Network anomaly detection systems encounter several challenges with traditional detectors trained offline. They become susceptible to concept drift and new threats such as zero-day or polymorphic attacks. To address this limitation, we propose a Ca$^{2+}$-modulated learning framework that draws inspiration from astrocytic Ca$^{2+}$ signaling in the brain, where rapid, context-sensitive adaptation enables robust information processing. Our approach couples a multicellular astrocyte dynamics simulator with a deep neural network (DNN). The simulator models astrocytic Ca$^{2+}$ dynamics through three key mechanisms: IP$_3$-mediated Ca$^{2+}$ release, SERCA pump uptake, and conductance-aware diffusion through gap junctions between cells. Evaluation of our proposed network on CTU-13 (Neris) network traffic data demonstrates the effectiveness of our biologically plausible approach. The Ca$^{2+}$-gated model outperforms a matched baseline DNN, achieving up to $\sim$98\% accuracy with reduced false positives and negatives across multiple train/test splits. Importantly, this improved performance comes with negligible runtime overhead once Ca$^{2+}$ trajectories are precomputed. While demonstrated here for cybersecurity applications, this Ca$^{2+}$-modulated learning framework offers a generic solution for streaming detection tasks that require rapid, biologically grounded adaptation to evolving data patterns.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) provides evidence-based guidelines for cancer treatment. Translating complex patient presentations into guideline-compliant treatment recommendations is time-intensive, requires specialized expertise, and is prone to error. Advances in large language model (LLM) capabilities promise to reduce the time required to generate treatment recommendations and improve accuracy. We present an LLM agent-based approach to automatically generate guideline-concordant treatment trajectories for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Our contributions are threefold. First, we construct a novel longitudinal dataset of 121 cases of NSCLC patients that includes clinical encounters, diagnostic results, and medical histories, each expertly annotated with the corresponding NCCN guideline trajectories by board-certified oncologists. Second, we demonstrate that existing LLMs possess domain-specific knowledge that enables high-quality proxy benchmark generation for both model development and evaluation, achieving strong correlation (Spearman coefficient r=0.88, RMSE = 0.08) with expert-annotated benchmarks. Third, we develop a hybrid approach combining expensive human annotations with model consistency information to create both the agent framework that predicts the relevant guidelines for a patient, as well as a meta-classifier that verifies prediction accuracy with calibrated confidence scores for treatment recommendations (AUROC=0.800), a critical capability for communicating the accuracy of outputs, custom-tailoring tradeoffs in performance, and supporting regulatory compliance. This work establishes a framework for clinically viable LLM-based guideline adherence systems that balance accuracy, interpretability, and regulatory requirements while reducing annotation costs, providing a scalable pathway toward automated clinical decision support.

Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) serves as a prodromal stage of Alzheimer's Disease (AD), where early identification and intervention can effectively slow the progression to dementia. However, diagnosing AD remains a significant challenge in neurology due to the confounders caused mainly by the selection bias of multi-modal data and the complex relationships between variables. To address these issues, we propose a novel visual-language causality-inspired framework named Cross-modal Causal Intervention with Mediator for Alzheimer's Disease Diagnosis (MediAD) for diagnostic assistance. Our MediAD employs Large Language Models (LLMs) to summarize clinical data under strict templates, therefore enriching textual inputs. The MediAD model utilizes Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), clinical data, and textual data enriched by LLMs to classify participants into Cognitively Normal (CN), MCI, and AD categories. Because of the presence of confounders, such as cerebral vascular lesions and age-related biomarkers, non-causal models are likely to capture spurious input-output correlations, generating less reliable results. Our framework implicitly mitigates the effect of both observable and unobservable confounders through a unified causal intervention method. Experimental results demonstrate the outstanding performance of our method in distinguishing CN/MCI/AD cases, outperforming other methods in most evaluation metrics. The study showcases the potential of integrating causal reasoning with multi-modal learning for neurological disease diagnosis.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a promising cornerstone for the development of natural language processing (NLP) and artificial intelligence (AI). However, ensuring the robustness of LLMs remains a critical challenge. To address these challenges and advance the field, this survey provides a comprehensive overview of current studies in this area. First, we systematically examine the nature of robustness in LLMs, including its conceptual foundations, the importance of consistent performance across diverse inputs, and the implications of failure modes in real-world applications. Next, we analyze the sources of non-robustness, categorizing intrinsic model limitations, data-driven vulnerabilities, and external adversarial factors that compromise reliability. Following this, we review state-of-the-art mitigation strategies, and then we discuss widely adopted benchmarks, emerging metrics, and persistent gaps in assessing real-world reliability. Finally, we synthesize findings from existing surveys and interdisciplinary studies to highlight trends, unresolved issues, and pathways for future research.

In many decision settings, the definitive ground truth is either non-existent or inaccessible. We introduce a framework for evaluating classifiers based solely on human judgments. In such cases, it is helpful to compare automated classifiers to human judgment. We quantify a classifier's performance by its rater equivalence: the smallest number of human raters whose combined judgment matches the classifier's performance. Our framework uses human-generated labels both to construct benchmark panels and to evaluate performance. We distinguish between two models of utility: one based on agreement with the assumed but inaccessible ground truth, and one based on matching individual human judgments. Using case studies and formal analysis, we demonstrate how this framework can inform the evaluation and deployment of AI systems in practice.

Household-travel surveys (HTSs) have long provided the empirical backbone for this work by coupling rich trip diaries with respondent characteristics such as age, gender, income, and household composition. Analyses drawing on these surveys consistently show that, after accounting for the built environment, so-ciodemographic traits still correlate with car ownership, mode choice, trip frequency, and trip-chaining behavior (Bhat and Koppelman, 1994; Lee et al., 2007; Lu and Pas, 1999; McGuckin and Murakami, 1999; Mokhtarian and Chen, 2004) In the past dozen years, the ubiquity of GPS-enabled smartphones has spawned a parallel, industry-scale source of mobility evidence in passively-generated mobile data, which includes call-detail records (CDR), location-based service (LBS) pings, connected-vehicle traces, and the like (Chen et al., 2016). These datasets dwarf HTSs in both sample size and temporal length, are refreshed continuously, and can often be licensed at a fraction of the cost of running a tailored survey. Their content, however, is almost exclusively spatial temporal; they record where and when a device was observed but remain agnostic about who was holding it. This missing dimension limits many distributional and behavioral analyses, including those that require understanding how travel patterns vary across population subgroups. Despite this blind spot, public agencies have been keen on experimenting with mobile data products (Ugurel et al., 2024). Metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) see potential in using them to stitch origin-destination matrices (Alexander et al., 2015; Iqbal et al., 2014), site electric-vehicle chargers (Yang et al., 2017), and evaluate complete-street retrofits (Bian et al., 2023). Yet the lack of respondent attributes imposes two related hazards.

Comparing clusterings is central to evaluating unsupervised models, yet the many existing similarity measures can produce widely divergent, sometimes contradictory, evaluations. Clustering similarity measures are typically organized into two principal families, pair-counting and information-theoretic, reflecting whether they quantify agreement through element pairs or aggregate information across full cluster contingency tables. Prior work has uncovered parallels between these families and applied empirical normalization or chance-correction schemes, but their deeper analytical connection remains only partially understood. Here, we develop an analytical framework that unifies these families through two complementary perspectives. First, both families are expressed as weighted expansions of observed versus expected co-occurrences, with pair-counting arising as a quadratic, low-order approximation and information-theoretic measures as higher-order, frequency-weighted extensions. Second, we generalize pair-counting to $k$-tuple agreement and show that information-theoretic measures can be viewed as systematically accumulating higher-order co-assignment structure beyond the pairwise level. We illustrate the approaches analytically for the Rand index and Mutual Information, and show how other indices in each family emerge as natural extensions. Together, these views clarify when and why the two regimes diverge, relating their sensitivities directly to weighting and approximation order, and provide a principled basis for selecting, interpreting, and extending clustering similarity measures across applications.

Demographic bias in high-performance face recognition (FR) systems often eludes detection by existing metrics, especially with respect to subtle disparities in the tails of the score distribution. We introduce the Comprehensive Equity Index (CEI), a novel metric designed to address this limitation. CEI uniquely analyzes genuine and impostor score distributions separately, enabling a configurable focus on tail probabilities while also considering overall distribution shapes. Our extensive experiments (evaluating state-of-the-art FR systems, intentionally biased models, and diverse datasets) confirm CEI's superior ability to detect nuanced biases where previous methods fall short. Furthermore, we present CEI^A, an automated version of the metric that enhances objectivity and simplifies practical application. CEI provides a robust and sensitive tool for operational FR fairness assessment. The proposed methods have been developed particularly for bias evaluation in face biometrics but, in general, they are applicable for comparing statistical distributions in any problem where one is interested in analyzing the distribution tails.

To foster trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI) within the European Union, the AI Act requires providers to mark and detect the outputs of their general-purpose models. The Article 50 and Recital 133 call for marking methods that are ''sufficiently reliable, interoperable, effective and robust''. Yet, the rapidly evolving and heterogeneous landscape of watermarks for Large Language Models (LLMs) makes it difficult to determine how these four standards can be translated into concrete and measurable evaluations. Our paper addresses this challenge, anchoring the normativity of European requirements in the multiplicity of watermarking techniques. Introducing clear and distinct concepts on LLM watermarking, our contribution is threefold. (1) Watermarking Categorisation: We propose an accessible taxonomy of watermarking methods according to the stage of the LLM lifecycle at which they are applied - before, during, or after training, and during next-token distribution or sampling. (2) Watermarking Evaluation: We interpret the EU AI Act's requirements by mapping each criterion with state-of-the-art evaluations on robustness and detectability of the watermark, and of quality of the LLM. Since interoperability remains largely untheorised in LLM watermarking research, we propose three normative dimensions to frame its assessment. (3) Watermarking Comparison: We compare current watermarking methods for LLMs against the operationalised European criteria and show that no approach yet satisfies all four standards. Encouraged by emerging empirical tests, we recommend further research into watermarking directly embedded within the low-level architecture of LLMs.

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has become a transformative approach in bioinformatics that often enables advancements in genomics, proteomics, transcriptomics, structural biology, and drug discovery. To systematically identify and evaluate these growing developments, this review proposed six research questions (RQs), according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis methods. The objective is to evaluate impactful GenAI strategies in methodological advancement, predictive performance, and specialization, and to identify promising approaches for advanced modeling, data-intensive discovery, and integrative biological analysis. RQ1 highlights diverse applications across multiple bioinformatics subfields (sequence analysis, molecular design, and integrative data modeling), which demonstrate superior performance over traditional methods through pattern recognition and output generation. RQ2 reveals that adapted specialized model architectures outperformed general-purpose models, an advantage attributed to targeted pretraining and context-aware strategies. RQ3 identifies significant benefits in the bioinformatics domains, focusing on molecular analysis and data integration, which improves accuracy and reduces errors in complex analysis. RQ4 indicates improvements in structural modeling, functional prediction, and synthetic data generation, validated by established benchmarks. RQ5 suggests the main constraints, such as the lack of scalability and biases in data that impact generalizability, and proposes future directions focused on robust evaluation and biologically grounded modeling. RQ6 examines that molecular datasets (such as UniProtKB and ProteinNet12), cellular datasets (such as CELLxGENE and GTEx) and textual resources (such as PubMedQA and OMIM) broadly support the training and generalization of GenAI models.