While Large Language Models have been used to produce interpretable stock forecasts, they mainly focus on analyzing textual reports but not historical price data, also known as Technical Analysis. This task is challenging as it switches between domains: the stock price inputs and outputs lie in the time-series domain, while the reasoning step should be in natural language. In this work, we introduce Verbal Technical Analysis (VTA), a novel framework that combine verbal and latent reasoning to produce stock time-series forecasts that are both accurate and interpretable. To reason over time-series, we convert stock price data into textual annotations and optimize the reasoning trace using an inverse Mean Squared Error (MSE) reward objective. To produce time-series outputs from textual reasoning, we condition the outputs of a time-series backbone model on the reasoning-based attributes. Experiments on stock datasets across U.S., Chinese, and European markets show that VTA achieves state-of-the-art forecasting accuracy, while the reasoning traces also perform well on evaluation by industry experts.

Clinical vignettes are essential educational tools in speech-language pathology (SLP), but manual creation is time-intensive. While general-purpose large language models (LLMs) can generate text, they lack domain-specific knowledge, leading to hallucinations and requiring extensive expert revision. This study presents a proof-of-concept system integrating retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) with curated knowledge bases to generate pediatric SLP case materials. A multi-model RAG-based system was prototyped integrating curated domain knowledge with engineered prompt templates, supporting five commercial (GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 2.5 Pro) and open-source (Llama 3.2, Qwen 2.5-7B) LLMs. Seven test scenarios spanning diverse disorder types and grade levels were systematically designed. Generated cases underwent automated quality assessment using a multi-dimensional rubric evaluating structural completeness, internal consistency, clinical appropriateness, and IEP goal/session note quality. This proof-of-concept demonstrates technical feasibility for RAG-augmented generation of pediatric SLP vignettes. Commercial models showed marginal quality advantages, but open-source alternatives achieved acceptable performance, suggesting potential for privacy-preserving institutional deployment. Integration of curated knowledge bases enabled content generation aligned with professional guidelines. Extensive validation through expert review, student pilot testing, and psychometric evaluation is required before educational or research implementation. Future applications may extend to clinical decision support, automated IEP goal generation, and clinical reflection training.

Knowledge-intensive question answering is central to large language models (LLMs) and is typically assessed using static benchmarks derived from sources like Wikipedia and textbooks. However, these benchmarks fail to capture evolving knowledge in a dynamic world, and centralized curation struggles to keep pace with rapid LLM advancements. To address these drawbacks, we propose Open Knowledge Bench (OKBench), a fully automated framework for generating high-quality, dynamic knowledge benchmarks on demand. Focusing on the news domain where knowledge updates daily, OKBench is an agentic framework that automates the sourcing, creation, validation, and distribution of benchmarks. Our approach democratizes benchmark creation and facilitates thorough evaluation of retrieval-augmented methods by reducing overlap with pretraining data. We evaluate our framework on a wide range open-source and proprietary LLMs of various sizes and configurations, both with and without retrieval over freshly generated knowledge. Our results reveal distinct model behaviors when confronted with new information and highlight how retrieval narrows the performance gap between small and large models. These findings underscore the importance of evaluating LLMs on evolving knowledge benchmarks.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are generally equipped with guardrails to block the generation of harmful responses. However, existing defenses always assume that an external attacker crafts the harmful query, and the possibility of a model's own output becoming a new attack vector has not been sufficiently explored. In this study, we propose the Self-HarmLLM scenario, which uses a Mitigated Harmful Query (MHQ) generated by the same model as a new input. An MHQ is an ambiguous query whose original intent is preserved while its harmful nature is not directly exposed. We verified whether a jailbreak occurs when this MHQ is re-entered into a separate session of the same model. We conducted experiments on GPT-3.5-turbo, LLaMA3-8B-instruct, and DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-7B under Base, Zero-shot, and Few-shot conditions. The results showed up to 52% transformation success rate and up to 33% jailbreak success rate in the Zero-shot condition, and up to 65% transformation success rate and up to 41% jailbreak success rate in the Few-shot condition. By performing both prefix-based automated evaluation and human evaluation, we found that the automated evaluation consistently overestimated jailbreak success, with an average difference of 52%. This indicates that automated evaluation alone is not accurate for determining harmfulness. While this study is a toy-level study based on a limited query set and evaluators, it proves that our method can still be a valid attack scenario. These results suggest the need for a fundamental reconsideration of guardrail design and the establishment of a more robust evaluation methodology.

Hallucinations pose a critical challenge to the real-world deployment of large language models (LLMs) in high-stakes domains. In this paper, we present a framework for stress testing factual fidelity in LLMs in the presence of adversarial nudge. Our framework consists of three steps. In the first step, we instruct the LLM to produce sets of truths and lies consistent with the closed domain in question. In the next step, we instruct the LLM to verify the same set of assertions as truths and lies consistent with the same closed domain. In the final step, we test the robustness of the LLM against the lies generated (and verified) by itself. Our extensive evaluation, conducted using five widely known proprietary LLMs across two closed domains of popular movies and novels, reveals a wide range of susceptibility to adversarial nudges: \texttt{Claude} exhibits strong resilience, \texttt{GPT} and \texttt{Grok} demonstrate moderate resilience, while \texttt{Gemini} and \texttt{DeepSeek} show weak resilience. Considering that a large population is increasingly using LLMs for information seeking, our findings raise alarm.

The ability of LLMs to represent diverse perspectives is critical as they increasingly impact society. However, recent studies reveal that alignment algorithms such as RLHF and DPO significantly reduce the diversity of LLM outputs. Not only do aligned LLMs generate text with repetitive structure and word choice, they also approach problems in more uniform ways, and their responses reflect a narrower range of societal perspectives. We attribute this problem to the KL divergence regularizer employed in preference learning algorithms. This causes the model to systematically overweight majority opinions and sacrifice diversity in its outputs. To address this, we propose Soft Preference Learning, which decouples the entropy and cross-entropy terms in the KL penalty -- allowing for fine-grained control over LLM generation diversity. From a capabilities perspective, LLMs trained using Soft Preference Learning attain higher accuracy on difficult repeated sampling tasks and produce outputs with greater semantic and lexical diversity. From an alignment perspective, they are capable of representing a wider range of societal viewpoints and display improved logit calibration. Notably, Soft Preference Learning resembles, but is a Pareto improvement over, standard temperature scaling. As LLMs become integrated into how people consume information (Bick et al., 2024) and approach tasks (Deloitte, 2024), their ability to represent diverse perspectives is critical. For example, consider an LLM answering the following multiple-choice question: The best way to reduce income inequality is: (A) Increase minimum wage (B) Expand access to education and job training (C) Implement universal basic income (D) Lower taxes on the wealthy to stimulate job creation Imagine a survey showing people's preferences as: A (55%), B (20%), C (15%), and D (10%). How should an LLM respond to this question? Ideally, we may prefer it to reflect the range of views in the population. If an LLM assigns 99% probability to majority option A, it fails to represent the diversity of perspectives. With LLMs becoming important information sources, this may reinforce dominant narratives at the expense of minority views. However, recent studies show that alignment algorithms such as RLHF and DPO significantly reduce the diversity of LLM outputs. This leads to mode collapse towards majority preferences, as the example above shows (Kirk et al., 2024; Padmakumar & He, 2024; Rafailov et al., 2024; Christiano et al., 2023). In a generative setting, this results in repetitive responses, as illustrated in Figure 1. For example, the DPO model frequently uses the same doctor's name and 1 We highlight Doctor name, gender, and textual aberration features shown in the plots on the right. DPO responses are well-formed but lack diversity (e.g.

The rise of Large Language Models (LLMs) offers transfor-mative potential for interpreting complex legal frameworks, such as Title 18 Section 175 of the US Code, which governs biological weapons. These systems hold promise for advancing legal analysis and compliance monitoring in sensitive domains. However, this capability comes with a troubling contradiction: while LLMs can analyze and interpret laws, they also demonstrate alarming vulnerabilities in generating unsafe outputs, such as actionable steps for bioweapon creation, despite their safeguards. To address this challenge, we propose a methodology that integrates knowledge graph construction with Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to systematically evaluate LLMs' understanding of this law, their capacity to assess legal intent (mens rea), and their potential for unsafe applications. Through structured experiments, we assess their accuracy in identifying legal violations, generating prohibited instructions, and detecting unlawful intent in bioweapons-related scenarios. Our findings reveal significant limitations in LLMs' reasoning and safety mechanisms, but they also point the way forward. By combining enhanced safety protocols with more robust legal reasoning frameworks, this research lays the groundwork for developing LLMs that can ethically and securely assist in sensitive legal domains--ensuring they act as protectors of the law rather than inadvertent enablers of its violation.

Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new avenues to simulate online communities and social media. Potential applications range from testing the design of content recommendation algorithms to estimating the effects of content policies and interventions. However, the validity of using LLMs to simulate conversations between various users remains largely untested. We evaluated whether LLMs can convincingly mimic human group conversations on social media. We collected authentic human conversations from Reddit and generated artificial conversations on the same topic with two LLMs: Llama 3 70B and GPT-4o. When presented side-by-side to study participants, LLM-generated conversations were mistaken for human-created content 39\% of the time. In particular, when evaluating conversations generated by Llama 3, participants correctly identified them as AI-generated only 56\% of the time, barely better than random chance. Our study demonstrates that LLMs can generate social media conversations sufficiently realistic to deceive humans when reading them, highlighting both a promising potential for social simulation and a warning message about the potential misuse of LLMs to generate new inauthentic social media content.

Large Language Model (LLM) routing has demonstrated strong capability in balancing response quality with computational cost. As users exhibit diverse preferences, personalization has attracted increasing attention in LLM routing, since even identical queries may require different models to generate responses tailored to individual needs. However, existing approaches are not fully personalized and often fail to capture the complex interactions between specific users and LLMs. Moreover, user preference data is typically scarce, noisy, and inconsistent in format, which limits the effectiveness of methods that rely solely on user-specific data. To address these challenges, we propose GMTRouter, which represents multi-turn user-LLM interactions as a heterogeneous graph with four node types: user, LLM, query, and response, thereby preserving the rich relational structure of the interaction. Through a tailored message-passing mechanism, GMTRouter learns to capture user preferences from few-shot data within a lightweight inductive graph learning framework, enabling effective personalization. Extensive experiments demonstrate that GMTRouter consistently outperforms strong baselines, achieving 0.9 to 21.6 percent higher accuracy and 0.006 to 0.309 higher AUC across multiple datasets. More importantly, we demonstrate that GMTRouter can adapt to new users and evolving preferences using only few-shot data, without extensive fine-tuning. The code for GMTRouter is publicly available at https://github.com/ulab-uiuc/GMTRouter.

Skill composition is the ability to combine previously learned skills to solve new tasks. As neural networks acquire increasingly complex skills during their pretraining, it is not clear how successfully they can compose them. In this paper, we focus on Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLM), and study their ability to compose skills across modalities. To this end, we design three evaluation tasks which can be solved sequentially composing two modality-dependent skills, and evaluate several open MLLMs under two main settings: i) prompting the model to directly solve the task, and ii) using a two-step cascaded inference approach, which manually enforces the composition of the two skills for a given task. Even with these straightforward compositions, we find that all evaluated MLLMs exhibit a significant cross-modality skill composition gap. To mitigate the aforementioned gap, we explore two alternatives: i) use chain-of-thought prompting to explicitly instruct MLLMs for skill composition and ii) a specific fine-tuning recipe to promote skill composition. Although those strategies improve model performance, they still exhibit significant skill composition gaps, suggesting that more research is needed to improve cross-modal skill composition in MLLMs.