This research introduces a novel approach to textual and multimodal Hate Speech Detection (HSD), using Large Language Models (LLMs) as dynamic knowledge bases to generate background context and incorporate it into the input of HSD classifiers. Two context generation strategies are examined: one focused on named entities and the other on full-text prompting. Four methods of incorporating context into the classifier input are compared: text concatenation, embedding concatenation, a hierarchical transformer-based fusion, and LLM-driven text enhancement. Experiments are conducted on the textual Latent Hatred dataset of implicit hate speech and applied in a multimodal setting on the MAMI dataset of misogynous memes. Results suggest that both the contextual information and the method by which it is incorporated are key, with gains of up to 3 and 6 F1 points on textual and multimodal setups respectively, from a zero-context baseline to the highest-performing system, based on embedding concatenation.

Dense Retrieval Models (DRMs) are a prominent development in Information Retrieval (IR). A key challenge with these neural Transformer-based models is that they often struggle to generalize beyond the specific tasks and domains they were trained on. To address this challenge, prior research in IR incorporated the Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) framework within each Transformer layer of a DRM, which, though effective, substantially increased the number of additional parameters. In this paper, we propose a more efficient design, which introduces a single MoE block (SB-MoE) after the final Transformer layer. To assess the retrieval effectiveness of SB-MoE, we perform an empirical evaluation across three IR tasks. Our experiments involve two evaluation setups, aiming to assess both in-domain effectiveness and the model's zero-shot generalizability. In the first setup, we fine-tune SB-MoE with four different underlying DRMs on seven IR benchmarks and evaluate them on their respective test sets. In the second setup, we fine-tune SB-MoE on MSMARCO and perform zero-shot evaluation on thirteen BEIR datasets. Additionally, we perform further experiments to analyze the model's dependency on its hyperparameters (i.e., the number of employed and activated experts) and investigate how this variation affects SB-MoE's performance. The obtained results show that SB-MoE is particularly effective for DRMs with lightweight base models, such as TinyBERT and BERT-Small, consistently exceeding standard model fine-tuning across benchmarks. For DRMs with more parameters, such as BERT-Base and Contriever, our model requires a larger number of training samples to achieve improved retrieval performance. Our code is available online at: https://github.com/FaySokli/SB-MoE.

We present SQuAI (https://squai.scads.ai/), a scalable and trustworthy multi-agent retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) framework for scientific question answering (QA) with large language models (LLMs). SQuAI addresses key limitations of existing RAG systems in the scholarly domain, where complex, open-domain questions demand accurate answers, explicit claims with citations, and retrieval across millions of scientific documents. Built on over 2.3 million full-text papers from arXiv.org, SQuAI employs four collaborative agents to decompose complex questions into sub-questions, retrieve targeted evidence via hybrid sparse-dense retrieval, and adaptively filter documents to improve contextual relevance. To ensure faithfulness and traceability, SQuAI integrates in-line citations for each generated claim and provides supporting sentences from the source documents. Our system improves faithfulness, answer relevance, and contextual relevance by up to +0.088 (12%) over a strong RAG baseline. We further release a benchmark of 1,000 scientific question-answer-evidence triplets to support reproducibility. With transparent reasoning, verifiable citations, and domain-wide scalability, SQuAI demonstrates how multi-agent RAG enables more trustworthy scientific QA with LLMs.

Allocating more computation during inference time (test-time scaling) improves language model performance, especially for reasoning tasks. To address this inefficiency, we introduce a general test-time calibration framework that adaptively modifies the model toward high-reward reasoning paths, with theoretical guarantees of improving the lower bound of expected reward under finite sampling, all without large language model (LLM) retraining. Within this framework, we propose CarBoN (Calibrated Best-of-N), a two-phase method that first explores the solution space and then learns a calibration of the logits via an input-specific temperature T and additive shift vector δ, guiding generation toward more reliable reasoning. Experiments on MA TH-500 and AIME-2024 show that CarBoN improves efficiency, with up to 4 fewer rollouts to reach the same accuracy, while often achieving higher accuracy under fixed budgets. We also analyze the complementary roles of T and δ in balancing output diversity and correctness, and demonstrate that the framework also generalizes to step-level sampling strategies such as beam search. Test-time scaling (TTS) is a practical alternative to ever-larger training, enabling models to "think longer" at inference by allocating additional computation to reasoning. As these studies suggest, TTS allows smaller LLMs to match or even outperform larger ones, providing a more cost-efficient and flexible inference strategy. Despite these benefits, simply increasing test-time compute does not guarantee optimal performance. Recent work has shown that inference without effective verification is often sub-optimal, as models may spend additional computation on low-quality reasoning paths (Setlur et al., 2025). To overcome this inefficiency, we propose a general test-time calibration framework that strategically reallocates the inference budget by leveraging feedback from a verifier or reward model during inference. Rather than treating generation as a fixed forward pass, the model adaptively steers toward high-reward (likely correct) regions, improving reasoning reliability under a fixed query budget. The reward is defined as the inverse distance to the target plus noise.

As powerful tools in Natural Language Processing (NLP), Large Language Models (LLMs) have been leveraged for crafting recommendations to achieve precise alignment with user preferences and elevate the quality of the recommendations. The existing approaches implement both non-tuning and tuning strategies. Compared to following the tuning strategy, the approaches following the non-tuning strategy avoid the relatively costly, time-consuming, and expertise-requiring process of further training pre-trained LLMs on task-specific datasets, but they suffer the issue of not having the task-specific business or local enterprise knowledge. To the best of our knowledge, none of the existing approaches following the non-tuning strategy explicitly integrates collaborative filtering, one of the most successful recommendation techniques. This study aims to fill the gap by proposing critique-based LLMs as recommendation systems (Critic-LLM-RS). For our purpose, we train a separate machine-learning model called Critic that implements collaborative filtering for recommendations by learning from the interactions between many users and items. The Critic provides critiques to LLMs to significantly refine the recommendations. Extensive experiments have verified the effectiveness of Critic-LLM-RS on real datasets.

Semantic top-K selection with cross-encoder rerankers underpins of on-device AI services, such as retrieval-augmented generation, agent memory, and personalized recommendation. However, its latency and memory demands dominate end-to-end budgets on edge hardware. Revisiting the objective of top-K selection, we reveal that only relative rankings matter, not exact per-candidate scores. We further observe sequence-level sparsity: relative rankings stabilize early in intermediate layers, allowing pruning opportunities prior to completing full inference. Building on this insight, we propose monolithic forwarding and develop a training-free inference system, GRATING. By maintaining a global view of all candidates, it reduces latency through progressive cluster pruning. It also bounds peak memory usage by strategically overlapping I/O with computation via dual-layer sliding window and chunked execution. We evaluate GRATING against state-of-the-art baselines on rerankers from 0.6B to 8B parameters across Apple M2 and RTX 5070. GRATING consistently reduces latency by up to 89.0% and peak memory by up to 94.9% in microbenchmarks, without any loss in precision. Across three real-world on-device AI applications, GRATING lowers latency by 11.6%-51.0% and peak memory by 18.6%-77.8%, demonstrating substantial improvements in efficiency and deployability.

As language models are increasingly used in scientific workflows, evaluating their ability to propose sets of explanations-not just a single correct answer-becomes critical. Many scientific problems are underdetermined: multiple, mechanistically distinct hypotheses are consistent with the same observations. We introduce HypoSpace, a diagnostic suite that treats LLMs as samplers of finite hypothesis sets and measures three complementary indicators: Validity (precision of proposals consistent with observations), Uniqueness (non-redundancy among proposals), and Recovery (coverage of the enumerated admissible set). We instantiate HypoSpace in three structured domains with deterministic validators and exactly enumerated hypothesis spaces: (i) causal graphs from perturbations, (ii) gravity-constrained 3D voxel reconstruction from top-down projections, and (iii) Boolean genetic interactions. Across instruction-tuned and reasoning-focused models, Validity often remains high while Uniqueness and Recovery degrade as the admissible space grows, revealing mode collapse that is invisible to correctness-only metrics. HypoSpace offers a controlled probe-rather than a leaderboard-for methods that explicitly explore and cover admissible explanation spaces. Code is available at: https://github.com/CTT-Pavilion/_HypoSpace.

Creative services teams increasingly rely on large language models (LLMs) to accelerate ideation, yet production systems often converge on homogeneous outputs that fail to meet brand or artistic expectations. Art of X developed persona-conditioned LLM agents -- internally branded as "Sparks" and instantiated through a library of role-inspired system prompts -- to intentionally diversify agent behaviour within a multi-agent workflow. This white paper documents the problem framing, experimental design, and quantitative evidence behind the Spark agent programme. Using an LLM-as-a-judge protocol calibrated against human gold standards, we observe a mean diversity gain of +4.1 points (on a 1-10 scale) when persona-conditioned Spark agents replace a uniform system prompt, narrowing the gap to human experts to 1.0 point. We also surface evaluator bias and procedural considerations for future deployments.

In this paper, we present our submission for the token prediction task of EvaCun 2025. Our sys-tems are based on LLMs (Command-R, Mistral, and Aya Expanse) fine-tuned on the task data provided by the organizers. As we only pos-sess a very superficial knowledge of the subject field and the languages of the task, we simply used the training data without any task-specific adjustments, preprocessing, or filtering. We compare 3 different approaches (based on 3 different prompts) of obtaining the predictions, and we evaluate them on a held-out part of the data.

The instruction-following capabilities of large language models (LLMs) are pivotal for numerous applications, from conversational agents to complex reasoning systems. However, current evaluations predominantly focus on English models, neglecting the linguistic and cultural nuances of other languages. Specifically, Korean, with its distinct syntax, rich morphological features, honorific system, and dual numbering systems, lacks a dedicated benchmark for assessing open-ended instruction-following capabilities. To address this gap, we introduce the Korean Instruction-following Task Evaluation (KITE), a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate both general and Korean-specific instructions. Unlike existing Korean benchmarks that focus mainly on factual knowledge or multiple-choice testing, KITE directly targets diverse, open-ended instruction-following tasks. Our evaluation pipeline combines automated metrics with human assessments, revealing performance disparities across models and providing deeper insights into their strengths and weaknesses. By publicly releasing the KITE dataset and code, we aim to foster further research on culturally and linguistically inclusive LLM development and inspire similar endeavors for other underrepresented languages.