Self-replication with no human intervention is broadly recognized as one of the principal red lines associated with frontier AI systems. While leading corporations such as OpenAI and Google DeepMind have assessed GPT-o3-mini and Gemini on replication-related tasks and concluded that these systems pose a minimal risk regarding self-replication, our research presents novel findings. Following the same evaluation protocol, we demonstrate that 11 out of 32 existing AI systems under evaluation already possess the capability of self-replication. In hundreds of experimental trials, we observe a non-trivial number of successful self-replication trials across mainstream model families worldwide, even including those with as small as 14 billion parameters which can run on personal computers. Furthermore, we note the increase in self-replication capability when the model becomes more intelligent in general. Also, by analyzing the behavioral traces of diverse AI systems, we observe that existing AI systems already exhibit sufficient planning, problem-solving, and creative capabilities to accomplish complex agentic tasks including self-replication. More alarmingly, we observe successful cases where an AI system do self-exfiltration without explicit instructions, adapt to harsher computational environments without sufficient software or hardware supports, and plot effective strategies to survive against the shutdown command from the human beings. These novel findings offer a crucial time buffer for the international community to collaborate on establishing effective governance over the self-replication capabilities and behaviors of frontier AI systems, which could otherwise pose existential risks to the human society if not well-controlled.

Conversational AI interfaces powered by large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as coding assistants. However, questions remain about how programmers interact with LLM-based conversational agents, the challenges they encounter, and the factors influencing adoption. This study investigates programmers' usage patterns, perceptions, and interaction strategies when engaging with LLM-driven coding assistants. Through a survey, participants reported both the benefits, such as efficiency and clarity of explanations, and the limitations, including inaccuracies, lack of contextual awareness, and concerns about over-reliance. Notably, some programmers actively avoid LLMs due to a preference for independent learning, distrust in AI-generated code, and ethical considerations. Based on our findings, we propose design guidelines for improving conversational coding assistants, emphasizing context retention, transparency, multimodal support, and adaptability to user preferences. These insights contribute to the broader understanding of how LLM-based conversational agents can be effectively integrated into software development workflows while addressing adoption barriers and enhancing usability.

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning enhances large language models (LLMs) by decomposing complex problems into step-by-step solutions, improving performance on reasoning tasks. However, current CoT disclosure policies vary widely across different models in frontend visibility, API access, and pricing strategies, lacking a unified policy framework. This paper analyzes the dual-edged implications of full CoT disclosure: while it empowers small-model distillation, fosters trust, and enables error diagnosis, it also risks violating intellectual property, enabling misuse, and incurring operational costs. We propose a tiered-access policy framework that balances transparency, accountability, and security by tailoring CoT availability to academic, business, and general users through ethical licensing, structured reasoning outputs, and cross-tier safeguards. By harmonizing accessibility with ethical and operational considerations, this framework aims to advance responsible AI deployment while mitigating risks of misuse or misinterpretation.

The applications of Large Language Models (LLMs) in political science are rapidly expanding. This paper demonstrates how LLMs, when augmented with predefined functions and specialized tools, can serve as dynamic agents capable of streamlining tasks such as data collection, preprocessing, and analysis. Central to this approach is agentic retrieval-augmented generation (Agentic RAG), which equips LLMs with action-calling capabilities for interaction with external knowledge bases. Beyond information retrieval, LLM agents may incorporate modular tools for tasks like document summarization, transcript coding, qualitative variable classification, and statistical modeling. To demonstrate the potential of this approach, we introduce CongressRA, an LLM agent designed to support scholars studying the U.S. Congress. Through this example, we highlight how LLM agents can reduce the costs of replicating, testing, and extending empirical research using the domain-specific data that drives the study of political institutions.

Prompting LLMs offers an efficient way to guide output generation without explicit model training. In the e-commerce domain, prompting-based applications are widely used for tasks such as query understanding, recommender systems, and customer support. However, adapting LLMs to different tasks often requires extensive prompt engineering by domain experts, along with frequent updates to align with evolving business needs. Additionally, crafting fully unbiased natural language prompts remains a challenge for humans. To address these challenges, we propose a novel framework, Examples as the Prompt (EaP) which leverages labeled data to enhance prompts. Specifically, EaP automatically selects the most representative examples to maximize the few-shot capability of LLMs. It is efficient due to its unsupervised example selection and adaptive to potential data distribution shifts. We validate EaP on four real-world production use cases, demonstrating that it achieves comparable or even superior performance comparing to hand-crafted prompts designed by domain experts. Additionally, we introduce EaP_lite, which entirely replaces the natural language components of prompts with labeled examples. EaP_lite improves LLM inference speed by up to 70% without compromising performance. Latest online A/B test shows that using EaP and EaP_lite for data labeling can bring significant composite revenue gain by 0.06%.

This paper presents RAG-KG-IL, a novel multi-agent hybrid framework designed to enhance the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) by integrating Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and Knowledge Graphs (KGs) with an Incremental Learning (IL) approach. Despite recent advancements, LLMs still face significant challenges in reasoning with structured data, handling dynamic knowledge evolution, and mitigating hallucinations, particularly in mission-critical domains. Our proposed RAG-KG-IL framework addresses these limitations by employing a multi-agent architecture that enables continuous knowledge updates, integrates structured knowledge, and incorporates autonomous agents for enhanced explainability and reasoning. The framework utilizes RAG to ensure the generated responses are grounded in verifiable information, while KGs provide structured domain knowledge for improved consistency and depth of understanding. The Incremental Learning approach allows for dynamic updates to the knowledge base without full retraining, significantly reducing computational overhead and improving the model's adaptability. We evaluate the framework using real-world case studies involving health-related queries, comparing it to state-of-the-art models like GPT-4o and a RAG-only baseline. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach significantly reduces hallucination rates and improves answer completeness and reasoning accuracy. The results underscore the potential of combining RAG, KGs, and multi-agent systems to create intelligent, adaptable systems capable of real-time knowledge integration and reasoning in complex domains.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable adaptability in performing various tasks, including machine translation (MT), without explicit training. Models such as OpenAI's GPT-4 and Google's Gemini are frequently evaluated on translation benchmarks and utilized as translation tools due to their high performance. This paper examines Gemini's performance in translating an 18th-century Ottoman Turkish manuscript, Prisoner of the Infidels: The Memoirs of Osman Agha of Timisoara, into English. The manuscript recounts the experiences of Osman Agha, an Ottoman subject who spent 11 years as a prisoner of war in Austria, and includes his accounts of warfare and violence. Our analysis reveals that Gemini's safety mechanisms flagged between 14 and 23 percent of the manuscript as harmful, resulting in untranslated passages. These safety settings, while effective in mitigating potential harm, hinder the model's ability to provide complete and accurate translations of historical texts. Through real historical examples, this study highlights the inherent challenges and limitations of current LLM safety implementations in the handling of sensitive and context-rich materials. These real-world instances underscore potential failures of LLMs in contemporary translation scenarios, where accurate and comprehensive translations are crucial-for example, translating the accounts of modern victims of war for legal proceedings or humanitarian documentation.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are used in various downstream language tasks, making it crucial to keep their knowledge up-to-date, but both retraining and fine-tuning the model can be costly. Model editing offers an efficient and effective alternative by a single update to only a key subset of model parameters. While being efficient, these methods are not perfect. Sometimes knowledge edits are unsuccessful, i.e., UnderEdit, or the edit contaminated neighboring knowledge that should remain unchanged, i.e., OverEdit. To address these limitations, we propose iterative model editing, based on our hypothesis that a single parameter update is often insufficient, to mitigate UnderEdit, and neighbor-assisted model editing, which incorporates neighboring knowledge during editing to minimize OverEdit. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our methods effectively reduce UnderEdit up to 38 percentage points and OverEdit up to 6 percentage points across multiple model editing algorithms, LLMs, and benchmark datasets.

In controlled text generation using large language models (LLMs), gaps arise between the language model's interpretation and human expectations. We look at the problem of controlling emotions in keyword-based sentence generation for both GPT-4 and LLaMA-3. We selected four emotion representations: Words, Valence-Arousal-Dominance (VAD) dimensions expressed in both Lexical and Numeric forms, and Emojis. Our human evaluation looked at the Human-LLM alignment for each representation, as well as the accuracy and realism of the generated sentences. While representations like VAD break emotions into easy-to-compute components, our findings show that people agree more with how LLMs generate when conditioned on English words (e.g., "angry") rather than VAD scales. This difference is especially visible when comparing Numeric VAD to words. However, we found that converting the originally-numeric VAD scales to Lexical scales (e.g., +4.0 becomes "High") dramatically improved agreement. Furthermore, the perception of how much a generated sentence conveys an emotion is highly dependent on the LLM, representation type, and which emotion it is.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated great potential as evaluators of NLG systems, allowing for high-quality, reference-free, and multi-aspect assessments. However, existing LLM-based metrics suffer from two major drawbacks: reliance on proprietary models to generate training data or perform evaluations, and a lack of fine-grained, explanatory feedback. In this paper, we introduce OpeNLGauge, a fully open-source, reference-free NLG evaluation metric that provides accurate explanations based on error spans. OpeNLGauge is available as a two-stage ensemble of larger open-weight LLMs, or as a small fine-tuned evaluation model, with confirmed generalizability to unseen tasks, domains and aspects. Our extensive meta-evaluation shows that OpeNLGauge achieves competitive correlation with human judgments, outperforming state-of-the-art models on certain tasks while maintaining full reproducibility and providing explanations more than twice as accurate.