The quality of a conversation goes beyond the individual quality of each reply, and instead emerges from how these combine into interactional dynamics that give the conversation its distinctive overall "shape". However, there is no robust automated method for comparing conversations in terms of their overall dynamics. Such methods could enhance the analysis of conversational data and help evaluate conversational agents more holistically. In this work, we introduce a similarity measure for comparing conversations with respect to their dynamics. We design a validation procedure for testing the robustness of the metric in capturing differences in conversation dynamics and for assessing its sensitivity to the topic of the conversations. To illustrate the measure's utility, we use it to analyze conversational dynamics in a large online community, bringing new insights into the role of situational power in conversations.

Bisimulation metric has long been regarded as an effective control-related representation learning technique in various reinforcement learning tasks. However, in this paper, we identify two main issues with the conventional bisimulation metric: 1) an inability to represent certain distinctive scenarios, and 2) a reliance on predefined weights for differences in rewards and subsequent states during recursive updates. We find that the first issue arises from an imprecise definition of the reward gap, whereas the second issue stems from overlooking the varying importance of reward difference and next-state distinctions across different training stages and task settings. To address these issues, by introducing a measure for state-action pairs, we propose a revised bisimulation metric that features a more precise definition of reward gap and novel update operators with adaptive coefficient. We also offer theoretical guarantees of convergence for our proposed metric and its improved representation distinctiveness. In addition to our rigorous theoretical analysis, we conduct extensive experiments on two representative benchmarks, DeepMind Control and Meta-World, demonstrating the effectiveness of our approach.

We run a controlled compositional generalization experiment in the ARC-AGI domain: an open-world problem domain in which the ability to generalize out-of-distribution is, by design, an essential characteristic for success. We compare neural program synthesis and test-time fine-tuning approaches on this experiment. We find that execution-guided neural program synthesis outperforms all reference algorithms in its ability to compose novel solutions. Our empirical findings also suggest that the success of TTFT on ARC-AGI lies mainly in eliciting in-distribution knowledge that the LLM otherwise fails to rely on directly.

In the fast-moving world of AI, as organizations and researchers develop more advanced models, they face challenges due to their sheer size and computational demands. Deploying such models on edge devices or in resource-constrained environments adds further challenges related to energy consumption, memory usage and latency. To address these challenges, emerging trends are shaping the future of efficient model optimization techniques. From this premise, by employing supervised state-of-the-art transformer-based models, this research introduces a systematic method for ontology alignment, grounded in cosine-based semantic similarity between a biomedical layman vocabulary and the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) Metathesaurus. It leverages Microsoft Olive to search for target optimizations among different Execution Providers (EPs) using the ONNX Runtime backend, followed by an assembled process of dynamic quantization employing Intel Neural Compressor and IPEX (Intel Extension for PyTorch). Through our optimization process, we conduct extensive assessments on the two tasks from the DEFT 2020 Evaluation Campaign, achieving a new state-of-the-art in both. We retain performance metrics intact, while attaining an average inference speed-up of 20x and reducing memory usage by approximately 70%.

The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has heightened concerns about benchmark data contamination (BDC), where models inadvertently memorize evaluation data during the training process, inflating performance metrics, and undermining genuine generalization assessment. This paper introduces the Data Contamination Risk (DCR) framework, a lightweight, interpretable pipeline designed to detect and quantify BDC risk across four granular levels: semantic, informational, data, and label. By synthesizing contamination scores via a fuzzy inference system, DCR produces a unified DCR Factor that adjusts raw accuracy to reflect contamination-aware performance. Validated on 9 LLMs (0.5B-72B) across sentiment analysis, fake news detection, and arithmetic reasoning tasks, the DCR framework reliably diagnoses contamination severity and with accuracy adjusted using the DCR Factor to within 4% average error across the three benchmarks compared to the uncontaminated baseline. Emphasizing computational efficiency and transparency, DCR provides a practical tool for integrating contamination assessment into routine evaluations, fostering fairer comparisons and enhancing the credibility of LLM benchmarking practices.

As online news consumption grows, personalized recommendation systems have become integral to digital journalism. However, these systems risk reinforcing filter bubbles and political polarization by failing to incorporate diverse perspectives. Stance detection -- identifying a text's position on a target -- can help mitigate this by enabling viewpoint-aware recommendations and data-driven analyses of media bias. Yet, existing stance detection research remains largely limited to short texts and high-resource languages. To address these gaps, we introduce \textsc{K-News-Stance}, the first Korean dataset for article-level stance detection, comprising 2,000 news articles with article-level and 21,650 segment-level stance annotations across 47 societal issues. We also propose \textsc{JoA-ICL}, a \textbf{Jo}urnalism-guided \textbf{A}gentic \textbf{I}n-\textbf{C}ontext \textbf{L}earning framework that employs a language model agent to predict the stances of key structural segments (e.g., leads, quotations), which are then aggregated to infer the overall article stance. Experiments showed that \textsc{JoA-ICL} outperforms existing stance detection methods, highlighting the benefits of segment-level agency in capturing the overall position of long-form news articles. Two case studies further demonstrate its broader utility in promoting viewpoint diversity in news recommendations and uncovering patterns of media bias.

Modern Artificial Intelligence (AI) increasingly relies on multi-agent architectures that blend visual and language understanding. Yet, a pressing challenge remains: How can we trust these agents especially in zero-shot settings with no fine-tuning? We introduce a novel modular Agentic AI visual classification framework that integrates generalist multimodal agents with a non-visual reasoning orchestrator and a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) module. Applied to apple leaf disease diagnosis, we benchmark three configurations: (I) zero-shot with confidence-based orchestration, (II) fine-tuned agents with improved performance, and (III) trust-calibrated orchestration enhanced by CLIP-based image retrieval and re-evaluation loops. Using confidence calibration metrics (ECE, OCR, CCC), the orchestrator modulates trust across agents. Our results demonstrate a 77.94\% accuracy improvement in the zero-shot setting using trust-aware orchestration and RAG, achieving 85.63\% overall. GPT-4o showed better calibration, while Qwen-2.5-VL displayed overconfidence. Furthermore, image-RAG grounded predictions with visually similar cases, enabling correction of agent overconfidence via iterative re-evaluation. The proposed system separates perception (vision agents) from meta-reasoning (orchestrator), enabling scalable and interpretable multi-agent AI. This blueprint illustrates how Agentic AI can deliver trustworthy, modular, and transparent reasoning, and is extensible to diagnostics, biology, and other trust-critical domains. In doing so, we highlight Agentic AI not just as an architecture but as a paradigm for building reliable multi-agent intelligence. agentic ai, orchestrator agent trust, trust orchestration, visual classification, retrieval augmented reasoning

Deep learning has driven significant advances in medical image analysis, yet its adoption in clinical practice remains constrained by the large size and lack of transparency in modern models. Advances in interpretability techniques such as DL-Backtrace, Layer-wise Relevance Propagation, and Integrated Gradients make it possible to assess the contribution of individual components within neural networks trained on medical imaging tasks. In this work, we introduce an interpretability-guided pruning framework that reduces model complexity while preserving both predictive performance and transparency. By selectively retaining only the most relevant parts of each layer, our method enables targeted compression that maintains clinically meaningful representations. Experiments across multiple medical image classification benchmarks demonstrate that this approach achieves high compression rates with minimal loss in accuracy, paving the way for lightweight, interpretable models suited for real-world deployment in healthcare settings.

Language barriers in scientific documents hinder the diffusion and development of science and technologies. However, prior efforts in translating such documents largely overlooked the information in layouts. To bridge the gap, we introduce PDFMathTranslate, the world's first open-source software for translating scientific documents while preserving layouts. Leveraging the most recent advances in large language models and precise layout detection, we contribute to the community with key improvements in precision, flexibility, and efficiency. The work has been open-sourced at https://github.com/byaidu/pdfmathtranslate with more than 222k downloads.

As financial institutions increasingly adopt Large Language Models (LLMs), rigorous domain-specific evaluation becomes critical for responsible deployment. For advanced financial reasoning, the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) Level III exam is widely considered the gold standard. In this paper, we present a comprehensive benchmark evaluating 23 state-of-the-art LLMs on mock CFA Level III exams, which require answering challenging multiple choice and essay questions. We evaluate reasoning and non-reasoning models, both proprietary and open source, using three prompting strategies: zero-shot, chain-of-thought, and self-discover. We find that frontier reasoning models, such as o4-mini, Gemini 2.5 Pro, and Claude Opus 4, using chain-of-thought prompting demonstrate strong capabilities, successfully passing the mock Level III exams. While there is little to separate the frontier models on multiple choice questions, only a few models excel at the complex essay questions, which require analysis, synthesis, and strategic thinking. These results demonstrate significant progress in the financial reasoning capabilities of LLMs, which previously [13] could clear Level I and Level II exams but struggled with the Level III exam, particularly the essay questions.