Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as judges for open-ended generation, as large-scale human evaluation is often expensive and difficult to scale, yet their preferences remain imperfect proxies for human judgment. Existing auditing pipelines often assume that a reliable subset of examples or clean supervision signals are available beforehand, for example from human annotation, heuristic filtering, or the outputs of strong judges. In LLM evaluation, this assumption is fragile: the initial split may inherit judge bias, while human verification is typically too scarce to define stable groups at scale. We propose AURA, an adaptive uncertainty--aware refinement framework for auditing pairwise LLM--as--a--judge decisions under selected human verification. AURA iteratively learns a human-consistency signal, propagates reliable evidence, and prioritizes uncertain comparisons for human review. The key idea is to treat trust in a judge as a latent quantity that is progressively refined as evidence accumulates. We provide a compact formulation, a stable refinement procedure, and a comprehensive evaluation on both synthetic and real pairwise LLM-answer data.

Pretrained transformers sit near singular minima of the loss, where the Fisher information metric degenerates along dead directions: directions in parameter space along which the directional Fisher vanishes. Locating such a direction normally needs a forward pass and an eigendecomposition of activations, or a sampling-based complexity estimate; none returns a direction computable from the network's parameters alone. We give one, for LayerNorm transformers. The inverse-scale direction $γ^{-1}/\|γ^{-1}\|$ of the LayerNorm affine is an exact algebraic kernel of the post-final-norm centred activation covariance, for any input distribution, and induces a corresponding dead direction in parameter space. It is read from the LN scale parameter alone, with no forward or backward pass and no eigensolve: the cheapest dead-direction read, specific to LayerNorm. We test it on $14$ pretrained transformers ($9$ LayerNorm, $5$ RMSNorm; $160$M-$35$B; language and vision objectives). At random initialisation the predicted direction matches the measured bottom singular direction (one forward pass, direct SVD) to four decimal places on $9/9$ LayerNorm models, and is correctly absent on $5/5$ RMSNorm models, which lack the mean-subtraction projector that creates it. On the trained checkpoint the covariance eigenvalue along this direction deepens by ${\sim}10^3\times$ and further dead directions open; the random-init-to-trained gap is a one-forward-pass, per-checkpoint readout of singular structure along the predicted coordinate. Two consequences follow in closed form: the residual stream's smallest singular value is preserved block-to-block on $13/14$ transformers measured on their own input distribution, the one exception (Gemma$4$-$31$B) a genuine dead direction the same read pinpoints; and the kernel direction's presence classifies a transformer's normalisation from the parameters alone.

Existing frameworks for evaluating long-context language models (LCLM) can be broadly categorized into real-world applications (e.g, document summarization) and synthetic tasks (e.g, needle-in-a-haystack). Despite their utility, both approaches are accompanied by certain intrinsic limitations. Real-world tasks often involve complexity that makes interpretation challenging and suffer from data contamination, whereas synthetic tasks frequently lack meaningful coherence between the target information ("needle") and its surrounding context ("haystack"), undermining their validity as proxies for realistic applications. In response to these challenges, we posit that an ideal long-context evaluation framework should be characterized by three essential features: 1) seamless context: coherent contextual integration between target information and its surrounding context; 2) controllable setting: an extensible task setup that enables controlled studies--for example, incorporating additional required abilities such as numerical reasoning; and 3) sound evaluation: avoiding LLM-as-Judge and conduct exact-match to ensure deterministic and reproducible evaluation results. This study introduces LongBioBench, a benchmark that utilizes artificially generated biographies as a controlled environment for assessing LCLMs across dimensions of understanding, reasoning, and trustworthiness. Our experimental evaluation, which includes 18 LCLMs in total, demonstrates that most models still exhibit deficiencies in semantic understanding and elementary reasoning over retrieved results and are less trustworthy as context length increases. Our further analysis indicates some design choices employed by existing synthetic benchmarks, such as contextual non-coherence, numerical needles, and the absence of distractors, rendering them vulnerable to test the model's long-context capabilities. Moreover, we also reveal that long-context continual pretraining primarily adjusts RoPE embedding to accommodate extended context lengths, which in turn yields only marginal improvements in the model's true capabilities. To sum up, compared to previous synthetic benchmarks, LongBioBench achieves a better trade-off between mirroring authentic language tasks and maintaining controllability, and is highly interpretable and configurable.

Computational cognitive models, which formalize theories of cognition, enable researchers to quantify cognitive processes and arbitrate between competing theories by fitting models to behavioral data. Traditionally, these models are handcrafted, which requires significant domain knowledge, coding expertise, and time investment.

State-of-the-art membership inference attacks (MIAs) typically require training many reference models, making it difficult to scale these attacks to large pre-trained language models (LLMs). As a result, prior research has either relied on weaker attacks that avoid training references (e.g., fine-tuning attacks), or on stronger attacks applied to small models and datasets. However, weaker attacks have been shown to be brittle and insights from strong attacks in simplified settings do not translate to today's LLMs. These challenges prompt an important question: are the limitations observed in prior work due to attack design choices, or are MIAs fundamentally ineffective on LLMs? We address this question by scaling LiRA--one of the strongest MIAs--to GPT-2 architectures ranging from 10M to 1B parameters, training references on over 20B tokens from the C4 dataset. Our results advance the understanding of MIAs on LLMs in four key ways. While (1) strong MIAs can succeed on pretrained LLMs, (2) their effectiveness, remains limited (e.g., AUC<0.7) in practical settings.

These qualitative results exhibit the superior performance of our approach in transferring various reference components, including characters, garments, backgrounds, and motions, to synthesize the new target videos.

Large-scale neural language models exhibit remarkable performance in in-context learning: the ability to learn and reason about the input context on the fly. This work studies in-context counterfactual reasoning in language models, that is, the ability to predict consequences of a hypothetical scenario. We focus on a well-defined, synthetic linear regression task that requires noise abduction. Accurate prediction is based on (1) inferring an unobserved latent concept and (2) copying contextual noise from factual observations. We show that language models are capable of counterfactual reasoning. Further, we enhance existing identifiability results and reduce counterfactual reasoning for a broad class of functions to a transformation on in-context observations.

Test-time scaling seeks to improve the reasoning performance of large language models (LLMs) by adding computational resources. A prevalent approach within the field is sampling-based test-time scaling methods, which enhance reasoning by generating multiple reasoning paths for a given input during inference. However, despite its practical success, the theoretical foundations remain underexplored. In this paper, we provide the first theoretical framework for analyzing sampling-based test-time scaling methods, grounded in the perspective of confidence estimation. Based on the framework, we analyze two dominant paradigms: self-consistency and perplexity, and reveal key limitations: self-consistency suffers from high estimation error while perplexity exhibits substantial modeling error and possible degradation of the estimation error convergence.

Differential Transformer has recently gained significant attention for its impressive empirical performance, often attributed to its ability to perform noise canceled attention. However, precisely how differential attention achieves its empirical benefits remains poorly understood.

Despite recent efforts in Large Language Model (LLM) safety and alignment, current adversarial attacks on frontier LLMs can still consistently force harmful generations. Although adversarial training has been widely studied and shown to significantly improve the robustness of traditional machine learning models, its strengths and weaknesses in the context of LLMs are less understood. Specifically, while existing discrete adversarial attacks are effective at producing harmful content, training LLMs with concrete adversarial prompts is often computationally expensive, leading to reliance on continuous relaxations. At the same time, despite their effectiveness and generalization capabilities, training with continuous perturbations does not always capture the full spectrum of vulnerabilities exploited by discrete attacks. In this work, we aim to bridge this gap by introducing MIXAT, a novel method that combines stronger discrete and faster continuous attacks during training. We rigorously evaluate MIXAT across a wide spectrum of state-of-theart attacks, proposing the At Least One Attack Success Rate (ALO-ASR) metric to capture the worst-case vulnerability of models. We show MIXAT achieves substantially better robustness (ALO-ASR < 20%) compared to prior defenses (ALO-ASR > 50%), while maintaining a runtime comparable to methods based on continuous relaxations. We further analyze MIXAT in realistic deployment settings, exploring how chat templates, quantization, low-rank adapters, and temperature affect both adversarial training and evaluation, revealing additional blind spots in current methodologies. Our results demonstrate that MIXAT's discrete-continuous defense offers a principled and superior robustness-accuracy tradeoff with minimal computational overhead, highlighting its promise for building safer LLMs.