With the growing complexity of modern integrated circuits, hardware engineers are required to devote more effort to the full design-to-manufacturing workflow. This workflow involves numerous iterations, making it both labor-intensive and error-prone. Therefore, there is an urgent demand for more efficient Electronic Design Automation (EDA) solutions to accelerate hardware development. Recently, large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable advancements in contextual comprehension, logical reasoning, and generative capabilities. Since hardware designs and intermediate scripts can be represented as text, integrating LLM for EDA offers a promising opportunity to simplify and even automate the entire workflow. Accordingly, this paper provides a comprehensive overview of incorporating LLMs into EDA, with emphasis on their capabilities, limitations, and future opportunities. Three case studies, along with their outlook, are introduced to demonstrate the capabilities of LLMs in hardware design, testing, and optimization. Finally, future directions and challenges are highlighted to further explore the potential of LLMs in shaping the next-generation EDA, providing valuable insights for researchers interested in leveraging advanced AI technologies for EDA.

Fine-tuning LLMs on narrowly harmful datasets can lead to behavior that is broadly misaligned with respect to human values. To understand when and how this emergent misalignment occurs, we develop a comprehensive framework for detecting and characterizing rapid transitions during fine-tuning using both distributional change detection methods as well as order parameters that are formulated in plain English and evaluated by an LLM judge. Using an objective statistical dissimilarity measure, we quantify how the phase transition that occurs during fine-tuning affects multiple aspects of the model. In particular, we assess what percentage of the total distributional change in model outputs is captured by different aspects, such as alignment or verbosity, providing a decomposition of the overall transition. We also find that the actual behavioral transition occurs later in training than indicated by the peak in the gradient norm alone. Our framework enables the automated discovery and quantification of language-based order parameters, which we demonstrate on examples ranging from knowledge questions to politics and ethics.

Cataract surgery remains one of the most widely performed and effective procedures for vision restoration. Effective surgical planning requires integrating diverse clinical examinations for patient assessment, intraocular lens (IOL) selection, and risk evaluation. Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in supporting clinical decision-making. However, existing LLMs often lack the domain-specific expertise to interpret heterogeneous ophthalmic data and provide actionable surgical plans. To enhance the model's ability to interpret heterogeneous ophthalmic reports, we propose a knowledge-driven Multi-Agent System (MAS), where each agent simulates the reasoning process of specialist ophthalmologists, converting raw clinical inputs into structured, actionable summaries in both training and deployment stages. Building on MAS, we introduce CataractSurg-80K, the first large-scale benchmark for cataract surgery planning that incorporates structured clinical reasoning. Each case is annotated with diagnostic questions, expert reasoning chains, and structured surgical recommendations. We further introduce Qwen-CSP, a domain-specialized model built on Qwen-4B, fine-tuned through a multi-stage process tailored for surgical planning. Comprehensive experiments show that Qwen-CSP outperforms strong general-purpose LLMs across multiple metrics. Our work delivers a high-quality dataset, a rigorous benchmark, and a domain-adapted LLM to facilitate future research in medical AI reasoning and decision support.

Fine-tuning multi-turn dialogue systems requires high-quality supervision but often suffers from degraded performance when exposed to low-quality data. Supervision errors in early turns can propagate across subsequent turns, undermining coherence and response quality. Existing methods typically address data quality via static prefiltering, which decouples quality control from training and fails to mitigate turn-level error propagation. In this context, we propose ReSURE (Regularizing Supervision UnREliability), an adaptive learning method that dynamically down-weights unreliable supervision without explicit filtering. ReSURE estimates per-turn loss distributions using Welford's online statistics and reweights sample losses on the fly accordingly. Experiments on both single-source and mixed-quality datasets show improved stability and response quality. Notably, ReSURE enjoys positive Spearman correlations (0.21 ~ 1.0 across multiple benchmarks) between response scores and number of samples regardless of data quality, which potentially paves the way for utilizing large-scale data effectively. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/Elvin-Yiming-Du/ReSURE_Multi_Turn_Training.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved high accuracy on complex commonsense and mathematical problems that involve the composition of multiple reasoning steps. However, current compositional benchmarks testing these skills tend to focus on either commonsense or math reasoning, whereas LLM agents solving real-world tasks would require a combination of both. In this work, we introduce an Agentic Commonsense and Math benchmark (AgentCoMa), where each compositional task requires a commonsense reasoning step and a math reasoning step. We test it on 61 LLMs of different sizes, model families, and training strategies. We find that LLMs can usually solve both steps in isolation, yet their accuracy drops by ~30% on average when the two are combined. This is a substantially greater performance gap than the one we observe in prior compositional benchmarks that combine multiple steps of the same reasoning type. In contrast, non-expert human annotators can solve the compositional questions and the individual steps in AgentCoMa with similarly high accuracy. Furthermore, we conduct a series of interpretability studies to better understand the performance gap, examining neuron patterns, attention maps and membership inference. Our work underscores a substantial degree of model brittleness in the context of mixed-type compositional reasoning and offers a test bed for future improvement.

As language models are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents in high-stakes settings, ensuring that they reliably follow user-defined rules has become a critical safety concern. To this end, we study whether language models exhibit contextual robustness, or the capability to adhere to context-dependent safety specifications. For this analysis, we develop a benchmark (PasswordEval) that measures whether language models can correctly determine when a user request is authorized (i.e., with a correct password). We find that current open- and closed-source models struggle with this seemingly simple task, and that, perhaps surprisingly, reasoning capabilities do not generally improve performance. In fact, we find that reasoning traces frequently leak confidential information, which calls into question whether reasoning traces should be exposed to users in such applications. We also scale the difficulty of our evaluation along multiple axes: (i) by adding adversarial user pressure through various jailbreaking strategies, and (ii) through longer multi-turn conversations where password verification is more challenging. Overall, our results suggest that current frontier models are not well-suited to handling confidential information, and that reasoning capabilities may need to be trained in a different manner to make them safer for release in high-stakes settings.

Despite its significance, Arabic, a linguistically rich and morphologically complex language, faces the challenge of being under-resourced. The scarcity of large annotated datasets hampers the development of accurate tools for subjectivity analysis in Arabic. Recent advances in deep learning and Transformers have proven highly effective for text classification in English and French. This paper proposes a new approach for subjectivity assessment in Arabic textual data. To address the dearth of specialized annotated datasets, we developed a comprehensive dataset, AraDhati+, by leveraging existing Arabic datasets and collections (ASTD, LABR, HARD, and SANAD). Subsequently, we fine-tuned state-of-the-art Arabic language models (XLM-RoBERTa, AraBERT, and ArabianGPT) on AraDhati+ for effective subjectivity classification. Furthermore, we experimented with an ensemble decision approach to harness the strengths of individual models. Our approach achieves a remarkable accuracy of 97.79\,\% for Arabic subjectivity classification. Results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach in addressing the challenges posed by limited resources in Arabic language processing.

The proliferation of digital payment platforms has transformed commerce, offering unmatched convenience and accessibility globally. However, this growth has also attracted malicious actors, leading to a corresponding increase in sophisticated social engineering scams. These scams are often initiated and orchestrated on multiple surfaces outside the payment platform, making user and transaction-based signals insufficient for a complete understanding of the scam's methodology and underlying patterns, without which it is very difficult to prevent it in a timely manner. This paper presents CASE (Conversational Agent for Scam Elucidation), a novel Agentic AI framework that addresses this problem by collecting and managing user scam feedback in a safe and scalable manner. A conversational agent is uniquely designed to proactively interview potential victims to elicit intelligence in the form of a detailed conversation. The conversation transcripts are then consumed by another AI system that extracts information and converts it into structured data for downstream usage in automated and manual enforcement mechanisms. Using Google's Gemini family of LLMs, we implemented this framework on Google Pay (GPay) India. By augmenting our existing features with this new intelligence, we have observed a 21% uplift in the volume of scam enforcements. The architecture and its robust evaluation framework are highly generalizable, offering a blueprint for building similar AI-driven systems to collect and manage scam intelligence in other sensitive domains.

Preference optimization methods like DPO have achieved remarkable performance in LLM alignment. However, the evaluation for these methods relies on a single response and overlooks other potential outputs, which could also be generated in real-world applications within this hypothetical space. To address this issue, this paper presents a \textbf{H}ypothesis-based Pr\textbf{E}ference-aware \textbf{A}na\textbf{L}ysis Framework (HEAL), a novel evaluation paradigm that formulates preference alignment as a re-ranking process within hypothesis spaces. The framework incorporates two complementary metrics: ranking accuracy for evaluating ordinal consistency and preference strength correlation for assessing continuous alignment. To facilitate this framework, we develop UniHypoBench, a unified hypothesis benchmark constructed from diverse instruction-response pairs. Through extensive experiments based on HEAL, with a particular focus on the intrinsic mechanisms of preference learning, we demonstrate that current preference learning methods can effectively capture preferences provided by proxy models while simultaneously suppressing negative samples. These findings contribute to preference learning research through two significant avenues. Theoretically, we introduce hypothesis space analysis as an innovative paradigm for understanding preference alignment. Practically, HEAL offers researchers robust diagnostic tools for refining preference optimization methods, while our empirical results identify promising directions for developing more advanced alignment algorithms capable of comprehensive preference capture.

Logical reasoning is a critical benchmark for evaluating the capabilities of large language models (LLMs), as it reflects their ability to derive valid conclusions from given premises. While the combination of test-time scaling with dedicated outcome or process reward models has opened up new avenues to enhance LLMs performance in complex reasoning tasks, this space is under-explored in deductive logical reasoning. We present a set of Outcome Reward Models (ORMs) for deductive reasoning. To train the ORMs we mainly generate data using Chain-of-Thought (CoT) with single and multiple samples. Additionally, we propose a novel tactic to further expand the type of errors covered in the training dataset of the ORM. In particular, we propose an echo generation technique that leverages LLMs' tendency to reflect incorrect assumptions made in prompts to extract additional training data, covering previously unexplored error types. While a standard CoT chain may contain errors likely to be made by the reasoner, the echo strategy deliberately steers the model toward incorrect reasoning. We show that ORMs trained on CoT and echo-augmented data demonstrate improved performance on the FOLIO, JustLogic, and ProverQA datasets across four different LLMs.