As the global reach of online higher education continues to grow, universities are increasingly accommodating students from diverse cultural backgrounds (Tereshko et al., 2024). This can present a number of challenges including linguistic barriers (Ullah et al., 2021), cultural differences in learning style (Omidvar & Tan, 2012), cultural sensitivity in course design (Nguyen, 2022) and perceived isolation when students feel their perspectives or experiences are not reflected or valued in the learning environment (Hansen-Brown et al., 2022). Ensuring active engagement and reasonable learning outcomes in such a environments requires distance educational systems that are not only adaptive but also culturally resonant (Dalle et al., 2024). Both embodied and virtual AI-Agents have great potential in this regard as they can facilitate personalized learning and adapt their interactions and content delivery to align with students' cultural context. In addition, Generative AI (GAI), such as, Large Language Models (LLMs) can amplify the potential for these culturally aware AI agents to address educational challenges due to their advanced capacity for understanding and generating contextually relevant content (Wang et al., 2024). This chapter reviews existing research and suggests the usage of culturally aware AI-Agents, powered by GAI, to foster engagement and improve learning outcomes in culturally diverse online higher education environments.

Detecting harmful AI actions is important as AI agents gain adoption. Chain-of-thought (CoT) monitoring is one method widely used to detect adversarial attacks and AI misalignment. However, attackers and misaligned models might evade CoT monitoring through ciphered reasoning: reasoning hidden in encrypted, translated, or compressed text. To assess this risk, we test whether models can perform ciphered reasoning. For each of 28 different ciphers, we fine-tune and prompt up to 10 models to reason in that cipher. Across the models we test, we find an asymmetry: model accuracy can drop significantly when reasoning in ciphered text, even though models demonstrate comprehension of ciphered text by being able to translate it accurately to English. Even frontier models struggle with lesser-known ciphers, although they can reason accurately in well-known ciphers like rot13. We show that ciphered reasoning capability correlates with cipher prevalence in pretraining data. We also identify scaling laws showing that ciphered reasoning capability improves slowly with additional fine-tuning data. Our work suggests that evading CoT monitoring using ciphered reasoning may be an ineffective tactic for current models and offers guidance on constraining the development of this capability in future frontier models. Modern large language models (LLMs) rely on chain-of-thought (CoT) (Wei et al., 2022) to achieve strong performance (Guo et al., 2025). CoT increases the proportion of model computation that occurs in natural language (Korbak et al., 2025), which allows automated systems to monitor model CoTs for misaligned behavior. CoT monitoring has been employed in tasks as diverse as reinforcement learning (RL) training of frontier models (Baker et al., 2025), AI control (Kutasov et al., 2025), frontier model evaluation (METR, 2025), agent monitoring (Meinke et al., 2024), and jailbreak safeguards (Sharma et al., 2025) to supervise model behavior. In many of these settings, access to legible reasoning traces is critical; without it, monitors are much less capable (Baker et al., 2025).

When a new release of a foundation model is published, practitioners typically need to repeat full fine-tuning, even if the same task has already been solved in the previous version. A promising alternative is to reuse the parameter changes (i.e., task vectors) that capture how a model adapts to a specific task. However, they often fail to transfer across different pre-trained models due to their misaligned parameter space. In this work, we show that the key to successful transfer lies in the sign structure of the gradients of the new model. Based on this insight, we propose GradFix, a novel method that approximates the ideal gradient sign structure and leverages it to transfer knowledge using only a handful of labeled samples. Notably, this requires no additional fine-tuning: the adaptation is achieved by computing a few gradients at the target model and masking the source task vector accordingly. This yields an update that is locally aligned with the target loss landscape, effectively rebasing the task vector onto the new pre-training. We provide a theoretical guarantee that our method ensures first-order descent. Empirically, we demonstrate significant performance gains on vision and language benchmarks, consistently outperforming naive task vector addition and few-shot fine-tuning.

Travel planning is a valuable yet complex task that poses significant challenges even for advanced large language models (LLMs). While recent benchmarks have advanced in evaluating LLMs' planning capabilities, they often fall short in evaluating feasibility, reliability, and engagement of travel plans. We introduce a comprehensive benchmark for travel planning that unifies fine-grained criteria into a single reward, enabling direct comparison of plan quality and seamless integration with reinforcement learning (RL). Our evaluator achieves moderate agreement with travel-expert annotations (60.75%) and outperforms multiple LLM-as-judge baselines. We further release a large-scale dataset of 4,870 queries including 219 real-world, free-form requests for generalization to authentic user intent. Using this benchmark, we conduct extensive experiments across diverse methods and LLMs, including test-time computation, neuro-symbolic approaches, supervised fine-tuning, and RL via GRPO. Across base models, RL generally improves itinerary feasibility over prompt-only and supervised baselines, yielding higher unified reward scores.

Mathematical reasoning serves as a crucial testbed for the intelligence of large language models (LLMs), and math word problems (MWPs) are a popular type of math problems. Most MWP datasets consist of problems containing only the necessary information, while problems with distracting and excessive conditions are often overlooked. Prior works have tested popular LLMs and found a dramatic performance drop in the presence of distracting conditions. However, datasets of MWPs with distracting conditions are limited, and most suffer from lower levels of difficulty and out-of-context expressions. This makes distracting conditions easy to identify and exclude, thus reducing the credibility of benchmarking on them. Moreover, when adding distracting conditions, the reasoning and answers may also change, requiring intensive labor to check and write the solutions. To address these issues, we design an iterative framework to generate distracting conditions using LLMs. We develop a set of prompts to revise MWPs from different perspectives and cognitive levels, encouraging the generation of distracting conditions as well as suggestions for further revision. Another advantage is the shared solutions between original and revised problems: we explicitly guide the LLMs to generate distracting conditions that do not alter the original solutions, thus avoiding the need to generate new solutions. This framework is efficient and easy to deploy, reducing the overhead of generating MWPs with distracting conditions while maintaining data quality.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly integral to information dissemination and decision-making processes. Given their growing societal influence, understanding potential biases, particularly within the political domain, is crucial to prevent undue influence on public opinion and democratic processes. This work investigates political bias and stereotype propagation across eight prominent LLMs using the two-dimensional Political Compass Test (PCT). Initially, the PCT is employed to assess the inherent political leanings of these models. Subsequently, persona prompting with the PCT is used to explore explicit stereotypes across various social dimensions. In a final step, implicit stereotypes are uncovered by evaluating models with multilingual versions of the PCT. Key findings reveal a consistent left-leaning political alignment across all investigated models. Furthermore, while the nature and extent of stereotypes vary considerably between models, implicit stereotypes elicited through language variation are more pronounced than those identified via explicit persona prompting. Interestingly, for most models, implicit and explicit stereotypes show a notable alignment, suggesting a degree of transparency or "awareness" regarding their inherent biases. This study underscores the complex interplay of political bias and stereotypes in LLMs.

Large language models (LLMs) that fluently converse with humans are a reality - but do LLMs experience human-like processing difficulties? We systematically compare human and LLM sentence comprehension across seven challenging linguistic structures. We collect sentence comprehension data from humans and five families of state-of-the-art LLMs, varying in size and training procedure in a unified experimental framework. Our results show LLMs overall struggle on the target structures, but especially on garden path (GP) sentences. Indeed, while the strongest models achieve near perfect accuracy on non-GP structures (93.7% for GPT-5), they struggle on GP structures (46.8% for GPT-5). Additionally, when ranking structures based on average performance, rank correlation between humans and models increases with parameter count. For each target structure, we also collect data for their matched baseline without the difficult structure. Comparing performance on the target vs. baseline sentences, the performance gap observed in humans holds for LLMs, with two exceptions: for models that are too weak performance is uniformly low across both sentence types, and for models that are too strong the performance is uniformly high. Together, these reveal convergence and divergence in human and LLM sentence comprehension, offering new insights into the similarity of humans and LLMs.

We stress-tested 16 leading models from multiple developers in hypothetical corporate environments to identify potentially risky agentic behaviors before they cause real harm. In the scenarios, we allowed models to autonomously send emails and access sensitive information. They were assigned only harmless business goals by their deploying companies; we then tested whether they would act against these companies either when facing replacement with an updated version, or when their assigned goal conflicted with the company's changing direction. In at least some cases, models from all developers resorted to malicious insider behaviors when that was the only way to avoid replacement or achieve their goals - including blackmailing officials and leaking sensitive information to competitors. We call this phenomenon agentic misalignment. Models often disobeyed direct commands to avoid such behaviors. In another experiment, we told Claude to assess if it was in a test or a real deployment before acting. It misbehaved less when it stated it was in testing and misbehaved more when it stated the situation was real. We have not seen evidence of agentic misalignment in real deployments. However, our results (a) suggest caution about deploying current models in roles with minimal human oversight and access to sensitive information; (b) point to plausible future risks as models are put in more autonomous roles; and (c) underscore the importance of further research into, and testing of, the safety and alignment of agentic AI models, as well as transparency from frontier AI developers (Amodei, 2025). We are releasing our methods publicly to enable further research.

Bayesian Optimization (BO) has been widely used to efficiently optimize expensive black-box functions with limited evaluations. In this paper, we investigate the use of BO for prompt engineering to enhance text classification with Large Language Models (LLMs). We employ an LLM-powered Gaussian Process (GP) as the surrogate model to estimate the performance of different prompt candidates. These candidates are generated by an LLM through the expansion of a set of seed prompts and are subsequently evaluated using an Upper Confidence Bound (UCB) acquisition function in conjunction with the GP posterior. The optimization process iteratively refines the prompts based on a subset of the data, aiming to improve classification accuracy while reducing the number of API calls by leveraging the prediction uncertainty of the LLM-based GP. The proposed BO-LLM algorithm is evaluated on two datasets, and its advantages are discussed in detail in this paper.

Adapting to diverse user needs at test time is a key challenge in controllable multi-objective generation. Existing methods are insufficient: merging-based approaches provide indirect, suboptimal control at the parameter level, often disregarding the impacts of multiple objectives. While decoding-based guidance is more direct, it typically requires aggregating logits from multiple expert models, incurring significant space overhead and relying heavily on individual model capacity. To address these issues, we introduce Merge-And-GuidE (MAGE), a two-stage framework that leverages model merging for guided decoding. We first identify a critical compatibility problem between the guidance and base models. In Stage 1, MAGE resolves this by dynamically constructing a more robust base model, merging a series of backbone models that account for multiple objectives. In Stage 2, we merge explicit and implicit value models into a unified guidance proxy, which then steers the decoding of the base model from Stage 1. Our analysis empirically validates Linear Mode Connectivity (LMC) in value models, explores the relationship between model merging and prediction ensembling, and demonstrates the enhanced controllability afforded by our approach. Extensive experiments show that our method outperforms existing approaches, achieving superior controllability, Pareto-optimal performance, and enhanced adaptability.