Recent advancements in tool-augmented large language models have enabled them to interact with external tools, enhancing their ability to perform complex user tasks. However, existing approaches overlook the role of personalisation in guiding tool use. This work investigates how user preferences can be effectively integrated into goal-oriented dialogue agents. Through extensive analysis, we identify key weaknesses in the ability of LLMs to personalise tool use. To this end, we introduce TAPS, a novel solution that enhances personalised tool use by leveraging a structured tagging tool and an uncertainty-based tool detector. TAPS significantly improves the ability of LLMs to incorporate user preferences, achieving the new state-of-the-art for open source models on the NLSI task.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have emerged as powerful tools for generating textual descriptions from visual data. While these models excel on web-scale datasets, their robustness to the domain shifts inherent in many real-world applications remains under-explored. This paper presents a systematic evaluation of VLM performance on a single-view object captioning task when faced with a controlled, physical domain shift. We compare captioning accuracy across two distinct object sets: a collection of multi-material, real-world tools and a set of single-material, 3D-printed items. The 3D-printed set introduces a significant domain shift in texture and material properties, challenging the models' generalization capabilities. Our quantitative results demonstrate that all tested VLMs show a marked performance degradation when describing the 3D-printed objects compared to the real-world tools. This underscores a critical limitation in the ability of current models to generalize beyond surface-level features and highlights the need for more robust architectures for real-world signal processing applications.

Vision Language Models (VLMs) have shown promise in automating image diagnosis and interpretation in clinical settings. However, developing specialist medical VLMs requires substantial computational resources and carefully curated datasets, and it remains unclear under which conditions generalist and specialist medical VLMs each perform best. This study highlights the complementary strengths of specialist medical and generalist VLMs. Specialists remain valuable in modality-aligned use cases, but we find that efficiently fine-tuned generalist VLMs can achieve comparable or even superior performance in most tasks, particularly when transferring to unseen or rare OOD medical modalities. These results suggest that generalist VLMs, rather than being constrained by their lack of specialist medical pretraining, may offer a scalable and cost-effective pathway for advancing clinical AI development.

Large Language Models (LLMs) often exhibit \textit{hallucinations}, generating factually incorrect or semantically irrelevant content in response to prompts. Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting can mitigate hallucinations by encouraging step-by-step reasoning, but its impact on hallucination detection remains underexplored. To bridge this gap, we conduct a systematic empirical evaluation. We begin with a pilot experiment, revealing that CoT reasoning significantly affects the LLM's internal states and token probability distributions. Building on this, we evaluate the impact of various CoT prompting methods on mainstream hallucination detection methods across both instruction-tuned and reasoning-oriented LLMs. Specifically, we examine three key dimensions: changes in hallucination score distributions, variations in detection accuracy, and shifts in detection confidence. Our findings show that while CoT prompting helps reduce hallucination frequency, it also tends to obscure critical signals used for detection, impairing the effectiveness of various detection methods. Our study highlights an overlooked trade-off in the use of reasoning. Code is publicly available at: https://github.com/ECNU-Text-Computing/cot-hallu-detect .

Human language production exhibits remarkable richness and variation, reflecting diverse communication styles and intents. However, this variation is often overlooked in summarization evaluation. While having multiple reference summaries is known to improve correlation with human judgments, the impact of the reference set on reference-based metrics has not been systematically investigated. This work examines the sensitivity of widely used reference-based metrics in relation to the choice of reference sets, analyzing three diverse multi-reference summarization datasets: SummEval, GUMSum, and DUC2004. We demonstrate that many popular metrics exhibit significant instability. This instability is particularly concerning for n-gram-based metrics like ROUGE, where model rankings vary depending on the reference sets, undermining the reliability of model comparisons. We also collect human judgments on LLM outputs for genre-diverse data and examine their correlation with metrics to supplement existing findings beyond newswire summaries, finding weak-to-no correlation. Taken together, we recommend incorporating reference set variation into summarization evaluation to enhance consistency alongside correlation with human judgments, especially when evaluating LLMs.

With the development and widespread application of large language models (LLMs), the new paradigm of "Model as Product" is rapidly evolving, and demands higher capabilities to address complex user needs, often requiring precise workflow execution which involves the accurate understanding of multiple tasks. However, existing benchmarks focusing on single-task environments with limited constraints lack the complexity required to fully reflect real-world scenarios. To bridge this gap, we present the Extremely Complex Instruction Following Benchmark (EIFBENCH), meticulously crafted to facilitate a more realistic and robust evaluation of LLMs. EIFBENCH not only includes multi-task scenarios that enable comprehensive assessment across diverse task types concurrently, but also integrates a variety of constraints, replicating complex operational environments. Furthermore, we propose the Segment Policy Optimization (SegPO) algorithm to enhance the LLM's ability to accurately fulfill multi-task workflow. Evaluations on EIFBENCH have unveiled considerable performance discrepancies in existing LLMs when challenged with these extremely complex instructions. This finding underscores the necessity for ongoing optimization to navigate the intricate challenges posed by LLM applications.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong performance on coding tasks such as generation, completion and repair, but their ability to handle complex symbolic reasoning over code still remains underexplored. We introduce the task of worst-case symbolic constraints analysis, which requires inferring the symbolic constraints that characterise worst-case program executions; these constraints can be solved to obtain inputs that expose performance bottlenecks or denial-of-service vulnerabilities in software systems. We show that even state-of-the-art LLMs (e.g., GPT-5) struggle when applied directly on this task. To address this challenge, we propose WARP, an innovative neurosymbolic approach that computes worst-case constraints on smaller concrete input sizes using existing program analysis tools, and then leverages LLMs to generalise these constraints to larger input sizes. Concretely, WARP comprises: (1) an incremental strategy for LLM-based worst-case reasoning, (2) a solver-aligned neurosymbolic framework that integrates reinforcement learning with SMT (Satisfiability Modulo Theories) solving, and (3) a curated dataset of symbolic constraints. Experimental results show that WARP consistently improves performance on worst-case constraint reasoning. Leveraging the curated constraint dataset, we use reinforcement learning to fine-tune a model, WARP-1.0-3B, which significantly outperforms size-matched and even larger baselines. These results demonstrate that incremental constraint reasoning enhances LLMs' ability to handle symbolic reasoning and highlight the potential for deeper integration between neural learning and formal methods in rigorous program analysis.

Iterative evaluation of LLMs during training is essential to ensure expected capability development, but can be time- and compute-intensive. While NLU tasks, where the model selects from fixed answer choices, are cheap to evaluate, essential capabilities like reasoning and code generation rely on the more time-consuming NLG (token-by-token generation) format. In this work, our aim is to decrease the computational burden of NLG benchmarks in order to enable monitoring crucial LLM capabilities during model training. We reformulate generative tasks into computationally cheaper NLU alternatives. We test the performance correlation between the original and reformulated tasks using 8 LMs of various sizes and 4 capabilities: mathematical reasoning, code generation, factual knowledge and reading comprehension. Our results show a strong correlation between task formats, supporting capability assessment via cheaper alternatives and achieving over 35x average reduction in evaluation time. Our project is available at: https://github.com/Fraunhofer-IIS/EvalShortcut

Large language models (LLMs) are often praised for exhibiting near-human performance on a wide range of tasks and valued for their ability to hold a general conversation. The rise of agentic AI systems is, however, ushering in a mass of applications in which language models perform a small number of specialized tasks repetitively and with little variation. Here we lay out the position that small language models (SLMs) are sufficiently powerful, inherently more suitable, and necessarily more economical for many invocations in agentic systems, and are therefore the future of agentic AI. Our argumentation is grounded in the current level of capabilities exhibited by SLMs, the common architectures of agentic systems, and the economy of LM deployment. We further argue that in situations where general-purpose conversational abilities are essential, heterogeneous agentic systems (i.e., agents invoking multiple different models) are the natural choice. We discuss the potential barriers for the adoption of SLMs in agentic systems and outline a general LLM-to-SLM agent conversion algorithm. Our position, formulated as a value statement, highlights the significance of the operational and economic impact even a partial shift from LLMs to SLMs is to have on the AI agent industry. We aim to stimulate the discussion on the effective use of AI resources and hope to advance the efforts to lower the costs of AI of the present day. Calling for both contributions to and critique of our position, we commit to publishing all such correspondence at https://research.nvidia.com/labs/lpr/slm-agents.

We introduce UniversalCEFR, a large-scale multilingual and multidimensional dataset of texts annotated with CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference) levels in 13 languages. To enable open research in automated readability and language proficiency assessment, UniversalCEFR comprises 505,807 CEFR-labeled texts curated from educational and learner-oriented resources, standardized into a unified data format to support consistent processing, analysis, and modelling across tasks and languages. To demonstrate its utility, we conduct benchmarking experiments using three modelling paradigms: a) linguistic feature-based classification, b) fine-tuning pre-trained LLMs, and c) descriptor-based prompting of instruction-tuned LLMs. Our results support using linguistic features and fine-tuning pretrained models in multilingual CEFR level assessment. Overall, UniversalCEFR aims to establish best practices in data distribution for language proficiency research by standardising dataset formats, and promoting their accessibility to the global research community.