There is no doubt that there has been a drastic increase in abusive and sexually explicit content in music, particularly in Billboard Music Charts. However, there is a lack of studies that validate the trend for effective policy development, as such content has harmful behavioural changes in children and youths. In this study, we utilise deep learning methods to analyse songs (lyrics) from Billboard Charts of the United States in the last seven decades. We provide a longitudinal study using deep learning and language models and review the evolution of content using sentiment analysis and abuse detection, including sexually explicit content. Our results show a significant rise in explicit content in popular music from 1990 onwards. Furthermore, we find an increasing prevalence of songs with lyrics containing profane, sexually explicit, and otherwise inappropriate language. The longitudinal analysis of the ability of language models to capture nuanced patterns in lyrical content, reflecting shifts in societal norms and language use over time.

Electronic health records (EHRs) contain extensive unstructured clinical data that can overwhelm emergency physicians trying to identify critical information. We present a two-stage summarization system that runs entirely on embedded devices, enabling offline clinical summarization while preserving patient privacy. In our approach, a dual-device architecture first retrieves relevant patient record sections using the Jetson Nano-R (Retrieve), then generates a structured summary on another Jetson Nano-S (Summarize), communicating via a lightweight socket link. The summarization output is two-fold: (1) a fixed-format list of critical findings, and (2) a context-specific narrative focused on the clinician's query. The retrieval stage uses locally stored EHRs, splits long notes into semantically coherent sections, and searches for the most relevant sections per query. The generation stage uses a locally hosted small language model (SLM) to produce the summary from the retrieved text, operating within the constraints of two NVIDIA Jetson devices. We first benchmarked six open-source SLMs under 7B parameters to identify viable models. We incorporated an LLM-as-Judge evaluation mechanism to assess summary quality in terms of factual accuracy, completeness, and clarity. Preliminary results on MIMIC-IV and de-identified real EHRs demonstrate that our fully offline system can effectively produce useful summaries in under 30 seconds.

We present AlphaApollo, a self-evolving agentic reasoning system that aims to address two bottlenecks in foundation model (FM) reasoning-limited model-intrinsic capacity and unreliable test-time iteration. AlphaApollo orchestrates multiple models with professional tools to enable deliberate, verifiable reasoning. It couples (i) a computation tool (Python with numerical and symbolic libraries) and (ii) a retrieval tool (task-relevant external information) to execute exact calculations and ground decisions. The system further supports multi-round, multi-model solution evolution via a shared state map that records candidates, executable checks, and feedback for iterative refinement. In evaluations on AIME 2024/2025 across multiple models, AlphaApollo delivers consistent gains: +5.15% Average@32 and +23.34% Pass@32 for Qwen2.5-14B-Instruct, and +8.91% Average@32 with +26.67% Pass@32 for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct. Tool-use analysis shows that more than 80% of tool calls are successfully executed, with consistent outperformance of non-tool baselines, thereby lifting the capability ceiling of FMs. More empirical results and implementation details will be updated at https://github.com/tmlr-group/AlphaApollo.

As online education platforms continue to expand, there is a growing need for assessment methods that not only measure answer accuracy but also capture the depth of students' cognitive processes in alignment with curriculum objectives. This study proposes and evaluates a rubric-based assessment framework powered by a large language model (LLM) for measuring algebraic competence, real-world-context block coding tasks. The problem set, designed by mathematics education experts, aligns each problem segment with five predefined rubric dimensions, enabling the LLM to assess both correctness and quality of students' problem-solving processes. The system was implemented on an online platform that records all intermediate responses and employs the LLM for rubric-aligned achievement evaluation. To examine the practical effectiveness of the proposed framework, we conducted a field study involving 42 middle school students engaged in multi-stage quadratic equation tasks with block coding. The study integrated learner self-assessments and expert ratings to benchmark the system's outputs. The LLM-based rubric evaluation showed strong agreement with expert judgments and consistently produced rubric-aligned, process-oriented feedback. These results demonstrate both the validity and scalability of incorporating LLM-driven rubric assessment into online mathematics and STEM education platforms.

Open-ended survey responses provide valuable insights in marketing research, but low-quality responses not only burden researchers with manual filtering but also risk leading to misleading conclusions, underscoring the need for effective evaluation. Existing automatic evaluation methods target LLM-generated text and inadequately assess human-written responses with their distinct characteristics. To address such characteristics, we propose a two-stage evaluation framework specifically designed for human survey responses. First, gibberish filtering removes nonsensical responses. Then, three dimensions-effort, relevance, and completeness-are evaluated using LLM capabilities, grounded in empirical analysis of real-world survey data. Validation on English and Korean datasets shows that our framework not only outperforms existing metrics but also demonstrates high practical applicability for real-world applications such as response quality prediction and response rejection, showing strong correlations with expert assessment.

We present OpenStaxQA, an evaluation benchmark specific to college-level educational applications based on 43 open-source college textbooks in English, Spanish, and Polish, available under a permissive Creative Commons license. We finetune and evaluate large language models (LLMs) with approximately 7 billion parameters on this dataset using quantized low rank adapters (QLoRa). Additionally we also perform a zero-shot evaluation on the AI2 reasoning challenge dev dataset in order to check if OpenStaxQA can lead to an improved performance on other tasks. We also discuss broader impacts relevant to datasets such as OpenStaxQA.

Objective: We sought to develop a classification algorithm to extract diagnoses from free-text radiology reports of brain imaging performed in patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation. Methods: We developed and fine-tuned Neu-RadBERT, a BERT-based model, to classify unstructured radiology reports. We extracted all the brain imaging reports (computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) from MIMIC-IV database, performed in patients with ARF. Initial manual labelling was performed on a subset of reports for various brain abnormalities, followed by fine-tuning Neu-RadBERT using three strategies: 1) baseline RadBERT, 2) Neu-RadBERT with Masked Language Modeling (MLM) pretraining, and 3) Neu-RadBERT with MLM pretraining and oversampling to address data skewness. We compared the performance of this model to Llama-2-13B, an autoregressive LLM. Results: The Neu-RadBERT model, particularly with oversampling, demonstrated significant improvements in diagnostic accuracy compared to baseline RadBERT for brain abnormalities, achieving up to 98.0% accuracy for acute brain injuries. Llama-2-13B exhibited relatively lower performance, peaking at 67.5% binary classification accuracy. This result highlights potential limitations of current autoregressive LLMs for this specific classification task, though it remains possible that larger models or further fine-tuning could improve performance. Conclusion: Neu-RadBERT, enhanced through target domain pretraining and oversampling techniques, offered a robust tool for accurate and reliable diagnosis of neurological conditions from radiology reports. This study underscores the potential of transformer-based NLP models in automatically extracting diagnoses from free text reports with potential applications to both research and patient care.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable proficiency in generating highly structured texts. However, while exhibiting a high degree of structural organization, movie scripts demand an additional layer of nuanced storytelling and emotional depth-the 'soul' of compelling cinema-that LLMs often fail to capture. To investigate this deficiency, we first curated CML-Dataset, a dataset comprising (summary, content) pairs for Cinematic Markup Language (CML), where 'content' consists of segments from esteemed, high-quality movie scripts and 'summary' is a concise description of the content. Through an in-depth analysis of the intrinsic multi-shot continuity and narrative structures within these authentic scripts, we identified three pivotal dimensions for quality assessment: Dialogue Coherence (DC), Character Consistency (CC), and Plot Reasonableness (PR). Informed by these findings, we propose the CML-Bench, featuring quantitative metrics across these dimensions. CML-Bench effectively assigns high scores to well-crafted, human-written scripts while concurrently pinpointing the weaknesses in screenplays generated by LLMs. To further validate our benchmark, we introduce CML-Instruction, a prompting strategy with detailed instructions on character dialogue and event logic, to guide LLMs to generate more structured and cinematically sound scripts. Extensive experiments validate the effectiveness of our benchmark and demonstrate that LLMs guided by CML-Instruction generate higher-quality screenplays, with results aligned with human preferences.

The objectives that Large Language Models (LLMs) implicitly optimize remain dangerously opaque, making trustworthy alignment and auditing a grand challenge. While Inverse Reinforcement Learning (IRL) can infer reward functions from behaviour, existing approaches either produce a single, overconfident reward estimate or fail to address the fundamental ambiguity of the task (non-identifiability). This paper introduces a principled auditing framework that re-frames reward inference from a simple estimation task to a comprehensive process for verification. Our framework leverages Bayesian IRL to not only recover a distribution over objectives but to enable three critical audit capabilities: (i) Quantifying and systematically reducing non-identifiability by demonstrating posterior contraction over sequential rounds of evidence; (ii) Providing actionable, uncertainty-aware diagnostics that expose spurious shortcuts and identify out-of-distribution prompts where the inferred objective cannot be trusted; and (iii) Validating policy-level utility by showing that the refined, low-uncertainty reward can be used directly in RLHF to achieve training dynamics and toxicity reductions comparable to the ground-truth alignment process. Empirically, our framework successfully audits a detoxified LLM, yielding a well-calibrated and interpretable objective that strengthens alignment guarantees. Overall, this work provides a practical toolkit for auditors, safety teams, and regulators to verify what LLMs are truly trying to achieve, moving us toward more trustworthy and accountable AI.

We present EvalMORAAL, a transparent chain-of-thought (CoT) framework that uses two scoring methods (log-probabilities and direct ratings) plus a model-as-judge peer review to evaluate moral alignment in 20 large language models. We assess models on the World Values Survey (55 countries, 19 topics) and the PEW Global Attitudes Survey (39 countries, 8 topics). With EvalMORAAL, top models align closely with survey responses (Pearson's r approximately 0.90 on WVS). Yet we find a clear regional difference: Western regions average r=0.82 while non-Western regions average r=0.61 (a 0.21 absolute gap), indicating consistent regional bias. Our framework adds three parts: (1) two scoring methods for all models to enable fair comparison, (2) a structured chain-of-thought protocol with self-consistency checks, and (3) a model-as-judge peer review that flags 348 conflicts using a data-driven threshold. Peer agreement relates to survey alignment (WVS r=0.74, PEW r=0.39, both p<.001), supporting automated quality checks. These results show real progress toward culture-aware AI while highlighting open challenges for use across regions.