With the advent of large language models (LLMs), the vast unstructured text within millions of academic papers is increasingly accessible for materials discovery, although significant challenges remain. While LLMs offer promising few- and zero-shot learning capabilities, particularly valuable in the materials domain where expert annotations are scarce, general-purpose LLMs often fail to address key materials-specific queries without further adaptation. To bridge this gap, fine-tuning LLMs on human-labeled data is essential for effective structured knowledge extraction. In this study, we introduce a novel annotation schema designed to extract generic process-structure-properties relationships from scientific literature. We demonstrate the utility of this approach using a dataset of 128 abstracts, with annotations drawn from two distinct domains: high-temperature materials (Domain I) and uncertainty quantification in simulating materials microstructure (Domain II). Initially, we developed a conditional random field (CRF) model based on MatBERT, a domain-specific BERT variant, and evaluated its performance on Domain I. Subsequently, we compared this model with a fine-tuned LLM (GPT-4o from OpenAI) under identical conditions. Our results indicate that fine-tuning LLMs can significantly improve entity extraction performance over the BERT-CRF baseline on Domain I. However, when additional examples from Domain II were incorporated, the performance of the BERT-CRF model became comparable to that of the GPT-4o model. These findings underscore the potential of our schema for structured knowledge extraction and highlight the complementary strengths of both modeling approaches.

Reasoning is an integral part of many tasks performed by language models (LMs). However, the effects of scaling model sizes and data on reasoning abilities at pretraining time remain understudied. To rigorously investigate this problem, we pretrain LMs from scratch on a synthetic implicit multihop reasoning environment designed to closely replicate the structure and distribution of real-world large-scale knowledge graphs. We then assess the LMs' ability to complete the missing edges in the graph, which requires multi-hop reasoning that can be viewed as a simplification of implicit reasoning during real-world pretraining. Interestingly, we observe that overparameterization can impair the implicit reasoning performance due to excessive memorization. We investigate different factors that affect the loss curve when scaling different components of the knowledge graph, model size, and training steps. To predict the optimal model size for a specific knowledge graph, we find an empirical scaling law that shows optimal-sized LMs can approximately reason over 0.008 bit information per parameter. This work shows counterintuitive effects of model size scaling and provides new insights into the relationship between scaling and reasoning in LLMs.

Advances in AI-generated content have led to wide adoption of large language models, diffusion-based visual generators, and synthetic audio tools. However, these developments raise critical concerns about misinformation, copyright infringement, security threats, and the erosion of public trust. In this paper, we explore an extensive range of methods designed to detect and mitigate AI-generated textual, visual, and audio content. We begin by discussing motivations and potential impacts associated with AI-based content generation, including real-world risks and ethical dilemmas. We then outline detection techniques spanning observation-based strategies, linguistic and statistical analysis, model-based pipelines, watermarking and fingerprinting, as well as emergent ensemble approaches. We also present new perspectives on robustness, adaptation to rapidly improving generative architectures, and the critical role of human-in-the-loop verification. By surveying state-of-the-art research and highlighting case studies in academic, journalistic, legal, and industrial contexts, this paper aims to inform robust solutions and policymaking. We conclude by discussing open challenges, including adversarial transformations, domain generalization, and ethical concerns, thereby offering a holistic guide for researchers, practitioners, and regulators to preserve content authenticity in the face of increasingly sophisticated AI-generated media.

Survey researchers face two key challenges: the rising costs of probability samples and missing data (e.g., non-response or attrition), which can undermine inference and increase the use of convenience samples. Recent work explores using large language models (LLMs) to simulate respondents via persona-based prompts, often without labeled data. We study a more practical setting where partial survey responses exist: we fine-tune LLMs on available data to impute self-reported vote choice under both random and systematic nonresponse, using the German Longitudinal Election Study. We compare zero-shot prompting and supervised fine-tuning against tabular classifiers (e.g., CatBoost) and test how different convenience samples (e.g., students) used for fine-tuning affect generalization. Our results show that when data are missing completely at random, fine-tuned LLMs match tabular classifiers but outperform zero-shot approaches. When only biased convenience samples are available, fine-tuning small (3B to 8B) open-source LLMs can recover both individual-level predictions and population-level distributions more accurately than zero-shot and often better than tabular methods. This suggests fine-tuned LLMs offer a promising strategy for researchers working with non-probability samples or systematic missing-ness, and may enable new survey designs requiring only easily accessible subpopulations.

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has emerged as a central paradigm for advancing Large Language Models (LLMs), where pre-training and RL post-training share the same log-likelihood formulation. In contrast, recent RL approaches for diffusion models, most notably Denoising Diffusion Policy Optimization (DDPO), optimize an objective different from the pretraining objectives--score/flow matching loss. In this work, we establish a novel theoretical analysis: DDPO is an implicit form of score/flow matching with noisy targets, which increases variance and slows convergence. Building on this analysis, we introduce \textbf{Advantage Weighted Matching (AWM)}, a policy-gradient method for diffusion. It uses the same score/flow-matching loss as pretraining to obtain a lower-variance objective and reweights each sample by its advantage. In effect, AWM raises the influence of high-reward samples and suppresses low-reward ones while keeping the modeling objective identical to pretraining. This unifies pretraining and RL conceptually and practically, is consistent with policy-gradient theory, reduces variance, and yields faster convergence. This simple yet effective design yields substantial benefits: on GenEval, OCR, and PickScore benchmarks, AWM delivers up to a $24\times$ speedup over Flow-GRPO (which builds on DDPO), when applied to Stable Diffusion 3.5 Medium and FLUX, without compromising generation quality. Code is available at https://github.com/scxue/advantage_weighted_matching.

ABSTRACT We investigate the use of large language models (LLMs) as post-processing modules for automatic speech recognition (ASR), focusing on their ability to perform error correction for disordered speech. In particular, we propose confidence-informed prompting, where word-level uncertainty estimates are embedded directly into LLM training to improve robustness and generalization across speakers and datasets. This approach directs the model to uncertain ASR regions and reduces overcorrection. We fine-tune a LLaMA 3.1 model and compare our approach to both transcript-only fine-tuning and post hoc confidence-based filtering. Evaluations show that our method achieves a 10% relative WER reduction compared to naive LLM correction on the Speech Accessibility Project spontaneous speech and a 47% reduction on TORGO, demonstrating the effectiveness of confidence-aware fine-tuning for impaired speech.

Model distillation typically focuses on behavioral mimicry, where a student model is trained to replicate a teacher's output while treating its internal computations as a black box. In this work we propose an alternative approach: Distilling the underlying computational mechanisms implemented by a teacher model. Specifically, we propose circuit distillation, which introduces an objective to align internal representations between analogous circuit components in teacher and student models. We propose a method to match "functionally correspondent" circuit components and introduce a loss reflecting similarities between the representations that these induce. We evaluate circuit distillation on entity tracking and theory of mind (ToM) tasks using models from the Llama3 family. Our results demonstrate that circuit distillation outperforms standard distillation, successfully transferring algorithmic capabilities by adjusting only a small, targeted subset of student model parameters. This work establishes the feasibility of transferring mechanisms, which may in turn allow for efficient distillation of targeted teacher capabilities via interpretable and controllable internal student mechanisms. Model distillation entails training a relatively small and efficient "student" LM using a larger and more capable teacher LLM (Gou et al., 2021). The prevailing training paradigm is one of behavioral mimicry: The student model is trained to replicate the output distribution of the large "teacher" model. This is typically done by minimizing the divergence between final-layer logits for the predictive task of interest (Hinton et al., 2015). More recent work has has focussed on distilling "reasoning" capabilities (Shridhar et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023; Wadhwa et al., 2024).

The ability to summarize long documents succinctly is increasingly important in daily life due to information overload, yet there is a notable lack of such summaries for Spanish documents in general, and in the legal domain in particular. In this work, we present BOE-XSUM, a curated dataset comprising 3,648 concise, plain-language summaries of documents sourced from Spain's ``Bolet\'ın Oficial del Estado'' (BOE), the State Official Gazette. Each entry in the dataset includes a short summary, the original text, and its document type label. We evaluate the performance of medium-sized large language models (LLMs) fine-tuned on BOE-XSUM, comparing them to general-purpose generative models in a zero-shot setting. Results show that fine-tuned models significantly outperform their non-specialized counterparts. Notably, the best-performing model -- BERTIN GPT-J 6B (32-bit precision) -- achieves a 24\% performance gain over the top zero-shot model, DeepSeek-R1 (accuracies of 41.6\% vs.\ 33.5\%).

The integration of visual understanding and generation into unified multimodal models represents a significant stride toward general-purpose AI. However, a fundamental question remains unanswered by existing benchmarks: does this architectural unification actually enable synergetic interaction between the constituent capabilities? Existing evaluation paradigms, which primarily assess understanding and generation in isolation, are insufficient for determining whether a unified model can leverage its understanding to enhance its generation, or use generative simulation to facilitate deeper comprehension. To address this critical gap, we introduce RealUnify, a benchmark specifically designed to evaluate bidirectional capability synergy. RealUnify comprises 1,000 meticulously human-annotated instances spanning 10 categories and 32 subtasks. It is structured around two core axes: 1) Understanding Enhances Generation, which requires reasoning (e.g., commonsense, logic) to guide image generation, and 2) Generation Enhances Understanding, which necessitates mental simulation or reconstruction (e.g., of transformed or disordered visual inputs) to solve reasoning tasks. A key contribution is our dual-evaluation protocol, which combines direct end-to-end assessment with a diagnostic stepwise evaluation that decomposes tasks into distinct understanding and generation phases. This protocol allows us to precisely discern whether performance bottlenecks stem from deficiencies in core abilities or from a failure to integrate them. Through large-scale evaluations of 12 leading unified models and 6 specialized baselines, we find that current unified models still struggle to achieve effective synergy, indicating that architectural unification alone is insufficient. These results highlight the need for new training strategies and inductive biases to fully unlock the potential of unified modeling.

In clinical practice, physicians refrain from making decisions when patient information is insufficient. This behavior, known as abstention, is a critical safety mechanism preventing potentially harmful misdiagnoses. Recent investigations have reported the application of large language models (LLMs) in medical scenarios. However, existing LLMs struggle with the abstentions, frequently providing overconfident responses despite incomplete information. This limitation stems from conventional abstention methods relying solely on model self-assessments, which lack systematic strategies to identify knowledge boundaries with external medical evidences. To address this, we propose \textbf{KnowGuard}, a novel \textit{investigate-before-abstain} paradigm that integrates systematic knowledge graph exploration for clinical decision-making. Our approach consists of two key stages operating on a shared contextualized evidence pool: 1) an evidence discovery stage that systematically explores the medical knowledge space through graph expansion and direct retrieval, and 2) an evidence evaluation stage that ranks evidence using multiple factors to adapt exploration based on patient context and conversation history. This two-stage approach enables systematic knowledge graph exploration, allowing models to trace structured reasoning paths and recognize insufficient medical evidence. We evaluate our abstention approach using open-ended multi-round clinical benchmarks that mimic realistic diagnostic scenarios, assessing abstention quality through accuracy-efficiency trade-offs beyond existing closed-form evaluations. Experimental evidences clearly demonstrate that KnowGuard outperforms state-of-the-art abstention approaches, improving diagnostic accuracy by 3.93\% while reducing unnecessary interaction by 7.27 turns on average.