This paper investigates and validates the impact of fine-tuning on large language model performance, focusing on parameter-efficient methods (LoRA and QLoRA). We evaluate model capabilities across three key domains: (1) commonsense reasoning (HellaSwag), (2) mathematical reasoning (GSM8K), and (3) multi-domain knowledge (MMLU-CS). Our findings demonstrate that: (1) LoRA-based methods effectively improve task-specific performance while maintaining computational efficiency, and (2) performance strongly depends on alignment between fine-tuning dataset and benchmark tasks. The study provides both theoretical insights into parameter-efficient mechanisms and practical guidance for developers implementing efficient LLM adaptation with limited resources.

Recent advancements have successfully harnessed the power of Large Language Models (LLMs) for zero-shot document ranking, exploring a variety of prompting strategies. Comparative approaches like pairwise and listwise achieve high effectiveness but are computationally intensive and thus less practical for larger-scale applications. Scoring-based pointwise approaches exhibit superior efficiency by independently and simultaneously generating the relevance scores for each candidate document. However, this independence ignores critical comparative insights between documents, resulting in inconsistent scoring and suboptimal performance. In this paper, we aim to improve the effectiveness of pointwise methods while preserving their efficiency through two key innovations: (1) We propose a novel Global-Consistent Comparative Pointwise Ranking (GCCP) strategy that incorporates global reference comparisons between each candidate and an anchor document to generate contrastive relevance scores. We strategically design the anchor document as a query-focused summary of pseudo-relevant candidates, which serves as an effective reference point by capturing the global context for document comparison. (2) These contrastive relevance scores can be efficiently Post-Aggregated with existing pointwise methods, seamlessly integrating essential Global Context information in a training-free manner (PAGC). Extensive experiments on the TREC DL and BEIR benchmark demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms previous pointwise methods while maintaining comparable efficiency. Our method also achieves competitive performance against comparative methods that require substantially more computational resources. More analyses further validate the efficacy of our anchor construction strategy.

Efficiently updating multilingual knowledge in large language models (LLMs), while preserving consistent factual representations across languages, remains a long-standing and unresolved challenge. While deploying separate editing systems for each language might seem viable, this approach incurs substantial costs due to the need to manage multiple models. A more efficient solution involves integrating knowledge updates across all languages into a unified model. However, performing sequential edits across languages often leads to destructive parameter interference, significantly degrading multilingual generalization and the accuracy of injected knowledge. To address this challenge, we propose LangEdit, a novel null-space constrained framework designed to precisely isolate language-specific knowledge updates. The core innovation of LangEdit lies in its ability to project parameter updates for each language onto the orthogonal complement of previous updated subspaces. This approach mathematically guarantees update independence while preserving multilingual generalization capabilities. We conduct a comprehensive evaluation across three model architectures, six languages, and four downstream tasks, demonstrating that LangEdit effectively mitigates parameter interference and outperforms existing state-of-the-art editing methods. Our results highlight its potential for enabling efficient and accurate multilingual knowledge updates in LLMs. The code is available at https://github.com/VRCMF/LangEdit.git.

Neo-fascism is a political and societal ideology that has been having remarkable growth in the last decade in the United States of America (USA), as well as in other Western societies. It poses a grave danger to democracy and the minorities it targets, and it requires active actions against it to avoid escalation. This work presents the first-of-its-kind neo-fascist coding scheme for digital discourse in the USA societal context, overseen by political science researchers. Our work bridges the gap between Natural Language Processing (NLP) and political science against this phenomena. Furthermore, to test the coding scheme, we collect a tremendous amount of activity on the internet from notable neo-fascist groups (the forums of Iron March and Stormfront.org), and the guidelines are applied to a subset of the collected posts. Through crowdsourcing, we annotate a total of a thousand posts that are labeled as neo-fascist or non-neo-fascist. With this labeled data set, we fine-tune and test both Small Language Models (SLMs) and Large Language Models (LLMs), obtaining the very first classification models for neo-fascist discourse. We find that the prevalence of neo-fascist rhetoric in this kind of forum is ever-present, making them a good target for future research. The societal context is a key consideration for neo-fascist speech when conducting NLP research. Finally, the work against this kind of political movement must be pressed upon and continued for the well-being of a democratic society. Disclaimer: This study focuses on detecting neo-fascist content in text, similar to other hate speech analyses, without labeling individuals or organizations.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)-powered features have rapidly proliferated across mobile apps in various domains, including productivity, education, entertainment, and creativity. However, how users perceive, evaluate, and critique these AI features remains largely unexplored, primarily due to the overwhelming volume of user feedback. In this work, we present the first comprehensive, large-scale study of user feedback on AI-powered mobile apps, leveraging a curated dataset of 292 AI-driven apps across 14 categories with 894K AI-specific reviews from Google Play. We develop and validate a multi-stage analysis pipeline that begins with a human-labeled benchmark and systematically evaluates large language models (LLMs) and prompting strategies. Each stage, including review classification, aspect-sentiment extraction, and clustering, is validated for accuracy and consistency. Our pipeline enables scalable, high-precision analysis of user feedback, extracting over one million aspect-sentiment pairs clustered into 18 positive and 15 negative user topics. Our analysis reveals that users consistently focus on a narrow set of themes: positive comments emphasize productivity, reliability, and personalized assistance, while negative feedback highlights technical failures (e.g., scanning and recognition), pricing concerns, and limitations in language support. Our pipeline surfaces both satisfaction with one feature and frustration with another within the same review. These fine-grained, co-occurring sentiments are often missed by traditional approaches that treat positive and negative feedback in isolation or rely on coarse-grained analysis. To this end, our approach provides a more faithful reflection of the real-world user experiences with AI-powered apps. Category-aware analysis further uncovers both universal drivers of satisfaction and domain-specific frustrations.

With recent advances in modeling and the increasing amount of supervised training data, automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems have achieved remarkable performance on general speech. However, the word error rate (WER) of state-of-the-art ASR remains high for named entities. Since named entities are often the most critical keywords, misrecognizing them can affect all downstream applications, especially when the ASR system functions as the front end of a complex system. In this paper, we introduce a large language model (LLM) revision mechanism to revise incorrect named entities in ASR predictions by leveraging the LLM's reasoning ability as well as local context (e.g., lecture notes) containing a set of correct named entities. Finally, we introduce the NER-MIT -OpenCourseWare dataset, containing 45 hours of data from MIT courses for development and testing. On this dataset, our proposed technique achieves up to 30% relative WER reduction for named entities.

Pretraining massively multilingual Large Language Models (LLMs) for many languages at once is challenging due to limited model capacity, scarce high-quality data, and compute constraints. Moreover, the lack of language coverage of the tokenizer makes it harder to address the gap for new languages purely at the post-training stage. In this work, we study what relatively cheap interventions early on in training improve "language plasticity", or adaptation capabilities of the model post-training to new languages. We focus on tokenizer design and propose using a universal tokenizer that is trained for more languages than the primary pretraining languages to enable efficient adaptation in expanding language coverage after pretraining. Our systematic experiments across diverse groups of languages and different training strategies show that a universal tokenizer enables significantly higher language adaptation, with up to 20.2% increase in win rates compared to tokenizers specific to pretraining languages. Furthermore, a universal tokenizer also leads to better plasticity towards languages that are completely unseen in the tokenizer and pretraining, by up to 5% win rate gain. We achieve this adaptation to an expanded set of languages with minimal compromise in performance on the majority of languages included in pre-training.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in solving diverse tasks. However, their proficiency in iteratively optimizing complex solutions through learning from previous feedback remains insufficiently explored. To bridge this gap, we present OPT-BENCH, a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate LLM agents on large-scale search space optimization problems. OPT-BENCH includes 20 real-world machine learning tasks sourced from Kaggle and 10 classical NP problems, offering a diverse and challenging environment for assessing LLM agents on iterative reasoning and solution refinement. To enable rigorous evaluation, we introduce OPT-Agent, an end-to-end optimization framework that emulates human reasoning when tackling complex problems by generating, validating, and iteratively improving solutions through leveraging historical feedback. Through extensive experiments on 9 state-of-the-art LLMs from 6 model families, we analyze the effects of optimization iterations, temperature settings, and model architectures on solution quality and convergence. Our results demonstrate that incorporating historical context significantly enhances optimization performance across both ML and NP tasks. All datasets, code, and evaluation tools are open-sourced to promote further research in advancing LLM-driven optimization and iterative reasoning. Project page: \href{https://github.com/OliverLeeXZ/OPT-BENCH}{https://github.com/OliverLeeXZ/OPT-BENCH}.

The rapid evolution of scientific fields introduces challenges in organizing and retrieving scientific literature. While expert-curated taxonomies have traditionally addressed this need, the process is time-consuming and expensive. Furthermore, recent automatic taxonomy construction methods either (1) over-rely on a specific corpus, sacrificing generalizability, or (2) depend heavily on the general knowledge of large language models (LLMs) contained within their pre-training datasets, often overlooking the dynamic nature of evolving scientific domains. Additionally, these approaches fail to account for the multi-faceted nature of scientific literature, where a single research paper may contribute to multiple dimensions (e.g., methodology, new tasks, evaluation metrics, benchmarks). To address these gaps, we propose TaxoAdapt, a framework that dynamically adapts an LLM-generated taxonomy to a given corpus across multiple dimensions. TaxoAdapt performs iterative hierarchical classification, expanding both the taxonomy width and depth based on corpus' topical distribution. We demonstrate its state-of-the-art performance across a diverse set of computer science conferences over the years to showcase its ability to structure and capture the evolution of scientific fields. As a multidimensional method, TaxoAdapt generates taxonomies that are 26.51% more granularity-preserving and 50.41% more coherent than the most competitive baselines judged by LLMs.

Claims made by individuals or entities are oftentimes nuanced and cannot be clearly labeled as entirely "true" or "false" -- as is frequently the case with scientific and political claims. However, a claim (e.g., "vaccine A is better than vaccine B") can be dissected into its integral aspects and sub-aspects (e.g., efficacy, safety, distribution), which are individually easier to validate. This enables a more comprehensive, structured response that provides a well-rounded perspective on a given problem while also allowing the reader to prioritize specific angles of interest within the claim (e.g., safety towards children). Thus, we propose ClaimSpect, a retrieval-augmented generation-based framework for automatically constructing a hierarchy of aspects typically considered when addressing a claim and enriching them with corpus-specific perspectives. This structure hierarchically partitions an input corpus to retrieve relevant segments, which assist in discovering new sub-aspects. Moreover, these segments enable the discovery of varying perspectives towards an aspect of the claim (e.g., support, neutral, or oppose) and their respective prevalence (e.g., "how many biomedical papers believe vaccine A is more transportable than B?"). We apply ClaimSpect to a wide variety of real-world scientific and political claims featured in our constructed dataset, showcasing its robustness and accuracy in deconstructing a nuanced claim and representing perspectives within a corpus. Through real-world case studies and human evaluation, we validate its effectiveness over multiple baselines.