We present a theoretical framework showing that popular LLM alignment methods--including RLHF and its variants--can be understood as divergence estimators between aligned (safe or preferred) and unaligned (harmful or less-preferred) distributions. This perspective explains the emergence of separation in the latent space between safe and harmful prompts after alignment. As an application of our general divergence framework, we propose KLDO, a novel KL divergence-based alignment method, and empirically validate its effectiveness. We further show that using compliance-refusal datasets, rather than standard preference-based datasets, leads to stronger separation and improved safety alignment. Finally, to quantify the separation effect, we propose a distance-based metric in the prompt representation space, which also acts as a statistically significant indicator for model safety.

Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) have been proposed as a compromise between white-box and black-box models, aiming to achieve interpretability without sacrificing accuracy. The standard training procedure for CBMs is to predefine a candidate set of human-interpretable concepts, extract their values from the training data, and identify a sparse subset as inputs to a transparent prediction model. However, such approaches are often hampered by the tradeoff between exploring a sufficiently large set of concepts versus controlling the cost of obtaining concept extractions, resulting in a large interpretability-accuracy tradeoff. This work investigates a novel approach that sidesteps these challenges: BC-LLM iteratively searches over a potentially infinite set of concepts within a Bayesian framework, in which Large Language Models (LLMs) serve as both a concept extraction mechanism and prior. Even though LLMs can be miscalibrated and hallucinate, we prove that BC-LLM can provide rigorous statistical inference and uncertainty quantification. Across image, text, and tabular datasets, BC-LLM outperforms interpretable baselines and even black-box models in certain settings, converges more rapidly towards relevant concepts, and is more robust to out-of-distribution samples.

We present SeePhys, a large-scale multimodal benchmark for LLM reasoning grounded in physics questions ranging from middle school to PhD qualifying exams. The benchmark covers 7 fundamental domains spanning the physics discipline, incorporating 21 categories of highly heterogeneous diagrams. In contrast to prior works where visual elements mainly serve auxiliary purposes, our benchmark features a substantial proportion of vision-essential problems (75%) that mandate visual information extraction for correct solutions. Through extensive evaluation, we observe that even the most advanced visual reasoning models (e.g., Gemini-2.5-pro

Policy exploration is critical in reinforcement learning (RL), where existing approaches include $\epsilon$-greedy, Gaussian process, etc. However, these approaches utilize preset stochastic processes and are indiscriminately applied in all kinds of RL tasks without considering task-specific features that influence policy exploration. Moreover, during RL training, the evolution of such stochastic processes is rigid, which typically only incorporates a decay in the variance, failing to adjust flexibly according to the agent's real-time learning status. Inspired by the analyzing and reasoning capability of large language models (LLMs), we design **LLM-Explorer** to adaptively generate task-specific exploration strategies with LLMs, enhancing the policy exploration in RL. In our design, we sample the learning trajectory of the agent during the RL training in a given task and prompt the LLM to analyze the agent's current policy learning status and then generate a probability distribution for future policy exploration. Updating the probability distribution periodically, we derive a stochastic process specialized for the particular task and dynamically adjusted to adapt to the learning process. Our design is a plug-in module compatible with various widely applied RL algorithms, including the DQN series, DDPG, TD3, and any possible variants developed based on them. Through extensive experiments on the Atari and MuJoCo benchmarks, we demonstrate LLM-Explorer's capability to enhance RL policy exploration, achieving an average performance improvement up to 37.27%.

The growing scale of evaluation tasks has led to the widespread adoption of automated evaluation using LLMs, a paradigm known as "LLM-as-a-judge". However, improving its alignment with human preferences without complex prompts or fine-tuning remains challenging. Previous studies mainly optimize based on shallow outputs, overlooking rich cross-layer representations. In this work, motivated by preliminary findings that middle-to-upper layers encode semantically and task-relevant representations that are often more aligned with human judgments than the final layer, we propose LAGER, a post-hoc, plug-and-play framework for improving the alignment of LLM-as-a-Judge point-wise evaluations with human scores by leveraging internal representations. LAGER produces fine-grained judgment scores by aggregating cross-layer score-token logits and computing the expected score from a softmax-based distribution, while keeping the LLM backbone frozen and ensuring no impact on the inference process.

Machine unlearning techniques aim to mitigate unintended memorization in large language models (LLMs). However, existing approaches predominantly focus on the explicit removal of isolated facts, often overlooking latent inferential dependencies and the non-deterministic nature of knowledge within LLMs. Consequently, facts presumed forgotten may persist implicitly through correlated information. To address these challenges, we propose a knowledge unlearning evaluation framework that more accurately captures the implicit structure of real-world knowledge by representing relevant factual contexts as knowledge graphs with associated confidence scores. We further develop an inference-based evaluation protocol leveraging powerful LLMs as judges; these judges reason over the extracted knowledge subgraph to determine unlearning success. Our LLM judges utilize carefully designed prompts and are calibrated against human evaluations to ensure their trustworthiness and stability. Extensive experiments on our newly constructed benchmark demonstrate that our framework provides a more realistic and rigorous assessment of unlearning performance. Moreover, our findings reveal that current evaluation strategies tend to overestimate unlearning effectiveness.

Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) lowers the computational and memory overhead of fine-tuning large models by updating a low-dimensional subspace of the pre-trained weight matrix. Albeit efficient, LoRA exhibits suboptimal convergence and noticeable performance degradation, due to inconsistent and imbalanced weight updates induced by its nonunique low-rank factorizations. To overcome these limitations, this article identifies the optimal low-rank factorization per step that minimizes an upper bound on the loss. The resultant refactored low-rank adaptation (RefLoRA) method promotes a flatter loss landscape, along with consistent and balanced weight updates, thus speeding up stable convergence. Extensive experiments evaluate RefLoRA on natural language understanding, and commonsense reasoning tasks with popular large language models including DeBERTaV3, LLaMA-7B, LLaMA2-7B and LLaMA3-8B. The numerical tests corroborate that RefLoRA converges faster, outperforms various benchmarks, and enjoys negligible computational overhead compared to state-of-the-art LoRA variants.

Large language models (LLMs) power many modern applications, but serving them at scale remains costly and resource-intensive. Current server-centric systems overlook consumer-grade GPUs at the edge. We introduce SpecEdge, an edge-assisted inference framework that splits LLM workloads between edge and server GPUs using a speculative decoding scheme, exchanging only token outputs over the network. SpecEdge employs proactive edge drafting to overlap edge token creation with server verification and pipeline-aware scheduling that interleaves multiple user requests to increase server-side throughput. Experiments show SpecEdge enhances overall cost efficiency by 1.91

The rapid development of multilingual large language models (LLMs) highlights the need for high-quality, diverse, and well-curated multilingual datasets. In this paper, we introduce DCAD-2000 (Data Cleaning as Anomaly Detection), a large-scale multilingual corpus constructed from newly extracted Common Crawl data and existing multilingual sources. DCAD-2000 covers 2,282 languages, 46.72TB of text, and 8.63 billion documents, spanning 155 high-and medium-resource languages and 159 writing scripts. To overcome the limitations of existing data cleaning approaches, which rely on manually designed heuristic thresholds, we reframe data cleaning as an anomaly detection problem. This dynamic filtering paradigm substantially improves data quality by automatically identifying and removing noisy or anomalous content. By fine-tuning LLMs on DCAD-2000, we demonstrate notable improvements in data quality, robustness of the cleaning pipeline, and downstream performance, particularly for low-resource languages across multiple multilingual benchmarks.

In-Context Learning (ICL) is a technique where large language models (LLMs) leverage multiple demonstrations (i.e., examples) to perform tasks. With the recent expansion of LLM context windows, many-shot ICL (generally with more than 50 demonstrations) can lead to significant performance improvements on a variety of language tasks such as text classification and question answering. Nevertheless, ICL faces the issue of demonstration order instability (ICL-DOI), which means that performance varies significantly depending on the order of demonstrations. Moreover, ICL-DOI persists in many-shot ICL, validated by our thorough experimental investigation. Current strategies for handling ICL-DOI are not applicable to many-shot ICL due to two critical challenges: (1) Most existing methods assess demonstration order quality by first prompting the LLM, then using heuristic metrics based on the LLM's predictions.