The rapid advancement of large language models presents significant opportunities for financial applications, yet systematic evaluation in specialized financial contexts remains limited. This study presents the first comprehensive evaluation of state-of-the-art LLMs using 1,560 multiple-choice questions from official mock exams across Levels I-III of CFA, most rigorous professional certifications globally that mirror real-world financial analysis complexity. We compare models distinguished by core design priorities: multi-modal and computationally powerful, reasoning-specialized and highly accurate, and lightweight efficiency-optimized. We assess models under zero-shot prompting and through a novel Retrieval-Augmented Generation pipeline that integrates official CFA curriculum content. The RAG system achieves precise domain-specific knowledge retrieval through hierarchical knowledge organization and structured query generation, significantly enhancing reasoning accuracy in professional financial certification evaluation. Results reveal that reasoning-oriented models consistently outperform others in zero-shot settings, while the RAG pipeline provides substantial improvements particularly for complex scenarios. Comprehensive error analysis identifies knowledge gaps as the primary failure mode, with minimal impact from text readability. These findings provide actionable insights for LLM deployment in finance, offering practitioners evidence-based guidance for model selection and cost-performance optimization.

Large language models (LLMs) have delivered significant breakthroughs across diverse domains but can still produce unreliable or misleading outputs, posing critical challenges for real-world applications. While many recent studies focus on quantifying model uncertainty, relatively little work has been devoted to \textit{diagnosing the source of uncertainty}. In this study, we show that, when an LLM is uncertain, the patterns of disagreement among its multiple generated responses contain rich clues about the underlying cause of uncertainty. To illustrate this point, we collect multiple responses from a target LLM and employ an auxiliary LLM to analyze their patterns of disagreement. The auxiliary model is tasked to reason about the likely source of uncertainty, such as whether it stems from ambiguity in the input question, a lack of relevant knowledge, or both. In cases involving knowledge gaps, the auxiliary model also identifies the specific missing facts or concepts contributing to the uncertainty. In our experiment, we validate our framework on AmbigQA, OpenBookQA, and MMLU-Pro, confirming its generality in diagnosing distinct uncertainty sources. Such diagnosis shows the potential for relevant manual interventions that improve LLM performance and reliability.

Personality prediction from social media posts is a critical task that implies diverse applications in psychology and sociology. The Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), a popular personality inventory, has been traditionally predicted by machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) techniques. Recently, the success of Large Language Models (LLMs) has revealed their huge potential in understanding and inferring personality traits from social media content. However, directly exploiting LLMs for MBTI prediction faces two key challenges: the hallucination problem inherent in LLMs and the naturally imbalanced distribution of MBTI types in the population. In this paper, we propose PostToPersonality (PtoP), a novel LLM based framework for MBTI prediction from social media posts of individuals. Specifically, PtoP leverages Retrieval Augmented Generation with in context learning to mitigate hallucination in LLMs. Furthermore, we fine tune a pretrained LLM to improve model specification in MBTI understanding with synthetic minority oversampling, which balances the class imbalance by generating synthetic samples. Experiments conducted on a real world social media dataset demonstrate that PtoP achieves state of the art performance compared with 10 ML and DL baselines.

The growing integration of large language models (LLMs) into the peer review process presents potential risks to the fairness and reliability of scholarly evaluation. While LLMs offer valuable assistance for reviewers with language refinement, there is growing concern over their use to generate substantive review content. Existing general AI-generated text detectors are vulnerable to paraphrasing attacks and struggle to distinguish between surface language refinement and substantial content generation, suggesting that they primarily rely on stylistic cues. When applied to peer review, this limitation can result in unfairly suspecting reviews with permissible AI-assisted language enhancement, while failing to catch deceptively humanized AI-generated reviews. To address this, we propose a paradigm shift from style-based to content-based detection. Specifically, we introduce CoCoNUTS, a content-oriented benchmark built upon a fine-grained dataset of AI-generated peer reviews, covering six distinct modes of human-AI collaboration. Furthermore, we develop CoCoDet, an AI review detector via a multi-task learning framework, designed to achieve more accurate and robust detection of AI involvement in review content. Our work offers a practical foundation for evaluating the use of LLMs in peer review, and contributes to the development of more precise, equitable, and reliable detection methods for real-world scholarly applications.

The emergence of large language models (LLMs) has unlocked boundless possibilities, along with significant challenges. In response, we developed a mental health support chatbot designed to augment professional healthcare, with a strong emphasis on safe and meaningful application. Our approach involved rigorous evaluation, covering accuracy, empathy, trustworthiness, privacy, and bias. We employed a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) framework, integrated prompt engineering, and fine-tuned a pre-trained model on novel datasets. The resulting system, Mentalic Net Conversational AI, achieved a BERT Score of 0.898, with other evaluation metrics falling within satisfactory ranges. We advocate for a human-in-the-loop approach and a long-term, responsible strategy in developing such transformative technologies, recognizing both their potential to change lives and the risks they may pose if not carefully managed.

Insurance, as a critical component of the global financial system, demands high standards of accuracy and reliability in AI applications. While existing benchmarks evaluate AI capabilities across various domains, they often fail to capture the unique characteristics and requirements of the insurance domain. To address this gap, we present INSEva, a comprehensive Chinese benchmark specifically designed for evaluating AI systems' knowledge and capabilities in insurance. INSEva features a multi-dimensional evaluation taxonomy covering business areas, task formats, difficulty levels, and cognitive-knowledge dimension, comprising 38,704 high-quality evaluation examples sourced from authoritative materials. Our benchmark implements tailored evaluation methods for assessing both faithfulness and completeness in open-ended responses. Through extensive evaluation of 8 state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs), we identify significant performance variations across different dimensions. While general LLMs demonstrate basic insurance domain competency with average scores above 80, substantial gaps remain in handling complex, real-world insurance scenarios. The benchmark will be public soon.

We introduce a new reading comprehension dataset, dubbed MultiWikiQA, which covers 306 languages. The context data comes from Wikipedia articles, with questions generated by an LLM and the answers appearing verbatim in the Wikipedia articles. We conduct a crowdsourced human evaluation of the fluency of the generated questions across 30 of the languages, providing evidence that the questions are of good quality. We evaluate 6 different language models, both decoder and encoder models of varying sizes, showing that the benchmark is sufficiently difficult and that there is a large performance discrepancy amongst the languages. The dataset and survey evaluations are freely available.

Integrating generative AI such as Large Language Models into social robots has improved their ability to engage in natural, human-like communication. This study presents a method to examine their persuasive capabilities. We designed an experimental framework focused on decision making and tested it in a pilot that varied robot appearance and self-knowledge. Using qualitative analysis, we evaluated interaction quality, persuasion effectiveness, and the robot's communicative strategies. Participants generally experienced the interaction positively, describing the robot as competent, friendly, and supportive, while noting practical limits such as delayed responses and occasional speech-recognition errors. Persuasiveness was highly context dependent and shaped by robot behavior: Participants responded well to polite, reasoned suggestions and expressive gestures, but emphasized the need for more personalized, context-aware arguments and clearer social roles. These findings suggest that generative social robots can influence user decisions, but their effectiveness depends on communicative nuance and contextual relevance. We propose refinements to the framework to further study persuasive dynamics between robots and human users.

Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models pre-trained on large, diverse datasets show remarkable potential for general-purpose robotic manipulation. However, a primary bottleneck remains in adapting these models to downstream tasks, especially when the robot's embodiment or the task itself differs from the pre-training data. This discrepancy leads to a significant mismatch in action distributions, demanding extensive data and compute for effective fine-tuning. To address this challenge, we introduce \textbf{Align-Then-stEer (\texttt{ATE})}, a novel, data-efficient, and plug-and-play adaptation framework. \texttt{ATE} first aligns disparate action spaces by constructing a unified latent space, where a variational autoencoder constrained by reverse KL divergence embeds adaptation actions into modes of the pre-training action latent distribution. Subsequently, it steers the diffusion- or flow-based VLA's generation process during fine-tuning via a guidance mechanism that pushes the model's output distribution towards the target domain. We conduct extensive experiments on cross-embodiment and cross-task manipulation in both simulation and real world. Compared to direct fine-tuning of representative VLAs, our method improves the average multi-task success rate by up to \textbf{9.8\%} in simulation and achieves a striking \textbf{32\% success rate gain} in a real-world cross-embodiment setting. Our work presents a general and lightweight solution that greatly enhances the practicality of deploying VLA models to new robotic platforms and tasks.

Collaborative filtering drives many successful recommender systems but struggles with fine-grained user-item interactions and explainability. As users increasingly seek transparent recommendations, generating textual explanations through language models has become a critical research area. Existing methods employ either RNNs or Transformers. However, RNN-based approaches fail to leverage the capabilities of pre-trained Transformer models, whereas Transformer-based methods often suffer from suboptimal adaptation and neglect aspect modeling, which is crucial for personalized explanations. We propose ELIXIR (Efficient and LIghtweight model for eXplaIning Recommendations), a multi-task model combining rating prediction with personalized review generation. ELIXIR jointly learns global and aspect-specific representations of users and items, optimizing overall rating, aspect-level ratings, and review generation, with personalized attention to emphasize aspect importance. Based on a T5-small (60M) model, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our aspect-based architecture in guiding text generation in a personalized context, where state-of-the-art approaches exploit much larger models but fail to match user preferences as well. Experimental results on TripAdvisor and RateBeer demonstrate that ELIXIR significantly outperforms strong baseline models, especially in review generation.