This paper introduces eX-NIDS, a framework designed to enhance interpretability in flow-based Network Intrusion Detection Systems (NIDS) by leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs). In our proposed framework, flows labelled as malicious by NIDS are initially processed through a module called the Prompt Augmenter. This module extracts contextual information and Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI)-related knowledge from these flows. This enriched, context-specific data is then integrated with an input prompt for an LLM, enabling it to generate detailed explanations and interpretations of why the flow was identified as malicious by NIDS. We compare the generated interpretations against a Basic-Prompt Explainer baseline, which does not incorporate any contextual information into the LLM's input prompt. Our framework is quantitatively evaluated using the Llama 3 and GPT-4 models, employing a novel evaluation method tailored for natural language explanations, focusing on their correctness and consistency. The results demonstrate that augmented LLMs can produce accurate and consistent explanations, serving as valuable complementary tools in NIDS to explain the classification of malicious flows. The use of augmented prompts enhances performance by over 20% compared to the Basic-Prompt Explainer.

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) extend LLMs to handle images, videos, and audio by incorporating feature extractors and projection modules. However, these additional components -- combined with complex inference pipelines and heterogeneous workloads -- introduce significant inference overhead. Therefore, efficiently serving MLLMs remains a major challenge. Current tightly coupled serving architectures struggle to distinguish between mixed request types or adapt parallelism strategies to different inference stages, leading to increased time-to-first-token (TTFT) latency and poor resource utilization. To address this, we introduce Elastic Multimodal Parallelism (EMP), a new serving paradigm that elastically adapts to resource heterogeneity across request types and inference stages. Building upon EMP, we develop ElasticMM, an MLLM serving system that (1) separates requests into independent modality groups with dynamic resource allocation via a modality-aware load balancer; (2) decouples inference stages and enables parallelism adjustment and adaptive scaling via elastic partition scheduling; and (3) improves inference efficiency through unified multimodal prefix caching and non-blocking encoding. Experiments on diverse real-world datasets show that ElasticMM outperforms state-of-the-art (SOTA) serving systems, reducing TTFT by up to 4.2x and achieving 3.2-4.5x higher throughput while meeting service-level objectives (SLOs).

This paper investigates the relationship between large language models' (LLMs) ability to recognize repetitive input patterns and their performance on in-context learning (ICL). In contrast to prior work that has primarily focused on attention heads, we examine this relationship from the perspective of skill neurons, specifically repetition neurons. Our experiments reveal that the impact of these neurons on ICL performance varies depending on the depth of the layer in which they reside. By comparing the effects of repetition neurons and induction heads, we further identify strategies for reducing repetitive outputs while maintaining strong ICL capabilities.

Emotions are a fundamental facet of human experience, varying across individuals, cultural contexts, and nationalities. Given the recent success of Large Language Models (LLMs) as role-playing agents, we examine whether LLMs exhibit emotional stereotypes when assigned nationality-specific personas. Specifically, we investigate how different countries are represented in pre-trained LLMs through emotion attributions and whether these attributions align with cultural norms. To provide a deeper interpretive lens, we incorporate four key cultural dimensions, namely Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Long-Term Orientation, and Individualism, derived from Hofstedes cross-cultural framework. Our analysis reveals significant nationality-based differences, with emotions such as shame, fear, and joy being disproportionately assigned across regions. Furthermore, we observe notable misalignment between LLM-generated and human emotional responses, particularly for negative emotions, highlighting the presence of reductive and potentially biased stereotypes in LLM outputs.

Multi-label classification is prevalent in real-world settings, but the behavior of Large Language Models (LLMs) in this setting is understudied. We investigate how autoregressive LLMs perform multi-label classification, focusing on subjective tasks, by analyzing the output distributions of the models at each label generation step. We find that the initial probability distribution for the first label often does not reflect the eventual final output, even in terms of relative order and find LLMs tend to suppress all but one label at each generation step. We further observe that as model scale increases, their token distributions exhibit lower entropy and higher single-label confidence, but the internal relative ranking of the labels improves. Finetuning methods such as supervised finetuning and reinforcement learning amplify this phenomenon. We introduce the task of distribution alignment for multi-label settings: aligning LLM-derived label distributions with empirical distributions estimated from annotator responses in subjective tasks. We propose both zero-shot and supervised methods which improve both alignment and predictive performance over existing approaches. We find one method -- taking the max probability over all label generation distributions instead of just using the initial probability distribution -- improves both distribution alignment and overall F1 classification without adding any additional computation.

Modeling complex subjective tasks in Natural Language Processing, such as recognizing emotion and morality, is considerably challenging due to significant variation in human annotations. This variation often reflects reasonable differences in semantic interpretations rather than mere noise, necessitating methods to distinguish between legitimate subjectivity and error. We address this challenge by exploring label verification in these contexts using Large Language Models (LLMs). First, we propose a simple In-Context Learning binary filtering baseline that estimates the reasonableness of a document-label pair. We then introduce the Label-in-a-Haystack setting: the query and its label(s) are included in the demonstrations shown to LLMs, which are prompted to predict the label(s) again, while receiving task-specific instructions (e.g., emotion recognition) rather than label copying. We show how the failure to copy the label(s) to the output of the LLM are task-relevant and informative. Building on this, we propose the Label-in-a-Haystack Rectification (LiaHR) framework for subjective label correction: when the model outputs diverge from the reference gold labels, we assign the generated labels to the example instead of discarding it. This approach can be integrated into annotation pipelines to enhance signal-to-noise ratios. Comprehensive analyses, human evaluations, and ecological validity studies verify the utility of LiaHR for label correction. Code is available at https://github.com/gchochla/liahr.

Traditional Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) struggles with complex queries that lack strong signals to retrieve the most relevant context, forcing a trade-off between choosing a small context that misses key information and a large context that confuses the LLM. To address this, we propose Forward-Backward RAG (FB-RAG), a new training-free framework based on a simple yet powerful forward-looking strategy. FB-RAG employs a light-weight LLM to peek into potential future generations, using evidence from multiple sampled outputs to precisely identify the most relevant context for a final, more powerful generator. This improves performance without complex finetuning or Reinforcement Learning common in prior work. Across $9$ datasets from LongBench and $\infty$Bench, FB-RAG consistently delivers strong results. Further, the performance gains can be achieved with reduced latency due to a shorter, more focused prompt for the powerful generator. On EN.QA dataset, FB-RAG matches the leading baseline with over $48$% latency reduction or achieves an $8$% performance improvement with a $10$% latency reduction. Our analysis finds cases where even when the forward-looking LLM fails to generate correct answers, its attempts are sufficient to guide the final model to an accurate response, demonstrating how smaller LLMs can systematically improve the performance and efficiency of larger ones.

We have only limited understanding of how and why large language models (LLMs) respond in the ways that they do. Their neural networks have proven challenging to interpret, and we are only beginning to tease out the function of individual neurons and circuits within them. However, another path to understanding these systems is to investigate and develop their capacity to explain their own functioning. Here, we show that i) LLMs can accurately describe quantitative features of their own internal processes during certain kinds of decision-making and ii) that it is possible to improve these capabilities through training. To do so, we fine-tuned GPT-4o and GPT-4o-mini to make decisions in a wide variety of complex contexts (e.g., choosing between condos, loans, vacations, etc.) according to randomly-generated, quantitative preferences about how to weigh different attributes (e.g., the relative importance of natural light versus quiet surroundings for condos). We demonstrate that the LLMs can accurately report these preferences (i.e., the weights that they learned to give to different attributes during decision-making). Next, we demonstrate that these LLMs can be fine-tuned to explain their decision-making even more accurately. Finally, we demonstrate that this training generalizes: It improves the ability of the models to accurately explain how they make other complex decisions, not just decisions they have been fine-tuned to make. This work is a step towards training LLMs to accurately and broadly report on their own internal processes -- a possibility that would yield substantial benefits for interpretability, control, and safety.

Reinforcement learning-based post-training of large language models (LLMs) has recently gained attention, particularly following the release of DeepSeek R1, which applied GRPO for fine-tuning. Amid the growing hype around improved reasoning abilities attributed to RL post-training, we critically examine the formulation and assumptions underlying these methods. We start by highlighting the popular structural assumptions made in modeling LLM training as a Markov Decision Process (MDP), and show how they lead to a degenerate MDP that doesn't quite need the RL/GRPO apparatus. The two critical structural assumptions include (1) making the MDP states be just a concatenation of the actions-with states becoming the context window and the actions becoming the tokens in LLMs and (2) splitting the reward of a state-action trajectory uniformly across the trajectory. Through a comprehensive analysis, we demonstrate that these simplifying assumptions make the approach effectively equivalent to an outcome-driven supervised learning. Our experiments on benchmarks including GSM8K and Countdown using Qwen-2.5 base models show that iterative supervised fine-tuning, incorporating both positive and negative samples, achieves performance comparable to GRPO-based training. We will also argue that the structural assumptions indirectly incentivize the RL to generate longer sequences of intermediate tokens-which in turn feeds into the narrative of "RL generating longer thinking traces." While RL may well be a very useful technique for improving the reasoning abilities of LLMs, our analysis shows that the simplistic structural assumptions made in modeling the underlying MDP render the popular LLM RL frameworks and their interpretations questionable.

Model editing aims to enhance the accuracy and reliability of large language models (LLMs) by efficiently adjusting their internal parameters. Currently, most LLM editing datasets are confined to narrow knowledge domains and cover a limited range of editing evaluation. They often overlook the broad scope of editing demands and the diversity of ripple effects resulting from edits. In this context, we introduce UniEdit, a unified benchmark for LLM editing grounded in open-domain knowledge. First, we construct editing samples by selecting entities from 25 common domains across five major categories, utilizing the extensive triple knowledge available in open-domain knowledge graphs to ensure comprehensive coverage of the knowledge domains. To address the issues of generality and locality in editing, we design an Neighborhood Multi-hop Chain Sampling (NMCS) algorithm to sample subgraphs based on a given knowledge piece to entail comprehensive ripple effects to evaluate. Finally, we employ proprietary LLMs to convert the sampled knowledge subgraphs into natural language text, guaranteeing grammatical accuracy and syntactical diversity. Extensive statistical analysis confirms the scale, comprehensiveness, and diversity of our UniEdit benchmark. We conduct comprehensive experiments across multiple LLMs and editors, analyzing their performance to highlight strengths and weaknesses in editing across open knowledge domains and various evaluation criteria, thereby offering valuable insights for future research endeavors.