Large Language Models have rapidly advanced in their ability to interpret and generate natural language. In enterprise settings, they are frequently augmented with closed-source domain knowledge to deliver more contextually informed responses. However, operational constraints such as limited context windows and inconsistencies between pre-training data and supplied knowledge often lead to hallucinations, some of which appear highly credible and escape routine human review. Current mitigation strategies either depend on costly, large-scale gold-standard Q\&A curation or rely on secondary model verification, neither of which offers deterministic assurance. This paper introduces a framework that organizes proprietary knowledge and model-generated content into interactive visual knowledge graphs. The objective is to provide end users with a clear, intuitive view of potential hallucination zones by linking model assertions to underlying sources of truth and indicating confidence levels. Through this visual interface, users can diagnose inconsistencies, identify weak reasoning chains, and supply corrective feedback. The resulting human-in-the-loop workflow creates a structured feedback loop that can enhance model reliability and continuously improve response quality.

To prevent misinformation and social issues arising from trustworthy-looking content generated by LLMs, it is crucial to develop efficient and reliable methods for identifying the source of texts. Previous approaches have demonstrated exceptional performance in detecting texts fully generated by LLMs. However, these methods struggle when confronting more advanced LLM output or text with adversarial multi-task machine revision, especially in the black-box setting, where the generating model is unknown. To address this challenge, grounded in the hypothesis that human writing possesses distinctive stylistic patterns, we propose Human Language Preference Detection (HLPD). HLPD employs a reward-based alignment process, Human Language Preference Optimization (HLPO), to shift the scoring model's token distribution toward human-like writing, making the model more sensitive to human writing, therefore enhancing the identification of machine-revised text. We test HLPD in an adversarial multi-task evaluation framework that leverages a five-dimensional prompt generator and multiple advanced LLMs to create diverse revision scenarios. When detecting texts revised by GPT-series models, HLPD achieves a 15.11% relative improvement in AUROC over ImBD, surpassing Fast-DetectGPT by 45.56%. When evaluated on texts generated by advanced LLMs, HLPD achieves the highest average AUROC, exceeding ImBD by 5.53% and Fast-DetectGPT by 34.14%. Code will be made available at https://github.com/dfq2021/HLPD.

Uncertainty in optimization is often represented as stochastic parameters in the optimization model. In Predict-Then-Optimize approaches, predictions of a machine learning model are used as values for such parameters, effectively transforming the stochastic optimization problem into a deterministic one. This two-stage framework is built on the assumption that more accurate predictions result in solutions that are closer to the actual optimal solution. However, providing evidence for this assumption in the context of complex, constrained optimization problems is challenging and often overlooked in the literature. Simulating predictions of machine learning models offers a way to (experimentally) analyze how prediction error impacts solution quality without the need to train real models. Complementing an algorithm from the literature for simulating binary classification, we introduce a new algorithm for simulating predictions of multiclass classifiers. We conduct a computational study to evaluate the performance of these algorithms, and show that classifier performance can be simulated with reasonable accuracy, although some variability is observed. Additionally, we apply these algorithms to assess the performance of a Predict-Then-Optimize algorithm for a machine scheduling problem. The experiments demonstrate that the relationship between prediction error and how close solutions are to the actual optimum is non-trivial, highlighting important considerations for the design and evaluation of decision-making systems based on machine learning predictions.

Hateful memes aimed at LGBTQ\,+ communities often evade detection by tweaking either the caption, the image, or both. We build the first robustness benchmark for this setting, pairing four realistic caption attacks with three canonical image corruptions and testing all combinations on the PrideMM dataset. Two state-of-the-art detectors, MemeCLIP and MemeBLIP2, serve as case studies, and we introduce a lightweight \textbf{Text Denoising Adapter (TDA)} to enhance the latter's resilience. Across the grid, MemeCLIP degrades more gently, while MemeBLIP2 is particularly sensitive to the caption edits that disrupt its language processing. However, the addition of the TDA not only remedies this weakness but makes MemeBLIP2 the most robust model overall. Ablations reveal that all systems lean heavily on text, but architectural choices and pre-training data significantly impact robustness. Our benchmark exposes where current multimodal safety models crack and demonstrates that targeted, lightweight modules like the TDA offer a powerful path towards stronger defences.

Large language model (LLM) watermarks enable authentication of text provenance, curb misuse of machine-generated text, and promote trust in AI systems. Current watermarks operate by changing the next-token predictions output by an LLM. The updated (i.e., watermarked) predictions depend on random side information produced, for example, by hashing previously generated tokens. LLM watermarking is particularly challenging in low-entropy generation tasks -- such as coding -- where next-token predictions are near-deterministic. In this paper, we propose an optimization framework for watermark design. Our goal is to understand how to most effectively use random side information in order to maximize the likelihood of watermark detection and minimize the distortion of generated text. Our analysis informs the design of two new watermarks: HeavyWater and SimplexWater. Both watermarks are tunable, gracefully trading-off between detection accuracy and text distortion. They can also be applied to any LLM and are agnostic to side information generation. We examine the performance of HeavyWater and SimplexWater through several benchmarks, demonstrating that they can achieve high watermark detection accuracy with minimal compromise of text generation quality, particularly in the low-entropy regime. Our theoretical analysis also reveals surprising new connections between LLM watermarking and coding theory. The code implementation can be found in https://github.com/DorTsur/HeavyWater_SimplexWater

Many users and contributors of large open-source projects report software defects or enhancement requests (known as bug reports) to the issue-tracking systems. However, they sometimes report issues that have already been reported. First, they may not have time to do sufficient research on existing bug reports. Second, they may not possess the right expertise in that specific area to realize that an existing bug report is essentially elaborating on the same matter, perhaps with a different wording. In this paper, we propose a novel approach based on machine learning methods that can automatically detect duplicate bug reports in an open bug repository based on the textual data in the reports. We present six alternative methods: Topic modeling, Gaussian Naive Bayes, deep learning, time-based organization, clustering, and summarization using a generative pre-trained transformer large language model. Additionally, we introduce a novel threshold-based approach for duplicate identification, in contrast to the conventional top-k selection method that has been widely used in the literature. Our approach demonstrates promising results across all the proposed methods, achieving accuracy rates ranging from the high 70%'s to the low 90%'s. We evaluated our methods on a public dataset of issues belonging to an Eclipse open-source project.

This paper examines the market for AI models in which firms compete to provide accurate model predictions and consumers exhibit heterogeneous preferences for model accuracy. We develop a consumer-firm duopoly model to analyze how competition affects firms' incentives to improve model accuracy. Each firm aims to minimize its model's error, but this choice can often be suboptimal. Counterintuitively, we find that in a competitive market, firms that improve overall accuracy do not necessarily improve their profits. Rather, each firm's optimal decision is to invest further on the error dimension where it has a competitive advantage. By decomposing model errors into false positive and false negative rates, firms can reduce errors in each dimension through investments. Firms are strictly better off investing on their superior dimension and strictly worse off with investments on their inferior dimension. Profitable investments adversely affect consumers but increase overall welfare.

Decision trees and random forest remain highly competitive for classification on medium-sized, standard datasets due to their robustness, minimal preprocessing requirements, and interpretability. However, a single tree suffers from high estimation variance, while large ensembles reduce this variance at the cost of substantial computational overhead and diminished interpretability. In this paper, we propose Decision Tree Embedding (DTE), a fast and effective method that leverages the leaf partitions of a trained classification tree to construct an interpretable feature representation. By using the sample means within each leaf region as anchor points, DTE maps inputs into an embedding space defined by the tree's partition structure, effectively circumventing the high variance inherent in decision-tree splitting rules. We further introduce an ensemble extension based on additional bootstrap trees, and pair the resulting embedding with linear discriminant analysis for classification. We establish several population-level theoretical properties of DTE, including its preservation of conditional density under mild conditions and a characterization of the resulting classification error. Empirical studies on synthetic and real datasets demonstrate that DTE strikes a strong balance between accuracy and computational efficiency, outperforming or matching random forest and shallow neural networks while requiring only a fraction of their training time in most cases. Overall, the proposed DTE method can be viewed either as a scalable decision tree classifier that improves upon standard split rules, or as a neural network model whose weights are learned from tree-derived anchor points, achieving an intriguing integration of both paradigms.

We introduce Smart Bayes, a new classification framework that bridges generative and discriminative modeling by integrating likelihood-ratio-based generative features into a logistic-regression-style discriminative classifier. From the generative perspective, Smart Bayes relaxes the fixed unit weights of Naive Bayes by allowing data-driven coefficients on density-ratio features. From a discriminative perspective, it constructs transformed inputs as marginal log-density ratios that explicitly quantify how much more likely each feature value is under one class than another, thereby providing predictors with stronger class separation than the raw covariates. To support this framework, we develop a spline-based estimator for univariate log-density ratios that is flexible, robust, and computationally efficient. Through extensive simulations and real-data studies, Smart Bayes often outperforms both logistic regression and Naive Bayes. Our results highlight the potential of hybrid approaches that exploit generative structure to enhance discriminative performance.

Evaluating rare-event forecasts is challenging because standard metrics collapse as event prevalence declines. Measures such as F1-score, AUPRC, MCC, and accuracy induce degenerate thresholds -- converging to zero or one -- and their values become dominated by class imbalance rather than tail discrimination. We develop a family of rare-event-stable (RES) metrics whose optimal thresholds remain strictly interior as the event probability approaches zero, ensuring coherent decision rules under extreme rarity. Simulations spanning event probabilities from 0.01 down to one in a million show that RES metrics maintain stable thresholds, consistent model rankings, and near-complete prevalence invariance, whereas traditional metrics exhibit statistically significant threshold drift and structural collapse. A credit-default application confirms these results: RES metrics yield interpretable probability-of-default cutoffs (4-9%) and remain robust under subsampling, while classical metrics fail operationally. The RES framework provides a principled, prevalence-invariant basis for evaluating extreme-risk forecasts.