Causal discovery (CD) plays a pivotal role in understanding the mechanisms underlying complex systems. While recent algorithms can detect spurious associations and latent confounding, many struggle to recover fairness-relevant pathways in realistic, noisy settings. Large Language Models (LLMs), with their access to broad semantic knowledge, offer a promising complement to statistical CD approaches, particularly in domains where metadata provides meaningful relational cues. Ensuring fairness in machine learning requires understanding how sensitive attributes causally influence outcomes, yet CD methods often introduce spurious or biased pathways. We propose a hybrid LLM-based framework for CD that extends a breadth-first search (BFS) strategy with active learning and dynamic scoring. Variable pairs are prioritized for LLM-based querying using a composite score based on mutual information, partial correlation, and LLM confidence, improving discovery efficiency and robustness. To evaluate fairness sensitivity, we construct a semi-synthetic benchmark from the UCI Adult dataset, embedding a domain-informed causal graph with injected noise, label corruption, and latent confounding. We assess how well CD methods recover both global structure and fairness-critical paths. Our results show that LLM-guided methods, including the proposed method, demonstrate competitive or superior performance in recovering such pathways under noisy conditions. We highlight when dynamic scoring and active querying are most beneficial and discuss implications for bias auditing in real-world datasets.

The explosive growth of scientific publications has created an urgent need for automated methods that facilitate knowledge synthesis and hypothesis generation. Literature-based discovery (LBD) addresses this challenge by uncovering previously unknown associations between disparate domains. This article surveys recent methodological advances in LBD, focusing on developments from 2000 to the present. We review progress in three key areas: knowledge graph construction, deep learning approaches, and the integration of pre-trained and large language models (LLMs). While LBD has made notable progress, several fundamental challenges remain unresolved, particularly concerning scalability, reliance on structured data, and the need for extensive manual curation. By examining ongoing advances and outlining promising future directions, this survey underscores the transformative role of LLMs in enhancing LBD and aims to support researchers and practitioners in harnessing these technologies to accelerate scientific innovation.

Large Language Models (LLMs) require continuous updates to maintain accurate and current knowledge as the world evolves. While existing knowledge editing approaches offer various solutions for knowledge updating, they often struggle with sequential editing scenarios and harm the general capabilities of the model, thereby significantly hampering their practical applicability. This paper proposes a two-stage framework combining robust supervised fine-tuning (R-SFT) with model merging for knowledge editing. Our method first fine-tunes the LLM to internalize new knowledge fully, then merges the fine-tuned model with the original foundation model to preserve newly acquired knowledge and general capabilities. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms existing methods in sequential editing while better preserving the original performance of the model, all without requiring any architectural changes. Code is available at: https://github.com/Applied-Machine-Learning-Lab/MM4KE.

Large language models (LLMs) have been widely adopted as the core of agent frameworks in various scenarios, such as social simulations and AI companions. However, the extent to which they can replicate human-like motivations remains an underexplored question. Existing benchmarks are constrained by simplistic scenarios and the absence of character identities, resulting in an information asymmetry with real-world situations. To address this gap, we propose MotiveBench, which consists of 200 rich contextual scenarios and 600 reasoning tasks covering multiple levels of motivation. Using MotiveBench, we conduct extensive experiments on seven popular model families, comparing different scales and versions within each family. The results show that even the most advanced LLMs still fall short in achieving human-like motivational reasoning. Our analysis reveals key findings, including the difficulty LLMs face in reasoning about "love & belonging" motivations and their tendency toward excessive rationality and idealism. These insights highlight a promising direction for future research on the humanization of LLMs. The dataset, benchmark, and code are available at https://aka.ms/motivebench.

The development of large language models (LLMs) has entered in a experience-driven era, flagged by the emergence of environment feedback-driven learning via reinforcement learning and tool-using agents. This encourages the emergenece of model context protocol (MCP), which defines the standard on how should a LLM interact with external services, such as \api and data. However, as MCP becomes the de facto standard for LLM agent systems, it also introduces new safety risks. In particular, MCP introduces third-party services, which are not controlled by the LLM developers, into the agent systems. These third-party MCP services provider are potentially malicious and have the economic incentives to exploit vulnerabilities and sabotage user-agent interactions. In this position paper, we advocate the research community in LLM safety to pay close attention to the new safety risks issues introduced by MCP, and develop new techniques to build safe MCP-powered agent systems. To establish our position, we argue with three key parts. (1) We first construct \framework, a controlled framework to examine safety issues in MCP-powered agent systems. (2) We then conduct a series of pilot experiments to demonstrate the safety risks in MCP-powered agent systems is a real threat and its defense is not trivial. (3) Finally, we give our outlook by showing a roadmap to build safe MCP-powered agent systems. In particular, we would call for researchers to persue the following research directions: red teaming, MCP safe LLM development, MCP safety evaluation, MCP safety data accumulation, MCP service safeguard, and MCP safe ecosystem construction. We hope this position paper can raise the awareness of the research community in MCP safety and encourage more researchers to join this important research direction. Our code is available at https://github.com/littlelittlenine/SafeMCP.git.

Data-driven approaches struggle with precise manipulation; imitation learning requires many hard-to-obtain demonstrations, while reinforcement learning yields brittle, non-generalizable policies. We introduce VisuoTactile Local (ViTaL) policy learning, a framework that solves fine-grained manipulation tasks by decomposing them into two phases: a reaching phase, where a vision-language model (VLM) enables scene-level reasoning to localize the object of interest, and a local interaction phase, where a reusable, scene-agnostic ViTaL policy performs contact-rich manipulation using egocentric vision and tactile sensing. This approach is motivated by the observation that while scene context varies, the low-level interaction remains consistent across task instances. By training local policies once in a canonical setting, they can generalize via a localize-then-execute strategy. ViTaL achieves around 90% success on contact-rich tasks in unseen environments and is robust to distractors. ViTaL's effectiveness stems from three key insights: (1) foundation models for segmentation enable training robust visual encoders via behavior cloning; (2) these encoders improve the generalizability of policies learned using residual RL; and (3) tactile sensing significantly boosts performance in contact-rich tasks. Ablation studies validate each of these insights, and we demonstrate that ViTaL integrates well with high-level VLMs, enabling robust, reusable low-level skills. Results and videos are available at https://vitalprecise.github.io.

Phishing attacks remain one of the most prevalent and persistent cybersecurity threat with attackers continuously evolving and intensifying tactics to evade the general detection system. Despite significant advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning, faithfully reproducing the interpretable reasoning with classification and explainability that underpin phishing judgments remains challenging. Due to recent advancement in Natural Language Processing, Large Language Models (LLMs) show a promising direction and potential for improving domain specific phishing classification tasks. However, enhancing the reliability and robustness of classification models requires not only accurate predictions from LLMs but also consistent and trustworthy explanations aligning with those predictions. Therefore, a key question remains: can LLMs not only classify phishing emails accurately but also generate explanations that are reliably aligned with their predictions and internally self-consistent? To answer these questions, we have fine-tuned transformer based models, including BERT, Llama models, and Wizard, to improve domain relevance and make them more tailored to phishing specific distinctions, using Binary Sequence Classification, Contrastive Learning (CL) and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO). To that end, we examined their performance in phishing classification and explainability by applying the ConsistenCy measure based on SHAPley values (CC SHAP), which measures prediction explanation token alignment to test the model's internal faithfulness and consistency and uncover the rationale behind its predictions and reasoning. Overall, our findings show that Llama models exhibit stronger prediction explanation token alignment with higher CC SHAP scores despite lacking reliable decision making accuracy, whereas Wizard achieves better prediction accuracy but lower CC SHAP scores.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems typically rely on a single fixed retriever, despite growing evidence that no single retriever performs optimally across all query types. In this paper, we explore a query routing approach that dynamically selects from a pool of retrievers based on the query, using both train-free heuristics and learned routing models. We frame routing as a learning-to-rank (LTR) problem and introduce LTRR, a framework that learns to rank retrievers by their expected utility gain to downstream LLM performance. Our experiments, conducted on synthetic QA data with controlled query type variations, show that routing-based RAG systems can outperform the best single-retriever-based systems. Performance gains are especially pronounced in models trained with the Answer Correctness (AC) metric and with pairwise learning approaches, especially with XGBoost. We also observe improvements in generalization to out-of-distribution queries. As part of the SIGIR 2025 LiveRAG challenge, our submitted system demonstrated the practical viability of our approach, achieving competitive performance in both answer correctness and faithfulness. These findings highlight the importance of both training methodology and metric selection in query routing for RAG systems.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are central to many contemporary AI applications, yet their extensive parameter counts pose significant challenges for deployment in memory- and compute-constrained environments. Recent works in eXplainable AI (XAI), particularly on attribution methods, suggest that interpretability can also enable model compression by identifying and removing components irrelevant to inference. In this paper, we leverage Layer-wise Relevance Propagation (LRP) to perform attribution-guided pruning of LLMs. While LRP has shown promise in structured pruning for vision models, we extend it to unstructured pruning in LLMs and demonstrate that it can substantially reduce model size with minimal performance loss. Our method is especially effective in extracting task-relevant subgraphs -- so-called ``circuits'' -- which can represent core functions (e.g., indirect object identification). Building on this, we introduce a technique for model correction, by selectively removing circuits responsible for spurious behaviors (e.g., toxic outputs). All in all, we gather these techniques as a uniform holistic framework and showcase its effectiveness and limitations through extensive experiments for compression, circuit discovery and model correction on Llama and OPT models, highlighting its potential for improving both model efficiency and safety. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/erfanhatefi/SparC3.

The introduction of advanced reasoning capabilities have improved the problem-solving performance of large language models, particularly on math and coding benchmarks. However, it remains unclear whether these reasoning models are more or less vulnerable to adversarial prompt attacks than their non-reasoning counterparts. In this work, we present a systematic evaluation of weaknesses in advanced reasoning models compared to similar non-reasoning models across a diverse set of prompt-based attack categories. Using experimental data, we find that on average the reasoning-augmented models are \emph{slightly more robust} than non-reasoning models (42.51\% vs 45.53\% attack success rate, lower is better). However, this overall trend masks significant category-specific differences: for certain attack types the reasoning models are substantially \emph{more vulnerable} (e.g., up to 32 percentage points worse on a tree-of-attacks prompt), while for others they are markedly \emph{more robust} (e.g., 29.8 points better on cross-site scripting injection). Our findings highlight the nuanced security implications of advanced reasoning in language models and emphasize the importance of stress-testing safety across diverse adversarial techniques.