Cultural evaluation of large language models has become increasingly important, yet current benchmarks often reduce culture to static facts or homogeneous values. This view conflicts with anthropological accounts that emphasize culture as dynamic, historically situated, and enacted in practice. To analyze this gap, we introduce a four-part framework that categorizes how benchmarks frame culture, such as knowledge, preference, performance, or bias. Using this lens, we qualitatively examine 20 cultural benchmarks and identify six recurring methodological issues, including treating countries as cultures, overlooking within-culture diversity, and relying on oversimplified survey formats. Drawing on established anthropological methods, we propose concrete improvements: incorporating real-world narratives and scenarios, involving cultural communities in design and validation, and evaluating models in context rather than isolation. Our aim is to guide the development of cultural benchmarks that go beyond static recall tasks and more accurately capture the responses of the models to complex cultural situations.

The promotion of academic papers has become an important means of enhancing research visibility. However, existing automated methods struggle limited storytelling, insufficient aesthetic quality, and constrained self-adjustment, making it difficult to achieve efficient and engaging dissemination. At the heart of those challenges is a simple principle: \emph{there is no way to improve it when you cannot evaluate it right}. To address this, we introduce \textbf{EvoPresent}, a self-improvement agent framework that unifies coherent narratives, aesthetic-aware designs, and realistic presentation delivery via virtual characters. Central to EvoPresent is \textbf{PresAesth}, a multi-task reinforcement learning (RL) aesthetic model that provides reliable aesthetic scoring, defect adjustment, and comparative feedback, enabling iterative self-improvement even under limited aesthetic training data. To systematically evaluate the methods, we introduce \textbf{EvoPresent Benchmark}, a comprehensive benchmark comprising: \textit{Presentation Generation Quality}, built on 650 top-tier AI conference papers with multimodal resources (slides, videos and scripts) to assess both content and design; and \textit{Aesthetic Awareness}, consisting of 2,000 slide pairs with varying aesthetic levels, supporting joint training and evaluation on scoring, defect adjustment, and comparison. Our findings highlight that (i) High-quality feedback is essential for agent self-improvement, while initial capability alone does not guarantee effective self-correction. (ii) Automated generation pipelines exhibit a trade-off between visual design and content construction. (iii) Multi-task RL training shows stronger generalization in aesthetic awareness tasks.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in decision-making contexts, but when they present answers without signaling low confidence, users may unknowingly act on erroneous outputs. Prior work shows that LLMs maintain internal uncertainty signals, yet their expressed confidence is often miscalibrated and poorly discriminates between correct and incorrect answers. We investigate whether supervised fine-tuning can improve models' ability to communicate uncertainty and whether such improvements generalize across tasks and domains. We fine-tune LLMs on datasets spanning general knowledge, mathematics, and open-ended trivia, and evaluate two metacognitive tasks: (1) single-question confidence estimation, where the model assigns a numeric certainty to its answer, and (2) pairwise confidence comparison, where the model selects which of two answers it is more likely to answer correctly. We assess generalization to unseen domains, including medical and legal reasoning. Results show that fine-tuning improves calibration (alignment between stated confidence and accuracy) and discrimination (higher confidence for correct vs. incorrect responses) within and across domains. However, gains are task-specific: training on single-question calibration does not transfer to pairwise comparison, and vice versa. Multitask fine-tuning yields broader gains, lowering calibration error and strengthening discrimination in out-of-domain evaluations. This suggests that uncertainty communication in LLMs is trainable but requires multitask training to generalize effectively.

When used in high-stakes settings, AI systems are expected to produce decisions that are transparent, interpretable, and auditable, a requirement increasingly expected by regulations. Decision trees such as CART provide clear and verifiable rules, but they are restricted to structured tabular data and cannot operate directly on unstructured inputs such as text. In practice, large language models (LLMs) are widely used for such data, yet prompting strategies such as chain-of-thought or prompt optimization still rely on free-form reasoning, limiting their ability to ensure trustworthy behaviors. We present the Agentic Classification Tree (ACT), which extends decision-tree methodology to unstructured inputs by formulating each split as a natural-language question, refined through impurity-based evaluation and LLM feedback via TextGrad. Experiments on text benchmarks show that ACT matches or surpasses prompting-based baselines while producing transparent and interpretable decision paths.

Case definitions are essential for effectively communicating public health threats. However, the absence of a standardized, machine-readable format poses significant challenges to interoperability, epidemiological research, the exchange of qualitative data, and the effective application of computational analysis methods, including artificial intelligence (AI). This complicates comparisons and collaborations across organizations and regions, limits data integration, and hinders technological innovation in public health. To address these issues, we propose the first open, machine-readable format for representing case and syndrome definitions. Additionally, we introduce the first comprehensive dataset of standardized case definitions and tools to convert existing human-readable definitions into machine-readable formats. We also provide an accessible online platform for browsing, analyzing, and contributing new definitions, available at https://opensyndrome.org. The Open Syndrome Definition format enables consistent, scalable use of case definitions across systems, unlocking AI's potential to strengthen public health preparedness and response. The source code for the format can be found at https://github.com/OpenSyndrome/schema under the MIT license.

AI scientists are emerging computational systems that serve as collaborative partners in discovery. These systems remain difficult to build because they are bespoke, tied to rigid workflows, and lack shared environments that unify tools, data, and analyses into a common ecosystem. In genomics, unified ecosystems have transformed research by enabling interoperability, reuse, and community-driven development; AI scientists require comparable infrastructure. We present ToolUniverse, an ecosystem for building AI scientists from any language or reasoning model across open- and closed-weight models. ToolUniverse standardizes how AI scientists identify and call tools by providing more than 600 machine learning models, datasets, APIs, and scientific packages for data analysis, knowledge retrieval, and experimental design. It automatically refines tool interfaces for correct use by AI scientists, generates new tools from natural language descriptions, iteratively optimizes tool specifications, and composes tools into agentic workflows. In a case study of hypercholesterolemia, ToolUniverse was used to create an AI scientist to identify a potent analog of a drug with favorable predicted properties. The open-source ToolUniverse is available at https://aiscientist.tools.

We study weight-only post-training quantization (PTQ), which quantizes the weights of a large language model (LLM) without retraining, using little or no calibration data. Weight-only PTQ is crucial for reducing the memory footprint and latency of LLM inference, especially in memory-bound, small-batch inference scenarios, such as personalized inference on edge devices. Despite its importance, irregular weight distributions with heavy-tailed outliers in LLMs complicate quantization, recently motivating rotation-based methods that transform weights into near-Gaussian distributions, which are more regular with fewer outliers, thereby reducing quantization error. In this work, we first derive the information-theoretically optimal bit allocation for Gaussianized weights under given bit budgets, revealing that fine-grained fractional-bit quantizers approaching the Gaussian distortion-rate bound are essential to achieve near-optimal quantization performance. To bridge this theoretical insight and practical implementation, we introduce Q-Palette, a versatile collection of fractional-bit quantizers that range from trellis-coded quantizers offering near-optimal distortion to simpler vector and scalar quantizers optimized for faster inference, all efficiently implemented with optimized CUDA kernels across various bitwidths. Furthermore, leveraging Q-Palette as a foundational component, we propose a novel mixed-scheme quantization framework, jointly optimizing quantizer choices and layer fusion decisions given resource constraints. The code is available at https://github.com/snu-mllab/Q-Palette.

Deploying reinforcement learning (RL) safely in the real world is challenging, as policies trained in simulators must face the inevitable sim-to-real gap. Robust safe RL techniques are provably safe, however difficult to scale, while domain randomization is more practical yet prone to unsafe behaviors. We address this gap by proposing SPiDR, short for Sim-to-real via Pessimistic Domain Randomization -- a scalable algorithm with provable guarantees for safe sim-to-real transfer. SPiDR uses domain randomization to incorporate the uncertainty about the sim-to-real gap into the safety constraints, making it versatile and highly compatible with existing training pipelines. Through extensive experiments on sim-to-sim benchmarks and two distinct real-world robotic platforms, we demonstrate that SPiDR effectively ensures safety despite the sim-to-real gap while maintaining strong performance.

Universal domain adaptation (UniDA) transfers knowledge from a labeled source domain to an unlabeled target domain, where label spaces may differ and the target domain may contain private classes. Previous UniDA methods primarily focused on visual space alignment but often struggled with visual ambiguities due to content differences, which limited their robustness and generalizability. To overcome this, we introduce a novel approach that leverages the strong \textit{zero-shot capabilities} of recent vision-language foundation models (VLMs) like CLIP, concentrating solely on label space alignment to enhance adaptation stability. CLIP can generate task-specific classifiers based only on label names. However, adapting CLIP to UniDA is challenging because the label space is not fully known in advance. In this study, we first utilize generative vision-language models to identify unknown categories in the target domain. Noise and semantic ambiguities in the discovered labels -- such as those similar to source labels (e.g., synonyms, hypernyms, hyponyms) -- complicate label alignment. To address this, we propose a training-free label-space alignment method for UniDA (\ours). Our method aligns label spaces instead of visual spaces by filtering and refining noisy labels between the domains. We then construct a \textit{universal classifier} that integrates both shared knowledge and target-private class information, thereby improving generalizability under domain shifts. The results reveal that the proposed method considerably outperforms existing UniDA techniques across key DomainBed benchmarks, delivering an average improvement of \textcolor{blue}{+7.9\%}in H-score and \textcolor{blue}{+6.1\%} in H$^3$-score. Furthermore, incorporating self-training further enhances performance and achieves an additional (\textcolor{blue}{+1.6\%}) increment in both H- and H$^3$-scores.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly envisioned as intelligent assistants for personalized learning, systematic head-to-head evaluations in authentic learning scenarios remain scarce. This study presents an empirical comparison of three state-of-the-art LLMs on a tutoring task simulating a realistic learning setting. Using a dataset containing a student's responses to ten mixed-format questions with correctness labels, each model was asked to (i) analyze the quiz to identify underlying knowledge components, (ii) infer the student's mastery profile, and (iii) generate targeted guidance for improvement. To mitigate subjectivity and evaluator bias, Gemini was employed as a virtual judge to perform pairwise comparisons across multiple dimensions: accuracy, clarity, actionability, and appropriateness. Results analyzed via the Bradley-Terry model reveal that GPT-4o is generally preferred, producing feedback that is more informative and better structured than its counterparts, whereas DeepSeek-V3 and GLM-4.5 demonstrate intermittent strengths but lower consistency. These findings highlight the feasibility of deploying LLMs as advanced teaching assistants for individualized support and provide methodological insights for subsequent empirical research on LLM-driven personalized learning.