Large language models now draft news, legal analyses, and software code with human-level fluency. At the same time, regulations such as the EU AI Act mandate that each synthetic passage carry an imperceptible, machine-verifiable mark for provenance. Conventional logit-based watermarks satisfy this requirement by selecting a pseudorandom green vocabulary at every decoding step and boosting its logits, yet the random split can exclude the highest-probability token and thus erode fluency. WaterMod mitigates this limitation through a probability-aware modular rule. The vocabulary is first sorted in descending model probability; the resulting ranks are then partitioned by the residue rank mod k, which distributes adjacent-and therefore semantically similar-tokens across different classes. A fixed bias of small magnitude is applied to one selected class. In the zero-bit setting (k=2), an entropy-adaptive gate selects either the even or the odd parity as the green list. Because the top two ranks fall into different parities, this choice embeds a detectable signal while guaranteeing that at least one high-probability token remains available for sampling. In the multi-bit regime (k>2), the current payload digit d selects the color class whose ranks satisfy rank mod k = d. Biasing the logits of that class embeds exactly one base-k digit per decoding step, thereby enabling fine-grained provenance tracing. The same modular arithmetic therefore supports both binary attribution and rich payloads. Experimental results demonstrate that WaterMod consistently attains strong watermark detection performance while maintaining generation quality in both zero-bit and multi-bit settings. This robustness holds across a range of tasks, including natural language generation, mathematical reasoning, and code synthesis. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/Shinwoo-Park/WaterMod.

Large Language Models (LLMs) and causal learning each hold strong potential for clinical decision making (CDM). However, their synergy remains poorly understood, largely due to the lack of systematic benchmarks evaluating their integration in clinical risk prediction. In real-world healthcare, identifying features with causal influence on outcomes is crucial for actionable and trustworthy predictions. While recent work highlights LLMs' emerging causal reasoning abilities, there lacks comprehensive benchmarks to assess their causal learning and performance informed by causal features in clinical risk prediction. To address this, we introduce REACT-LLM, a benchmark designed to evaluate whether combining LLMs with causal features can enhance clinical prognostic performance and potentially outperform traditional machine learning (ML) methods. Unlike existing LLM-clinical benchmarks that often focus on a limited set of outcomes, REACT-LLM evaluates 7 clinical outcomes across 2 real-world datasets, comparing 15 prominent LLMs, 6 traditional ML models, and 3 causal discovery (CD) algorithms. Our findings indicate that while LLMs perform reasonably in clinical prognostics, they have not yet outperformed traditional ML models. Integrating causal features derived from CD algorithms into LLMs offers limited performance gains, primarily due to the strict assumptions of many CD methods, which are often violated in complex clinical data. While the direct integration yields limited improvement, our benchmark reveals a more promising synergy.

Retrieval systems are essential to contemporary AI pipelines, although most confuse two separate processes: finding relevant information and giving enough context for reasoning. We introduce the Search-Is-Not-Retrieve (SINR) framework, a dual-layer architecture that distinguishes between fine-grained search representations and coarse-grained retrieval contexts. SINR enhances the composability, scalability, and context fidelity of retrieval systems by directly connecting small, semantically accurate search chunks to larger, contextually complete retrieve chunks, all without incurring extra processing costs. This design changes retrieval from a passive step to an active one, making the system architecture more like how people process information. We discuss the SINR framework's conceptual foundation, formal structure, implementation issues, and qualitative outcomes. This provides a practical foundation for the next generation of AI systems that use retrieval.

Recent advances in Text-to-SQL have achieved strong results in static, single-turn tasks, where models generate SQL queries from natural language questions. However, these systems fall short in real-world interactive scenarios, where user intents evolve and queries must be refined over multiple turns. In applications such as finance and business analytics, users iteratively adjust query constraints or dimensions based on intermediate results. To evaluate such dynamic capabilities, we introduce DySQL-Bench, a benchmark assessing model performance under evolving user interactions. Unlike previous manually curated datasets, DySQL-Bench is built through an automated two-stage pipeline of task synthesis and verification. Structured tree representations derived from raw database tables guide LLM-based task generation, followed by interaction-oriented filtering and expert validation. Human evaluation confirms 100% correctness of the synthesized data. We further propose a multi-turn evaluation framework simulating realistic interactions among an LLM-simulated user, the model under test, and an executable database. The model must adapt its reasoning and SQL generation as user intents change. DySQL-Bench covers 13 domains across BIRD and Spider 2 databases, totaling 1,072 tasks. Even GPT-4o attains only 58.34% overall accuracy and 23.81% on the Pass@5 metric, underscoring the benchmark's difficulty. All code and data are released at https://github.com/Aurora-slz/Real-World-SQL-Bench .

Vision-based end-to-end (E2E) driving has garnered significant interest in the research community due to its scalability and synergy with multimodal large language models (MLLMs). However, current E2E driving benchmarks primarily feature nominal scenarios, failing to adequately test the true potential of these systems. Furthermore, existing open-loop evaluation metrics often fall short in capturing the multi-modal nature of driving or effectively evaluating performance in long-tail scenarios. To address these gaps, we introduce the Waymo Open Dataset for End-to-End Driving (WOD-E2E). WOD-E2E contains 4,021 driving segments (approximately 12 hours), specifically curated for challenging long-tail scenarios that that are rare in daily life with an occurring frequency of less than 0.03%. Concretely, each segment in WOD-E2E includes the high-level routing information, ego states, and 360-degree camera views from 8 surrounding cameras. To evaluate the E2E driving performance on these long-tail situations, we propose a novel open-loop evaluation metric: Rater Feedback Score (RFS). Unlike conventional metrics that measure the distance between predicted way points and the logs, RFS measures how closely the predicted trajectory matches rater-annotated trajectory preference labels. We have released rater preference labels for all WOD-E2E validation set segments, while the held out test set labels have been used for the 2025 WOD-E2E Challenge. Through our work, we aim to foster state of the art research into generalizable, robust, and safe end-to-end autonomous driving agents capable of handling complex real-world situations.

Single-cell RNA sequencing has transformed our ability to identify diverse cell types and their transcriptomic signatures. However, annotating these signatures-especially those involving poorly characterized genes-remains a major challenge. Traditional methods, such as Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA), depend on well-curated annotations and often perform poorly in these contexts. Large Language Models (LLMs) offer a promising alternative but struggle to represent complex biological knowledge within structured ontologies. To address this, we present BRAINCELL-AID (BRAINCELL-AID: https://biodataai.uth.edu/BRAINCELL-AID), a novel multi-agent AI system that integrates free-text descriptions with ontology labels to enable more accurate and robust gene set annotation. By incorporating retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), we developed a robust agentic workflow that refines predictions using relevant PubMed literature, reducing hallucinations and enhancing interpretability. Using this workflow, we achieved correct annotations for 77% of mouse gene sets among their top predictions. Applying this approach, we annotated 5,322 brain cell clusters from the comprehensive mouse brain cell atlas generated by the BRAIN Initiative Cell Census Network, enabling novel insights into brain cell function by identifying region-specific gene co-expression patterns and inferring functional roles of gene ensembles. BRAINCELL-AID also identifies Basal Ganglia-related cell types with neurologically meaningful descriptions. Hence, we create a valuable resource to support community-driven cell type annotation.

We present Ax-Prover, a multi-agent system for automated theorem proving in Lean that can solve problems across diverse scientific domains and operate either autonomously or collaboratively with human experts. To achieve this, Ax-Prover approaches scientific problem solving through formal proof generation, a process that demands both creative reasoning and strict syntactic rigor. Ax-Prover meets this challenge by equipping Large Language Models (LLMs), which provide knowledge and reasoning, with Lean tools via the Model Context Protocol (MCP), which ensure formal correctness. To evaluate its performance as an autonomous prover, we benchmark our approach against frontier LLMs and specialized prover models on two public math benchmarks and on two Lean benchmarks we introduce in the fields of abstract algebra and quantum theory. On public datasets, Ax-Prover is competitive with state-of-the-art provers, while it largely outperforms them on the new benchmarks. This shows that, unlike specialized systems that struggle to generalize, our tool-based agentic theorem prover approach offers a generalizable methodology for formal verification across diverse scientific domains. Furthermore, we demonstrate Ax-Prover's assistant capabilities in a practical use case, showing how it enabled an expert mathematician to formalize the proof of a complex cryptography theorem.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has recently become a strong recipe for training reasoning LLMs that produce long chains of thought (LongCoT). Yet the standard RL "thinking environment", where the state is the prompt plus all prior reasoning tokens, makes the state unbounded and forces attention-based policies to pay quadratic compute as thoughts lengthen. We revisit the environment itself. We propose Markovian Thinking, a paradigm in which the policy advances reasoning while conditioning on a constant-size state, decoupling thinking length from context size. As an immediate consequence this yields linear compute with constant memory. We instantiate this idea with Delethink, an RL environment that structures reasoning into fixed-size chunks. Within each chunk, the model thinks as usual; at the boundary, the environment resets the context and reinitializes the prompt with a short carryover. Through RL, the policy learns to write a textual state near the end of each chunk sufficient for seamless continuation of reasoning after reset. Trained in this environment, an R1-Distill 1.5B model reasons in 8K-token chunks yet thinks up to 24K tokens, matching or surpassing LongCoT-RL trained with a 24K budget. With test-time scaling, Delethink continues to improve where LongCoT plateaus. The effect of linear compute is substantial: we empirically estimate at 96K average thinking length LongCoT-RL costs 27 H100-months vs. 7 for Delethink. Analysis at RL initialization shows off-the-shelf reasoning models (1.5B-120B) often sample Markovian traces zero-shot across diverse benchmarks, providing positive samples that make RL effective at scale. Our results show that redesigning the thinking environment is a powerful lever: it enables very long reasoning without quadratic overhead and opens a path toward efficient, scalable reasoning LLMs.

We investigate whether contemporary multimodal LLMs can assist with grading open-ended calculus at scale without eroding validity. In a large first-year exam, students' handwritten work was graded by GPT-5 against the same rubric used by teaching assistants (TAs), with fractional credit permitted; TA rubric decisions served as ground truth. We calibrated a human-in-the-loop filter that combines a partial-credit threshold with an Item Response Theory (2PL) risk measure based on the deviation between the AI score and the model-expected score for each student-item. Unfiltered AI-TA agreement was moderate, adequate for low-stakes feedback but not for high-stakes use. Confidence filtering made the workload-quality trade-off explicit: under stricter settings, AI delivered human-level accuracy, but also left roughly 70% of the items to be graded by humans. Psychometric patterns were constrained by low stakes on the open-ended portion, a small set of rubric checkpoints, and occasional misalignment between designated answer regions and where work appeared. Practical adjustments such as slightly higher weight and protected time, a few rubric-visible substeps, stronger spatial anchoring should raise ceiling performance. Overall, calibrated confidence and conservative routing enable AI to reliably handle a sizable subset of routine cases while reserving expert judgment for ambiguous or pedagogically rich responses.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable success across a wide range of industries, primarily due to their impressive generative abilities. Yet, their potential in applications requiring cognitive abilities, such as psychological counseling, remains largely untapped. This paper investigates the key question: \textit{Can LLMs be effectively applied to psychological counseling?} To determine whether an LLM can effectively take on the role of a psychological counselor, the first step is to assess whether it meets the qualifications required for such a role, namely the ability to pass the U.S. National Counselor Certification Exam (NCE). This is because, just as a human counselor must pass a certification exam to practice, an LLM must demonstrate sufficient psychological knowledge to meet the standards required for such a role. To address this, we introduce PsychCounsel-Bench, a benchmark grounded in U.S.national counselor examinations, a licensure test for professional counselors that requires about 70\% accuracy to pass. PsychCounsel-Bench comprises approximately 2,252 carefully curated single-choice questions, crafted to require deep understanding and broad enough to cover various sub-disciplines of psychology. This benchmark provides a comprehensive assessment of an LLM's ability to function as a counselor. Our evaluation shows that advanced models such as GPT-4o, Llama3.3-70B, and Gemma3-27B achieve well above the passing threshold, while smaller open-source models (e.g., Qwen2.5-7B, Mistral-7B) remain far below it. These results suggest that only frontier LLMs are currently capable of meeting counseling exam standards, highlighting both the promise and the challenges of developing psychology-oriented LLMs. We release the proposed dataset for public use: https://github.com/cloversjtu/PsychCounsel-Bench