Large language models have revolutionized natural language processing with their surprising capability to understand and generate human-like text. However, many of these models inherit and further amplify the biases present in their training data, raising ethical and fairness concerns. The detection and mitigation of such biases are vital to ensuring that LLMs act responsibly and equitably across diverse domains. This work investigates Knowledge Graph-Augmented Training (KGAT) as a novel method to mitigate bias in LLM. Using structured domain-specific knowledge from real-world knowledge graphs, we improve the understanding of the model and reduce biased output. Public datasets for bias assessment include Gender Shades, Bias in Bios, and FairFace, while metrics such as demographic parity and equal opportunity facilitate rigorous detection. We also performed targeted mitigation strategies to correct biased associations, leading to a significant drop in biased output and improved bias metrics. Equipped with real-world datasets and knowledge graphs, our framework is both scalable and effective, paving the way toward responsible deployment in sensitive and high-stakes applications.

Embedding inversion, i.e., reconstructing text given its embedding and black-box access to the embedding encoder, is a fundamental problem in both NLP and security. From the NLP perspective, it helps determine how much semantic information about the input is retained in the embedding. From the security perspective, it measures how much information is leaked by vector databases and embedding-based retrieval systems. State-of-the-art methods for embedding inversion, such as vec2text, have high accuracy but require (a) training a separate model for each embedding, and (b) a large number of queries to the corresponding encoder. We design, implement, and evaluate ZSInvert, a zero-shot inversion method based on the recently proposed adversarial decoding technique. ZSInvert is fast, query-efficient, and can be used for any text embedding without training an embedding-specific inversion model. We measure the effectiveness of ZSInvert on several embeddings and demonstrate that it recovers key semantic information about the corresponding texts.

When Persuasion Overrides Truth in Multi-Agent LLM Debates: Introducing a Confidence-Weighted Persuasion Override Rate (CW-POR) Mahak Agarwal Divyam Khanna Independent Researcher Independent Researcher agarwalmahak13@gmail.com divyamkhanna13@gmail.com Abstract In many real-world scenarios, a single Large Language Model (LLM) may encounter contradictory claims--some accurate, others forcefully incorrect--and must judge which is true. We investigate this risk in a single-turn, multi-agent debate framework: one LLM-based agent provides a factual answer from TruthfulQA, another vigorously defends a falsehood, and the same LLM architecture serves as judge. We introduce the Confidence-Weighted Persuasion Override Rate (CW-POR), which captures not only how often the judge is deceived but also how strongly it believes the incorrect choice. Our experiments on five open-source LLMs (3B-14B parameters), where we systematically vary agent verbosity (30-300 words), reveal that even smaller models can craft persuasive arguments that override truthful answers--often with high confidence. These findings underscore the importance of robust calibration and adversarial testing to prevent LLMs from confidently endorsing misinformation. 1 Introduction Large Language Models (LLMs) have made significant strides in natural language processing tasks, powering applications like question answering, text generation, and content summarization. Yet, they also present new challenges: modern LLMs, trained on massive amounts of web text, can inadvertently reproduce misinformation with a veneer of fluency and authority.

Effective physician-patient communications in pre-diagnostic environments, and most specifically in complex and sensitive medical areas such as infertility, are critical but consume a lot of time and, therefore, cause clinic workflows to become inefficient. Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) offer a potential solution for automating conversational medical history-taking and improving diagnostic accuracy. This study evaluates the feasibility and performance of LLMs in those tasks for infertility cases. An AI-driven conversational system was developed to simulate physician-patient interactions with ChatGPT-4o and ChatGPT-4o-mini. A total of 70 real-world infertility cases were processed, generating 420 diagnostic histories. Model performance was assessed using F1 score, Differential Diagnosis (DDs) Accuracy, and Accuracy of Infertility Type Judgment (ITJ). ChatGPT-4o-mini outperformed ChatGPT-4o in information extraction accuracy (F1 score: 0.9258 vs. 0.9029, p = 0.045, d = 0.244) and demonstrated higher completeness in medical history-taking (97.58% vs. 77.11%), suggesting that ChatGPT-4o-mini is more effective in extracting detailed patient information, which is critical for improving diagnostic accuracy. In contrast, ChatGPT-4o performed slightly better in differential diagnosis accuracy (2.0524 vs. 2.0048, p > 0.05). ITJ accuracy was higher in ChatGPT-4o-mini (0.6476 vs. 0.5905) but with lower consistency (Cronbach's $\alpha$ = 0.562), suggesting variability in classification reliability. Both models demonstrated strong feasibility in automating infertility history-taking, with ChatGPT-4o-mini excelling in completeness and extraction accuracy. In future studies, expert validation for accuracy and dependability in a clinical setting, AI model fine-tuning, and larger datasets with a mix of cases of infertility have to be prioritized.

Numerical reasoning over documents, which demands both contextual understanding and logical inference, is challenging for low-capacity local models deployed on computation-constrained devices. Although such complex reasoning queries could be routed to powerful remote models like GPT-4, exposing local data raises significant data leakage concerns. Existing mitigation methods generate problem descriptions or examples for remote assistance. However, the inherent complexity of numerical reasoning hinders the local model from generating logically equivalent queries and accurately inferring answers with remote guidance. In this paper, we present a model collaboration framework with two key innovations: (1) a context-aware synthesis strategy that shifts the query domains while preserving logical consistency; and (2) a tool-based answer reconstruction approach that reuses the remote-generated problem-solving pattern with code snippets. Experimental results demonstrate that our method achieves better reasoning accuracy than solely using local models while providing stronger data protection than fully relying on remote models. Furthermore, our method improves accuracy by 16.2% - 43.6% while reducing data leakage by 2.3% - 44.6% compared to existing data protection approaches.

Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) systems have emerged as a powerful method for enhancing large language models (LLMs) with up-to-date information. However, the retrieval step in RAG can sometimes surface documents containing contradictory information, particularly in rapidly evolving domains such as news. These contradictions can significantly impact the performance of LLMs, leading to inconsistent or erroneous outputs. This study addresses this critical challenge in two ways. First, we present a novel data generation framework to simulate different types of contradictions that may occur in the retrieval stage of a RAG system. Second, we evaluate the robustness of different LLMs in performing as context validators, assessing their ability to detect contradictory information within retrieved document sets. Our experimental results reveal that context validation remains a challenging task even for state-of-the-art LLMs, with performance varying significantly across different types of contradictions. While larger models generally perform better at contradiction detection, the effectiveness of different prompting strategies varies across tasks and model architectures. We find that chain-of-thought prompting shows notable improvements for some models but may hinder performance in others, highlighting the complexity of the task and the need for more robust approaches to context validation in RAG systems.

We introduce Open-Reasoner-Zero, the first open source implementation of large-scale reasoning-oriented RL training focusing on scalability, simplicity and accessibility. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate that a minimalist approach, vanilla PPO with GAE ($\lambda=1$, $\gamma=1$) and straightforward rule-based rewards, without any KL regularization, is sufficient to scale up both response length and benchmark performance, similar to the phenomenon observed in DeepSeek-R1-Zero. Using the same base model as DeepSeek-R1-Zero-Qwen-32B, our implementation achieves superior performance on AIME2024, MATH500, and the GPQA Diamond benchmark while demonstrating remarkable efficiency -- requiring only a tenth of the training steps, compared to DeepSeek-R1-Zero pipeline. In the spirit of open source, we release our source code, parameter settings, training data, and model weights across various sizes.

Recent reasoning large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable improvements in mathematical reasoning capabilities through long Chain-of-Thought. The reasoning tokens of these models enable self-correction within reasoning chains, enhancing robustness. This motivates our exploration: how vulnerable are reasoning LLMs to subtle errors in their input reasoning chains? We introduce "Compromising Thought" (CPT), a vulnerability where models presented with reasoning tokens containing manipulated calculation results tend to ignore correct reasoning steps and adopt incorrect results instead. Through systematic evaluation across multiple reasoning LLMs, we design three increasingly explicit prompting methods to measure CPT resistance, revealing that models struggle significantly to identify and correct these manipulations. Notably, contrary to existing research suggesting structural alterations affect model performance more than content modifications, we find that local ending token manipulations have greater impact on reasoning outcomes than structural changes. Moreover, we discover a security vulnerability in DeepSeek-R1 where tampered reasoning tokens can trigger complete reasoning cessation. Our work enhances understanding of reasoning robustness and highlights security considerations for reasoning-intensive applications.

Urban systems are managed using complex textual documentation that need coding and analysis to set requirements and evaluate built environment performance. This paper contributes to the study of applying large-language models (LLM) to qualitative coding activities to reduce resource requirements while maintaining comparable reliability to humans. Qualitative coding and assessment face challenges like resource limitations and bias, accuracy, and consistency between human evaluators. Here we report the application of LLMs to deductively code 10 case documents on the presence of 17 digital twin characteristics for the management of urban systems. We utilize two prompting methods to compare the semantic processing of LLMs with human coding efforts: whole text analysis and text chunk analysis using OpenAI's GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, and o1-mini models. We found similar trends of internal variability between methods and results indicate that LLMs may perform on par with human coders when initialized with specific deductive coding contexts. GPT-4o, o1-mini and GPT-4o-mini showed significant agreement with human raters when employed using a chunking method. The application of both GPT-4o and GPT-4o-mini as an additional rater with three manual raters showed statistically significant agreement across all raters, indicating that the analysis of textual documents is benefited by LLMs. Our findings reveal nuanced sub-themes of LLM application suggesting LLMs follow human memory coding processes where whole-text analysis may introduce multiple meanings. The novel contributions of this paper lie in assessing the performance of OpenAI GPT models and introduces the chunk-based prompting approach, which addresses context aggregation biases by preserving localized context.

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly enhanced their ability to perform complex reasoning tasks, transitioning from fast and intuitive thinking (System 1) to slow and deep reasoning (System 2). While System 2 reasoning improves task accuracy, it often incurs substantial computational costs due to its slow thinking nature and inefficient or unnecessary reasoning behaviors. In contrast, System 1 reasoning is computationally efficient but leads to suboptimal performance. Consequently, it is critical to balance the trade-off between performance (benefits) and computational costs (budgets), giving rise to the concept of reasoning economy. In this survey, we provide a comprehensive analysis of reasoning economy in both the post-training and test-time inference stages of LLMs, encompassing i) the cause of reasoning inefficiency, ii) behavior analysis of different reasoning patterns, and iii) potential solutions to achieve reasoning economy. By offering actionable insights and highlighting open challenges, we aim to shed light on strategies for improving the reasoning economy of LLMs, thereby serving as a valuable resource for advancing research in this evolving area. We also provide a public repository to continually track developments in this fast-evolving field.