Instruct models, obtained from various instruction tuning or post-training steps, are commonly deemed superior and more usable than their base counterpart. While the model gains instruction following ability, instruction tuning may lead to forgetting the knowledge from pre-training or it may encourage the model to become overly conversational or verbose. This, in turn, can lead to degradation of in-context few-shot learning performance. In this work, we study the performance trajectory between base and instruct models by scaling down the strength of instruction-tuning via the partial adaption method. We show that, across several model families and model sizes, reducing the strength of instruction-tuning results in material improvement on a few-shot in-context learning benchmark covering a variety of classic natural language tasks. This comes at the cost of losing some degree of instruction following ability as measured by AlpacaEval. Our study shines light on the potential trade-off between in-context learning and instruction following abilities that is worth considering in practice.

Optimizing Register Transfer Level (RTL) code is crucial for improving the power, performance, and area (PPA) of digital circuits in the early stages of synthesis. Manual rewriting, guided by synthesis feedback, can yield high-quality results but is time-consuming and error-prone. Most existing compiler-based approaches have difficulty handling complex design constraints. Large Language Model (LLM)-based methods have emerged as a promising alternative to address these challenges. However, LLM-based approaches often face difficulties in ensuring alignment between the generated code and the provided prompts. This paper presents SymRTLO, a novel neuron-symbolic RTL optimization framework that seamlessly integrates LLM-based code rewriting with symbolic reasoning techniques. Our method incorporates a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) system of optimization rules and Abstract Syntax Tree (AST)-based templates, enabling LLM-based rewriting that maintains syntactic correctness while minimizing undesired circuit behaviors. A symbolic module is proposed for analyzing and optimizing finite state machine (FSM) logic, allowing fine-grained state merging and partial specification handling beyond the scope of pattern-based compilers. Furthermore, a fast verification pipeline, combining formal equivalence checks with test-driven validation, further reduces the complexity of verification. Experiments on the RTL-Rewriter benchmark with Synopsys Design Compiler and Yosys show that SymRTLO improves power, performance, and area (PPA) by up to 43.9%, 62.5%, and 51.1%, respectively, compared to the state-of-the-art methods.

Redundancy of visual tokens in multi-modal large language models (MLLMs) significantly reduces their computational efficiency. Recent approaches, such as resamplers and summarizers, have sought to reduce the number of visual tokens, but at the cost of visual reasoning ability. To address this, we propose LEO-MINI, a novel MLLM that significantly reduces the number of visual tokens and simultaneously boosts visual reasoning capabilities. For efficiency, LEO-MINI incorporates CoTR, a novel token reduction module to consolidate a large number of visual tokens into a smaller set of tokens, using the similarity between visual tokens, text tokens, and a compact learnable query. For effectiveness, to scale up the model's ability with minimal computational overhead, LEO-MINI employs MMoE, a novel mixture of multi-modal experts module. MMOE employs a set of LoRA experts with a novel router to switch between them based on the input text and visual tokens instead of only using the input hidden state. MMoE also includes a general LoRA expert that is always activated to learn general knowledge for LLM reasoning. For extracting richer visual features, MMOE employs a set of vision experts trained on diverse domain-specific data. To demonstrate LEO-MINI's improved efficiency and performance, we evaluate it against existing efficient MLLMs on various benchmark vision-language tasks.

LLMs' remarkable ability to tackle a wide range of language tasks opened new opportunities for collaborative human-AI problem solving. LLMs can amplify human capabilities by applying their intuitions and reasoning strategies at scale. We explore whether human guides can be simulated, by generalizing from human demonstrations of guiding an AI system to solve complex language problems. We introduce CoLa, a novel self-guided learning paradigm for training automated $\textit{guides}$ and evaluate it on two QA datasets, a puzzle-solving task, and a constrained text generation task. Our empirical results show that CoLa consistently outperforms competitive approaches across all domains. Moreover, a small-sized trained guide outperforms a strong model like GPT-4 when acting as a guide. We compare the strategies employed by humans and automated guides by conducting a human study on a QA dataset. We show that automated guides outperform humans by adapting their strategies to reasoners' capabilities and conduct qualitative analyses highlighting distinct differences in guiding strategies.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated promising performance on medical benchmarks; however, their ability to perform medical calculations, a crucial aspect of clinical decision-making, remains underexplored and poorly evaluated. Existing benchmarks often assess only the final answer with a wide numerical tolerance, overlooking systematic reasoning failures and potentially causing serious clinical misjudgments. In this work, we revisit medical calculation evaluation with a stronger focus on clinical trustworthiness. First, we clean and restructure the MedCalc-Bench dataset and propose a new step-by-step evaluation pipeline that independently assesses formula selection, entity extraction, and arithmetic computation. Under this granular framework, the accuracy of GPT-4o drops from 62.7% to 43.6%, revealing errors masked by prior evaluations. Second, we introduce an automatic error analysis framework that generates structured attribution for each failure mode. Human evaluation confirms its alignment with expert judgment, enabling scalable and explainable diagnostics. Finally, we propose a modular agentic pipeline, MedRaC, that combines retrieval-augmented generation and Python-based code execution. Without any fine-tuning, MedRaC improves the accuracy of different LLMs from 16.35% up to 53.19%. Our work highlights the limitations of current benchmark practices and proposes a more clinically faithful methodology. By enabling transparent and transferable reasoning evaluation, we move closer to making LLM-based systems trustworthy for real-world medical applications.

Misinformation evolves as it spreads, shifting in language, framing, and moral emphasis to adapt to new audiences. However, current misinformation detection approaches implicitly assume that misinformation is static. We introduce MPCG, a multi-round, persona-conditioned framework that simulates how claims are iteratively reinterpreted by agents with distinct ideological perspectives. Our approach uses an uncensored large language model (LLM) to generate persona-specific claims across multiple rounds, conditioning each generation on outputs from the previous round, enabling the study of misinformation evolution. We evaluate the generated claims through human and LLM-based annotations, cognitive effort metrics (readability, perplexity), emotion evocation metrics (sentiment analysis, morality), clustering, feasibility, and downstream classification. Results show strong agreement between human and GPT-4o-mini annotations, with higher divergence in fluency judgments. Generated claims require greater cognitive effort than the original claims and consistently reflect persona-aligned emotional and moral framing. Clustering and cosine similarity analyses confirm semantic drift across rounds while preserving topical coherence. Feasibility results show a 77% feasibility rate, confirming suitability for downstream tasks. Classification results reveal that commonly used misinformation detectors experience macro-F1 performance drops of up to 49.7%. The code is available at https://github.com/bcjr1997/MPCG

Vision Transformer (ViT) based autoencoders often underutilize the global Class token and employ static attention mechanisms, limiting both generative control and optimization efficiency. This paper introduces ViTCAE, a framework that addresses these issues by re-purposing the Class token into a generative linchpin. In our architecture, the encoder maps the Class token to a global latent variable that dictates the prior distribution for local, patch-level latent variables, establishing a robust dependency where global semantics directly inform the synthesis of local details. Drawing inspiration from opinion dynamics, we treat each attention head as a dynamical system of interacting tokens seeking consensus. This perspective motivates a convergence-aware temperature scheduler that adaptively anneals each head's influence function based on its distributional stability. This process enables a principled head-freezing mechanism, guided by theoretically-grounded diagnostics like an attention evolution distance and a consensus/cluster functional. This technique prunes converged heads during training to significantly improve computational efficiency without sacrificing fidelity. By unifying a generative Class token with an adaptive attention mechanism rooted in multi-agent consensus theory, ViTCAE offers a more efficient and controllable approach to transformer-based generation.

In this paper we investigate formal verification of extracted rules for Neural Networks under a complexity theoretic point of view. A rule is a global property or a pattern concerning a large portion of the input space of a network. These rules are algorithmically extracted from networks in an effort to better understand their inner way of working. Here, three problems will be in the focus: Does a given set of rules apply to a given network? Is a given set of rules consistent or do the rules contradict themselves? Is a given set of rules exhaustive in the sense that for every input the output is determined? Finding algorithms that extract such rules out of networks has been investigated over the last 30 years, however, to the author's current knowledge, no attempt in verification was made until now. A lot of attempts of extracting rules use heuristics involving randomness and over-approximation, so it might be beneficial to know whether knowledge obtained in that way can actually be trusted. We investigate the above questions for neural networks with ReLU-activation as well as for Boolean networks, each for several types of rules. We demonstrate how these problems can be reduced to each other and show that most of them are co-NP-complete.

Empowering large language models (LLMs) with chemical intelligence remains a challenge due to the scarcity of high-quality, domain-specific instruction-response datasets and the misalignment of existing synthetic data generation pipelines with the inherently hierarchical and rule-governed structure of chemical information. To address this, we propose ChemOrch, a framework that synthesizes chemically grounded instruction-response pairs through a two-stage process: task-controlled instruction generation and tool-aware response construction. ChemOrch enables controllable diversity and levels of difficulty for the generated tasks, and ensures response precision through tool planning and distillation, and tool-based self-repair mechanisms. The effectiveness of ChemOrch is evaluated based on: 1) the high quality of generated instruction data, demonstrating superior diversity and strong alignment with chemical constraints; 2) the reliable generation of evaluation tasks that more effectively reveal LLM weaknesses in chemistry; and 3) the significant improvement of LLM chemistry capabilities when the generated instruction data are used for fine-tuning. Our work thus represents a critical step toward scalable and verifiable chemical intelligence in LLMs.

Millions of people openly share mental health struggles on social media, providing rich data for early detection of conditions such as depression, bipolar disorder, etc. However, most prior Natural Language Processing (NLP) research has focused on single-disorder identification, leaving a gap in understanding the efficacy of advanced NLP techniques for distinguishing among multiple mental health conditions. In this work, we present a large-scale comparative study of state-of-the-art transformer versus Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM)-based models to classify mental health posts into exclusive categories of mental health conditions. We first curate a large dataset of Reddit posts spanning six mental health conditions and a control group, using rigorous filtering and statistical exploratory analysis to ensure annotation quality. We then evaluate five transformer architectures (BERT, RoBERTa, DistilBERT, ALBERT, and ELECTRA) against several LSTM variants (with or without attention, using contextual or static embeddings) under identical conditions. Experimental results show that transformer models consistently outperform the alternatives, with RoBERTa achieving 91-99% F1-scores and accuracies across all classes. Notably, attention-augmented LSTMs with BERT embeddings approach transformer performance (up to 97% F1-score) while training 2-3.5 times faster, whereas LSTMs using static embeddings fail to learn useful signals. These findings represent the first comprehensive benchmark for multi-class mental health detection, offering practical guidance on model selection and highlighting an accuracy-efficiency trade-off for real-world deployment of mental health NLP systems.