Compilers, while essential, are notoriously complex systems that demand prohibitively expensive human expertise to develop and maintain. The recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) offer a compelling new paradigm: Neural Compilation, which could potentially simplify compiler development for new architectures and facilitate the discovery of innovative optimization techniques. However, several critical obstacles impede its practical adoption. Firstly, a significant lack of dedicated benchmarks and robust evaluation methodologies hinders objective assessment and tracking of progress in the field. Secondly, systematically enhancing the reliability and performance of LLM-generated assembly remains a critical challenge. Addressing these challenges, this paper introduces NeuComBack, a novel benchmark dataset specifically designed for IR-to-assembly compilation. Leveraging this dataset, we first define a foundational Neural Compilation workflow and conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the capabilities of recent frontier LLMs on Neural Compilation, establishing new performance baselines. We further propose a self-evolving prompt optimization method that enables LLMs to iteratively evolve their internal prompt strategies by extracting insights from prior self-debugging traces, thereby enhancing their neural compilation capabilities. Experiments demonstrate that our method significantly improves both the functional correctness and the performance of LLM-generated assembly code. Compared to baseline prompts, the functional correctness rates improved from 44% to 64% on x86_64 and from 36% to 58% on aarch64, respectively. More significantly, among the 16 correctly generated x86_64 programs using our method, 14 (87.5%) surpassed clang-O3 performance.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable progress in translating natural language to SQL, but a significant semantic gap persists between their general knowledge and domain-specific semantics of databases. Historical translation logs constitute a rich source of this missing in-domain knowledge, where SQL queries inherently encapsulate real-world usage patterns of database schema. Existing methods primarily enhance the reasoning process for individual translations but fail to accumulate in-domain knowledge from past translations. We introduce ORANGE, an online self-evolutionary framework that constructs database-specific knowledge bases by parsing SQL queries from translation logs. By accumulating in-domain knowledge that contains schema and data semantics, ORANGE progressively reduces the semantic gap and enhances the accuracy of subsequent SQL translations. To ensure reliability, we propose a novel nested Chain-of-Thought SQL-to-Text strategy with tuple-semantic tracking, which reduces semantic errors during knowledge generation. Experiments on multiple benchmarks confirm the practicality of ORANGE, demonstrating its effectiveness for real-world Text-to-SQL deployment, particularly in handling complex and domain-specific queries.

Large language models (LLMs) undergo safety alignment after training and tuning, yet recent work shows that safety can be bypassed through jailbreak attacks. While many jailbreaks and defenses exist, their cross-lingual generalization remains underexplored. This paper presents the first systematic multilingual evaluation of jailbreaks and defenses across ten languages -- spanning high-, medium-, and low-resource languages -- using six LLMs on HarmBench and AdvBench. We assess two jailbreak types: logical-expression-based and adversarial-prompt-based. For both types, attack success and defense robustness vary across languages: high-resource languages are safer under standard queries but more vulnerable to adversarial ones. Simple defenses can be effective, but are language- and model-dependent. These findings call for language-aware and cross-lingual safety benchmarks for LLMs.

Speculative decoding has become the standard approach for accelerating Large Language Model (LLM) inference. It exploits a lossless draft-then-verify procedure to circumvent the latency of autoregressive decoding, achieving impressive speed-ups. Yet, current speculative decoding approaches remain limited by two fundamental bottlenecks: (1) the autoregressive dependency during drafting which limits parallelism, and (2) frequent rejections of draft tokens caused by misalignment between the draft and verify models. This paper proposes SpecDiff-2, a novel framework to jointly address these two bottlenecks. It leverages discrete diffusion as a non-autoregressive drafter to address bottleneck (1) and develops novel techniques to calibrate discrete diffusion drafters with autoregressive verifiers, addressing bottleneck (2). Experimental results across a comprehensive benchmark suite show that SpecDiff-2 achieves a new state-of-the-art across reasoning, coding, and mathematical benchmarks, improving tokens-per-second by up to an average of +55% over previous baselines and obtaining up to 5.5x average speed-up over standard decoding, without any loss of accuracy.

Sentiment analysis using deep learning and pre-trained language models (PLMs) has gained significant traction due to their ability to capture rich contextual representations. However, existing approaches often underperform in scenarios involving nuanced emotional cues, domain shifts, and imbalanced sentiment distributions. We argue that these limitations stem from inadequate semantic grounding, poor generalization to diverse linguistic patterns, and biases toward dominant sentiment classes. To overcome these challenges, we propose CISEA-MRFE, a novel PLM-based framework integrating Contextual Instruction (CI), Semantic Enhancement Augmentation (SEA), and Multi-Refined Feature Extraction (MRFE). CI injects domain-aware directives to guide sentiment disambiguation; SEA improves robustness through sentiment-consistent paraphrastic augmentation; and MRFE combines a Scale-Adaptive Depthwise Encoder (SADE) for multi-scale feature specialization with an Emotion Evaluator Context Encoder (EECE) for affect-aware sequence modeling. Experimental results on four benchmark datasets demonstrate that CISEA-MRFE consistently outperforms strong baselines, achieving relative improvements in accuracy of up to 4.6% on IMDb, 6.5% on Yelp, 30.3% on Twitter, and 4.1% on Amazon. These results validate the effectiveness and generalization ability of our approach for sentiment classification across varied domains.

The remarkable capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) often need to be tailored for specific applications, requiring the integration of new knowledge or the acquisition of new skills. While full fine-tuning is a powerful adaptation method, it is computationally expensive and can lead to a degradation of general reasoning abilities, a phenomenon known as catastrophic forgetting. A range of alternative techniques exists, each with its own trade-offs. In-Context Learning (ICL) is fast but limited by context length, while Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT) methods like Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) offer a middle ground by minimizing parameter changes. However, the challenge of catastrophic forgetting persists, raising questions about the best adaptation strategy for a given task. This paper presents a comparative analysis of Supervised Finetuning (SFT), LoRA, and ICL in data-scarce scenarios. We find that LoRA provides the most effective balance, successfully instilling new skills with minimal impact on the base model's general knowledge. In contrast, while SFT excels at skill acquisition, it is highly susceptible to catastrophic forgetting. ICL is effective for incorporating factual knowledge but struggles with complex skills. Our findings offer a practical framework for selecting an LLM adaptation strategy. We highlight the critical distinction between skill acquisition and knowledge integration, clarify the trade-offs between task-specific performance and the preservation of general capabilities.

Recently, augmenting vision-language-action models (VLAs) with world-models has shown promise in robotic policy learning. However, it remains challenging to jointly predict next-state observations and action sequences because of the inherent difference between the two modalities. To address this, we propose DUal-STream diffusion (DUST), a world-model augmented VLA framework that handles the modality conflict and enhances the performance of VLAs across diverse tasks. Specifically, we propose a multimodal diffusion transformer architecture that explicitly maintains separate modality streams while enabling cross-modal knowledge sharing. In addition, we propose training techniques such as independent noise perturbations for each modality and a decoupled flow matching loss, which enables the model to learn the joint distribution in a bidirectional manner while avoiding the need for a unified latent space. Furthermore, based on the decoupled training framework, we introduce a sampling method where we sample action and vision tokens asynchronously at different rates, which shows improvement through inference-time scaling. Through experiments on simulated benchmarks such as RoboCasa and GR-1, DUST achieves up to 6% gains over a standard VLA baseline and implicit world-modeling methods, with our inference-time scaling approach providing an additional 2-5% gain on success rate. On real-world tasks with the Franka Research 3, DUST outperforms baselines in success rate by 13%, confirming its effectiveness beyond simulation. Lastly, we demonstrate the effectiveness of DUST in large-scale pretraining with action-free videos from BridgeV2, where DUST leads to significant gain when transferred to the RoboCasa benchmark.

A central architectural question for both biological and artificial intelligence is whether judgment relies on specialized modules or a unified, domain-general resource. While the discovery of decodable neural representations for distinct concepts in Large Language Models (LLMs) has suggested a modular architecture, whether these representations are truly independent systems remains an open question. Here we provide evidence for a convergent architecture for evaluative judgment. Across a range of LLMs, we find that diverse evaluative judgments are computed along a dominant dimension, which we term the Valence-Assent Axis (VAA). This axis jointly encodes subjective valence ("what is good") and the model's assent to factual claims ("what is true"). Through direct interventions, we demonstrate this axis drives a critical mechanism, which is identified as the subordination of reasoning: the VAA functions as a control signal that steers the generative process to construct a rationale consistent with its evaluative state, even at the cost of factual accuracy. Our discovery offers a mechanistic account for response bias and hallucination, revealing how an architecture that promotes coherent judgment can systematically undermine faithful reasoning.

As AI systems become increasingly integrated into human lives, endowing them with robust social intelligence has emerged as a critical frontier. A key aspect of this intelligence is discerning truth from deception, a ubiquitous element of human interaction that is conveyed through a complex interplay of verbal language and non-verbal visual cues. However, automatic deception detection in dynamic, multi-party conversations remains a significant challenge. The recent rise of powerful Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), with their impressive abilities in visual and textual understanding, makes them natural candidates for this task. Consequently, their capabilities in this crucial domain are mostly unquantified. To address this gap, we introduce a new task, Multimodal Interactive Veracity Assessment (MIVA), and present a novel multimodal dataset derived from the social deduction game Werewolf. This dataset provides synchronized video, text, with verifiable ground-truth labels for every statement. We establish a comprehensive benchmark evaluating state-of-the-art MLLMs, revealing a significant performance gap: even powerful models like GPT-4o struggle to distinguish truth from falsehood reliably. Our analysis of failure modes indicates that these models fail to ground language in visual social cues effectively and may be overly conservative in their alignment, highlighting the urgent need for novel approaches to building more perceptive and trustworthy AI systems.

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) promise more effective information extraction for review-based recommender systems, yet current methods still (i) mine free-form reviews without scope control, producing redundant and noisy representations, (ii) lack principled metrics that link LLM hallucination to downstream effectiveness, and (iii) leave the cost-quality trade-off across model scales largely unexplored. We address these gaps with the Hyper-Adaptive Dual-Stage Semantic Framework (HADSF), a two-stage approach that first induces a compact, corpus-level aspect vocabulary via adaptive selection and then performs vocabulary-guided, explicitly constrained extraction of structured aspect-opinion triples. To assess the fidelity of the resulting representations, we introduce Aspect Drift Rate (ADR) and Opinion Fidelity Rate (OFR) and empirically uncover a nonmonotonic relationship between hallucination severity and rating prediction error. Experiments on approximately 3 million reviews across LLMs spanning 1.5B-70B parameters show that, when integrated into standard rating predictors, HADSF yields consistent reductions in prediction error and enables smaller models to achieve competitive performance in representative deployment scenarios. We release code, data pipelines, and metric implementations to support reproducible research on hallucination-aware, LLM-enhanced explainable recommendation. Code is available at https://github.com/niez233/HADSF