properties--connectivity, bipartiteness, planarity, acyclicity--that are crucial in applications but invisible to standard discriminators.

Humanitarian organizations face a critical choice: invest in costly commercial APIs or rely on free open-weight models for multilingual human rights monitoring. While commercial systems offer reliability, open-weight alternatives lack empirical validation -- especially for low-resource languages common in conflict zones. This paper presents the first systematic comparison of commercial and open-weight large language models (LLMs) for human-rights-violation detection across seven languages, quantifying the cost-reliability trade-off facing resource-constrained organizations. Across 78,000 multilingual inferences, we evaluate six models -- four instruction-aligned (Claude-Sonnet-4, DeepSeek-V3, Gemini-Flash-2.0, GPT-4.1-mini) and two open-weight (LLaMA-3-8B, Mistral-7B) -- using both standard classification metrics and new measures of cross-lingual reliability: Calibration Deviation (CD), Decision Bias (B), Language Robustness Score (LRS), and Language Stability Score (LSS). Results show that alignment, not scale, determines stability: aligned models maintain near-invariant accuracy and balanced calibration across typologically distant and low-resource languages (e.g., Lingala, Burmese), while open-weight models exhibit significant prompt-language sensitivity and calibration drift. These findings demonstrate that multilingual alignment enables language-agnostic reasoning and provide practical guidance for humanitarian organizations balancing budget constraints with reliability in multilingual deployment.

Air pollution remains a critical environmental and public health concern in Indian megacities such as Delhi, Kolkata, and Mumbai, where sudden spikes in pollutant levels challenge timely intervention. Accurate Air Quality Index (AQI) forecasting is difficult due to the coexistence of linear trends, seasonal variations, and volatile nonlinear patterns. This paper proposes a hybrid forecasting framework that integrates LOESS decomposition, ARIMA modeling, and a multi-scale CNN-BiLSTM network with a residual-gated attention mechanism. The LOESS step separates the AQI series into trend, seasonal, and residual components, with ARIMA modeling the smooth components and the proposed deep learning module capturing multi-scale volatility in the residuals. Model hyperparameters are tuned via the Unified Adaptive Multi-Stage Metaheuristic Optimizer (UAMMO), combining multiple optimization strategies for efficient convergence. Experiments on 2021-2023 AQI datasets from the Central Pollution Control Board show that the proposed method consistently outperforms statistical, deep learning, and hybrid baselines across PM2.5, O3, CO, and NOx in three major cities, achieving up to 5-8% lower MSE and higher R^2 scores (>0.94) for all pollutants. These results demonstrate the framework's robustness, sensitivity to sudden pollution events, and applicability to urban air quality management.

Automatically assessing handwritten mathematical solutions is an important problem in educational technology with practical applications, but it remains a significant challenge due to the diverse formats, unstructured layouts, and symbolic complexity of student work. To address this challenge, we introduce VEHME-a Vision-Language Model for Evaluating Handwritten Mathematics Expressions-designed to assess open-form handwritten math responses with high accuracy and interpretable reasoning traces. VEHME integrates a two-phase training pipeline: (i) supervised fine-tuning using structured reasoning data, and (ii) reinforcement learning that aligns model outputs with multi-dimensional grading objectives, including correctness, reasoning depth, and error localization. To enhance spatial understanding, we propose an Expression-Aware Visual Prompting Module, trained on our synthesized multi-line math expressions dataset to robustly guide attention in visually heterogeneous inputs. Evaluated on AIHub and FERMAT datasets, VEHME achieves state-of-the-art performance among open-source models and approaches the accuracy of proprietary systems, demonstrating its potential as a scalable and accessible tool for automated math assessment. Our training and experiment code is publicly available at our GitHub repository.

Software architecture design is a fundamental part of creating every software system. Despite its importance, producing a C4 software architecture model -- the preferred notation for such architecture -- remains manual and time-consuming. W e introduce an LLM-based multi-agent system that automates this task by simulating a dialogue between role-specific experts who analyze requirements and generate the Context, Container, and Component views of the C4 model. Quality is assessed with a hybrid evaluation framework: deterministic checks for structural and syntactic integrity and C4 rule consistency, plus semantic and qualitative scoring via an LLM-as-a-Judge approach. T ested on five canonical system briefs, the workflow demonstrates fast C4 model creation, sustains high compilation success, and delivers semantic fidelity. A comparison of four state-of-the-art LLMs shows different strengths relevant to architectural design. This study contributes to automated software architecture design and its evaluation methods.

While large language model agents have advanced software engineering tasks, the unscalable nature of existing test-based supervision is limiting the potential improvement of data scaling. The reason is twofold: (1) building and running test sandbox is rather heavy and fragile, and (2) data with high-coverage tests is naturally rare and threatened by test hacking via edge cases. In this paper, we propose R4P, a patch verifier model to provide scalable rewards for training and testing SWE agents via reasoning. We consider that patch verification is fundamentally a reasoning task, mirroring how human repository maintainers review patches without writing and running new reproduction tests. To obtain sufficient reference and reduce the risk of reward hacking, R4P uses a group-wise objective for RL training, enabling it to verify multiple patches against each other's modification and gain a dense reward for stable training. R4P achieves 72.2% Acc. for verifying patches from SWE-bench-verified, surpassing OpenAI o3. To demonstrate R4P's practicality, we design and train a lite scaffold, Mini-SE, with pure reinforcement learning where all rewards are derived from R4P. As a result, Mini-SE achieves 26.2% Pass@1 on SWE-bench-verified, showing a 10.0% improvement over the original Qwen3-32B. This can be further improved to 32.8% with R4P for test-time scaling. Furthermore, R4P verifies patches within a second, 50x faster than testing on average. The stable scaling curves of rewards and accuracy along with high efficiency reflect R4P's practicality.

As Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) are increasingly deployed in domains such as shopping, health, and news, they are exposed to pervasive persuasive content. A critical question is how these models function as persuadees-how and why they can be influenced by persuasive multimodal inputs. Understanding both their susceptibility to persuasion and the effectiveness of different persuasive strategies is crucial, as overly persuadable models may adopt misleading beliefs, override user preferences, or generate unethical or unsafe outputs when exposed to manipulative messages. We introduce MMPersuade, a unified framework for systematically studying multimodal persuasion dynamics in LVLMs. MMPersuade contributes (i) a comprehensive multimodal dataset that pairs images and videos with established persuasion principles across commercial, subjective and behavioral, and adversarial contexts, and (ii) an evaluation framework that quantifies both persuasion effectiveness and model susceptibility via third-party agreement scoring and self-estimated token probabilities on conversation histories. Our study of six leading LVLMs as persuadees yields three key insights: (i) multimodal inputs substantially increase persuasion effectiveness-and model susceptibility-compared to text alone, especially in misinformation scenarios; (ii) stated prior preferences decrease susceptibility, yet multimodal information maintains its persuasive advantage; and (iii) different strategies vary in effectiveness across contexts, with reciprocity being most potent in commercial and subjective contexts, and credibility and logic prevailing in adversarial contexts. By jointly analyzing persuasion effectiveness and susceptibility, MMPersuade provides a principled foundation for developing models that are robust, preference-consistent, and ethically aligned when engaging with persuasive multimodal content.

While Large Language Models have transformed how we interact with AI systems, they suffer from a critical flaw: they confidently generate false information that sounds entirely plausible. This hallucination problem has become a major barrier to deploying these models in real-world applications where accuracy matters. We developed a fact-verification framework that catches and corrects these errors in real-time by cross-checking LLM outputs against multiple knowledge sources. Our system combines structured databases, live web searches, and academic literature to verify factual claims as they're generated. When we detect inconsistencies, we automatically correct them while preserving the natural flow of the response. Testing across various domains showed we could reduce hallucinations by 67% without sacrificing response quality. Domain experts in healthcare, finance, and scientific research rated our corrected outputs 89% satisfactory--a significant improvement over unverified LLM responses. This work offers a practical solution for making LLMs more trustworthy in applications where getting facts wrong isn't an option.

Gaussian-Process-based Bayesian optimization (GP-BO), is a prevailing model-based framework for DBMS auto-tuning. However, recent work shows GP-BO-based DBMS auto-tuners significantly outperformed auto-tuners based on SMAC, which features random forest surrogate models; such results motivate us to rethink and investigate the limitations of GP-BO in auto-tuner design. We find the fundamental assumptions of GP-BO are widely violated when modeling and optimizing DBMS performance, while tree-ensemble-BOs (e.g., SMAC) can avoid the assumption pitfalls and deliver improved tuning efficiency and effectiveness. Moreover, we argue that existing tree-ensemble-BOs restrict further advancement in DBMS auto-tuning. First, existing tree-ensemble-BOs can only achieve distribution-free point estimates, but still impose unrealistic distributional assumptions on uncertainty estimates, compromising surrogate modeling and distort the acquisition function. Second, recent advances in gradient boosting, which can further enhance surrogate modeling against vanilla GP and random forest counterparts, have rarely been applied in optimizing DBMS auto-tuners. To address these issues, we propose a novel model-based DBMS auto-tuner, Centrum. Centrum improves distribution-free point and interval estimation in surrogate modeling with a two-phase learning procedure of stochastic gradient boosting ensembles. Moreover, Centrum adopts a generalized SGBE-estimated locally-adaptive conformal prediction to facilitate a distribution-free uncertainty estimation and acquisition function. To our knowledge, Centrum is the first auto-tuner to realize distribution-freeness, enhancing BO's practicality in DBMS auto-tuning, and the first to seamlessly fuse gradient boosting ensembles and conformal inference in BO. Extensive physical and simulation experiments on two DBMSs and three workloads show Centrum outperforms 21 SOTA methods.

Big Language Models (LLMs) are changing the way businesses use software, the way people live their lives and the way industries work. Companies like Google, High-Flyer, Anthropic, OpenAI and Meta are making better LLMs. So, it's crucial to look at how each model is different in terms of performance, moral behaviour and usability, as these differences are based on the different ideas that built them. This study compares five top LLMs: Google's Gemini, High-Flyer's DeepSeek, Anthropic's Claude, OpenAI's GPT models and Meta's LLaMA. It performs this by analysing three important factors: Performance and Accuracy, Ethics and Bias Mitigation and Usability and Integration. It was found that Claude has good moral reasoning, Gemini is better at multimodal capabilities and has strong ethical frameworks. DeepSeek is great at reasoning based on facts, LLaMA is good for open applications and ChatGPT delivers balanced performance with a focus on usage. It was concluded that these models are different in terms of how well they work, how easy they are to use and how they treat people ethically, making it a point that each model should be utilised by the user in a way that makes the most of its strengths.