Workplace negotiations are undermined by psychological barriers, which can even derail well-prepared tactics. AI offers personalized and always -- available negotiation coaching, yet its effectiveness for negotiation preparedness remains unclear. We built Trucey, a prototype AI coach grounded in Brett's negotiation model. We conducted a between-subjects experiment (N=267), comparing Trucey, ChatGPT, and a traditional negotiation Handbook, followed by in-depth interviews (N=15). While Trucey showed the strongest reductions in fear relative to both comparison conditions, the Handbook outperformed both AIs in usability and psychological empowerment. Interviews revealed that the Handbook's comprehensive, reviewable content was crucial for participants' confidence and preparedness. In contrast, although participants valued AI's rehearsal capability, its guidance often felt verbose and fragmented -- delivered in bits and pieces that required additional effort -- leaving them uncertain or overwhelmed. These findings challenge assumptions of AI superiority and motivate hybrid designs that integrate structured, theory-driven content with targeted rehearsal, clear boundaries, and adaptive scaffolds to address psychological barriers and support negotiation preparedness.

Understanding how Large Language Models (LLMs) perform complex reasoning and their failure mechanisms is a challenge in interpretability research. To provide a measurable geometric analysis perspective, we define the concept of the Reasoning Manifold, a latent low-dimensional geometric structure formed by the internal representations corresponding to all correctly reasoned generations. This structure can be conceptualized as the embodiment of the effective thinking paths that the model has learned to successfully solve a given task. Based on this concept, we build REMA, a framework that explains the origins of failures by quantitatively comparing the spatial relationships of internal model representations corresponding to both erroneous and correct reasoning samples. Specifically, REMA first quantifies the geometric deviation of each erroneous representation by calculating its k-nearest neighbors distance to the approximated manifold formed by correct representations, thereby providing a unified failure signal. It then localizes the divergence points where these deviations first become significant by tracking this deviation metric across the model's layers and comparing it against a baseline of internal fluctuations from correct representations, thus identifying where the reasoning chain begins to go off-track. Our extensive experiments on diverse language and multimodal models and tasks demonstrate the low-dimensional nature of the reasoning manifold and the high separability between erroneous and correct reasoning representations. The results also validate the effectiveness of the REMA framework in analyzing the origins of reasoning failures. This research connects abstract reasoning failures to measurable geometric deviations in representations, providing new avenues for in-depth understanding and diagnosis of the internal computational processes of black-box models.

This paper introduces TrueGradeAI, an AI-driven digital examination framework that directly addresses the shortcomings of traditional paper assessments, namely excessive paper usage, logistical complexity, grading delays, and evaluator bias. The system preserves natural handwriting by capturing stylus input on secure tablets and applying transformer-based optical character recognition for transcription. Evaluation is performed through a retrieval-augmented pipeline that integrates faculty solutions, cache layers, and external references, enabling a large language model to assign scores with explicit, evidence-linked reasoning. By combining handwriting preservation with scalable and transparent evaluation, the framework reduces environmental costs, accelerates feedback cycles, and progressively builds a reusable knowledge base, while explicitly working to mitigate grading bias and ensure fairness in assessment. Despite advances in digital infrastructure, most institutions continue to rely on paper-based examinations as their primary mode of assessment.

Federated Learning (FL) has emerged as a promising decentralized learning (DL) approach that enables the use of distributed data without compromising user privacy. However, FL poses several key challenges. First, it is frequently assumed that every client can train the same machine learning models, however, not all clients are able to meet this assumption because of differences in their business needs and computational resources. Second, statistical heterogeneity (a.k.a. non-IID data) poses a major challenge in FL, which can lead to lower global model performance. Third, while addressing these challenges, there is a need for a cost-effective incentive mechanism to encourage clients to participate in FL training. In response to these challenges, we propose several methodologies: DL-SH, which facilitates efficient, privacy-preserving, and communication-efficient learning in the context of statistical heterogeneity; DL-MH, designed to manage fully heterogeneous models while tackling statistical disparities; and I-DL-MH, an incentive-based extension of DL-MH that promotes client engagement in federated learning training by providing incentives within this complex federated learning framework. Comprehensive experiments were carried out to assess the performance and scalability of the proposed approaches across a range of complex experimental settings. This involved utilizing various model architectures, in diverse data distributions, including IID and several non-IID scenarios, as well as multiple datasets. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed approaches significantly enhance accuracy and decrease communication costs while effectively addressing statistical heterogeneity and model heterogeneity in comparison to existing state-of-the-art approaches and baselines, with DL-SH improving global model accuracy by 153%, and I-DL-MH achieving a 225% improvement under non-IID conditions.

AI-powered companion chatbots (AICCs) such as Replika are increasingly popular, offering empathetic interactions, yet their psychosocial impacts remain unclear. We examined how engaging with AICCs shaped wellbeing and how users perceived these experiences. First, we conducted a large-scale quasi-experimental study of longitudinal Reddit data, applying stratified propensity score matching and Difference-in-Differences regression. Findings revealed mixed effects -- greater affective and grief expression, readability, and interpersonal focus, alongside increases in language about loneliness and suicidal ideation. Second, we complemented these results with 15 semi-structured interviews, which we thematically analyzed and contextualized using Knapp's relationship development model. We identified trajectories of initiation, escalation, and bonding, wherein AICCs provided emotional validation and social rehearsal but also carried risks of over-reliance and withdrawal. Triangulating across methods, we offer design implications for AI companions that scaffold healthy boundaries, support mindful engagement, support disclosure without dependency, and surface relationship stages -- maximizing psychosocial benefits while mitigating risks.

Large language models deployed in sensitive applications increasingly require the ability to unlearn specific knowledge, such as user requests, copyrighted materials, or outdated information, without retraining from scratch to ensure regulatory compliance, user privacy, and safety. This task, known as machine unlearning, aims to remove the influence of targeted data (forgetting) while maintaining performance on the remaining data (retention). A common approach is to formulate this as a multi-objective problem and reduce it to a single-objective problem via scalarization, where forgetting and retention losses are combined using a weighted sum. However, this often results in unstable training dynamics and degraded model utility due to conflicting gradient directions. To address these challenges, we propose OFMU, a penalty-based bi-level optimization framework that explicitly prioritizes forgetting while preserving retention through a hierarchical structure. Our method enforces forgetting via an inner maximization step that incorporates a similarity-aware penalty to decorrelate the gradients of the forget and retention objectives, and restores utility through an outer minimization step. To ensure scalability, we develop a two-loop algorithm with provable convergence guarantees under both convex and non-convex regimes. We further provide a rigorous theoretical analysis of convergence rates and show that our approach achieves better trade-offs between forgetting efficacy and model utility compared to prior methods. Extensive experiments across vision and language benchmarks demonstrate that OFMU consistently outperforms existing unlearning methods in both forgetting efficacy and retained utility.

Large language models (LLMs) have been widely used for problem-solving tasks. Most recent work improves their performance through supervised fine-tuning (SFT) with labeled data or reinforcement learning (RL) from task feedback. In this paper, we study a new perspective: the divergence in solutions generated by LLMs for a single problem. We show that higher solution divergence is positively related to better problem-solving abilities across various models. Based on this finding, we propose solution divergence as a novel metric that can support both SFT and RL strategies. We test this idea on three representative problem domains and find that using solution divergence consistently improves success rates. These results suggest that solution divergence is a simple but effective tool for advancing LLM training and evaluation. The rise of large language models (LLMs) and their remarkable general problem-solving capabilities have accelerated research on advanced artificial intelligence (AI) solutions across diverse domains, including science (Ren et al., 2025), finance (Li et al., 2023), and education (Wang et al., 2024).

In an era dominated by Large Language Models (LLMs), understanding their capabilities and limitations, especially in high-stakes fields like law, is crucial. While LLMs such as Meta's LLaMA, OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, DeepSeek, and other emerging models are increasingly integrated into legal workflows, their performance in multilingual, jurisdictionally diverse, and adversarial contexts remains insufficiently explored. This work evaluates LLaMA and Gemini on multilingual legal and non-legal benchmarks, and assesses their adversarial robustness in legal tasks through character and word-level perturbations. We use an LLM-as-a-Judge approach for human-aligned evaluation. We moreover present an open-source, modular evaluation pipeline designed to support multilingual, task-diverse benchmarking of any combination of LLMs and datasets, with a particular focus on legal tasks, including classification, summarization, open questions, and general reasoning. Our findings confirm that legal tasks pose significant challenges for LLMs with accuracies often below 50% on legal reasoning benchmarks such as LEXam, compared to over 70% on general-purpose tasks like XNLI. In addition, while English generally yields more stable results, it does not always lead to higher accuracy. Prompt sensitivity and adversarial vulnerability is also shown to persist across languages. Finally, a correlation is found between the performance of a language and its syntactic similarity to English. We also observe that LLaMA is weaker than Gemini, with the latter showing an average advantage of about 24 percentage points across the same task. Despite improvements in newer LLMs, challenges remain in deploying them reliably for critical, multilingual legal applications.

Physics-informed graph neural networks (PIGNNs) have emerged as fast AC power-flow solvers that can replace classic Newton--Raphson (NR) solvers, especially when thousands of scenarios must be evaluated. However, current PIGNNs still need accuracy improvements at parity speed; in particular, the physics loss is inoperative at inference, which can deter operational adoption. We address this with PIGNN-Attn-LS, combining an edge-aware attention mechanism that explicitly encodes line physics via per-edge biases, capturing the grid's anisotropy, with a backtracking line-search-based globalized correction operator that restores an operative decrease criterion at inference. Training and testing use a realistic High-/Medium-Voltage scenario generator, with NR used only to construct reference states. On held-out HV cases consisting of 4--32-bus grids, PIGNN-Attn-LS achieves a test RMSE of 0.00033 p.u. in voltage and 0.08$^\circ$ in angle, outperforming the PIGNN-MLP baseline by 99.5\% and 87.1\%, respectively. With streaming micro-batches, it delivers 2--5$\times$ faster batched inference than NR on 4--1024-bus grids.

Diagrams convey symbolic information in a visual format rather than a linear stream of words, making them especially challenging for AI models to process. While recent evaluations suggest that vision-language models (VLMs) perform well on diagram-related benchmarks, their reliance on knowledge, reasoning, or modality shortcuts raises concerns about whether they genuinely understand and reason over diagrams. To address this gap, we introduce Chimera, a comprehensive test suite comprising 7,500 high-quality diagrams sourced from Wikipedia; each diagram is annotated with its symbolic content represented by semantic triples along with multi-level questions designed to assess four fundamental aspects of diagram comprehension: entity recognition, relation understanding, knowledge grounding, and visual reasoning. We use Chimera to measure the presence of three types of shortcuts in visual question answering: (1) the visual-memorization shortcut, where VLMs rely on memorized visual patterns; (2) the knowledge-recall shortcut, where models leverage memorized factual knowledge instead of interpreting the diagram; and (3) the Clever-Hans shortcut, where models exploit superficial language patterns or priors without true comprehension. We evaluate 15 open-source VLMs from 7 model families on Chimera and find that their seemingly strong performance largely stems from shortcut behaviors: visual-memorization shortcuts have slight impact, knowledge-recall shortcuts play a moderate role, and Clever-Hans shortcuts contribute significantly. These findings expose critical limitations in current VLMs and underscore the need for more robust evaluation protocols that benchmark genuine comprehension of complex visual inputs (e.g., diagrams) rather than question-answering shortcuts.