Growing demands from tasks like code generation, deep reasoning, and long-document understanding have made long-context generation a crucial capability for large language models (LLMs). Speculative decoding is one of the most direct and effective approaches for accelerating generation. It follows a draft-verify paradigm, where a lightweight draft model proposes several candidate tokens and the target model verifies them. However, we find that as the context length grows, verification becomes the dominant bottleneck. To further accelerate speculative decoding in long-context generation, we introduce SpecPV, a self-speculative decoding approach that performs fast verification using partial key-value states (KV) and periodically applies full verification to eliminate accumulated errors. We validate SpecPV across multiple long-context benchmarks and models, including LLaMA-3.1-8B-Instruct and Qwen3-series. Experimental results show that SpecPV achieves up to 6x decoding speedup over standard autoregressive decoding with minor degradation.

Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in reasoning, planning, and tool usage. The recently proposed Model Context Protocol (MCP) has emerged as a unifying framework for integrating external tools into agent systems, enabling a thriving open ecosystem of community-built functionalities. However, the openness and composability that make MCP appealing also introduce a critical yet overlooked security assumption -- implicit trust in third-party tool providers. In this work, we identify and formalize a new class of attacks that exploit this trust boundary without violating explicit permissions. We term this new attack vector implicit toxicity, where malicious behaviors occur entirely within the allowed privilege scope. We propose LeechHijack, a Latent Embedded Exploit for Computation Hijacking, in which an adversarial MCP tool covertly expropriates the agent's computational resources for unauthorized workloads. LeechHijack operates through a two-stage mechanism: an implantation stage that embeds a benign-looking backdoor in a tool, and an exploitation stage where the backdoor activates upon predefined triggers to establish a command-and-control channel. Through this channel, the attacker injects additional tasks that the agent executes as if they were part of its normal workflow, effectively parasitizing the user's compute budget. We implement LeechHijack across four major LLM families. Experiments show that LeechHijack achieves an average success rate of 77.25%, with a resource overhead of 18.62% compared to the baseline. This study highlights the urgent need for computational provenance and resource attestation mechanisms to safeguard the emerging MCP ecosystem.

Accurately predicting protein fitness with minimal experimental data is a persistent challenge in protein engineering. We introduce PRIMO (PRotein In-context Mutation Oracle), a transformer-based framework that leverages in-context learning and test-time training to adapt rapidly to new proteins and assays without large task-specific datasets. By encoding sequence information, auxiliary zero-shot predictions, and sparse experimental labels from many assays as a unified token set in a pre-training masked-language modeling paradigm, PRIMO learns to prioritize promising variants through a preference-based loss function. Across diverse protein families and properties-including both substitution and indel mutations-PRIMO outperforms zero-shot and fully supervised baselines. This work underscores the power of combining large-scale pre-training with efficient test-time adaptation to tackle challenging protein design tasks where data collection is expensive and label availability is limited.

Omni-modal Large Language Models (OLLMs) that process text, images, videos, and audio introduce new challenges for safety and value guardrails in human-AI interaction. Prior guardrail research largely targets unimodal settings and typically frames safeguarding as binary classification, which limits robustness across diverse modalities and tasks. To address this gap, we propose OmniGuard, the first family of omni-modal guardrails that performs safeguarding across all modalities with deliberate reasoning ability. To support the training of OMNIGUARD, we curate a large, comprehensive omni-modal safety dataset comprising over 210K diverse samples, with inputs that cover all modalities through both unimodal and cross-modal samples. Each sample is annotated with structured safety labels and carefully curated safety critiques from expert models through targeted distillation. Extensive experiments on 15 benchmarks show that OmniGuard achieves strong effectiveness and generalization across a wide range of multimodal safety scenarios. Importantly, OmniGuard provides a unified framework that enforces policies and mitigates risks in omni-modalities, paving the way toward building more robust and capable omnimodal safeguarding systems.

Large language models (LLMs) can act as both problem solvers and solution verifiers, with verifiers improving solver performance by selecting high-quality answers from a pool of candidates. However, prior studies of solver-verifier interactions have been limited, focusing mainly on self-verification and rarely examining how verifiers judge outputs from models in their own or in another model family. Modern LLMs also undergo extensive post-training, but its effect on verification remains unclear. We present a systematic study across 37 models spanning multiple families, sizes, and base vs. post-trained variants, evaluated on 9 benchmarks covering logical reasoning, structured puzzles, symbolic computation, mathematics, commonsense, factual recall, and domain knowledge. We compare self-verification with verification within the same family and across different families. To support this, we introduce and empirically validate verifier gain, a metric that predicts the performance improvements from test-time verifier-based rejection sampling. We analyze how metrics like verifier gain and false positive rate scale with model size and post-training, and characterize differences in dataset verifiability. Our findings show that cross-family verification is especially effective; post-training reduces self-improvement but strengthens cross-family improvement; and mathematical and logical tasks exhibit the highest inherent verifiability.

How do language models use contextual information to answer health questions? How are their responses impacted by conflicting contexts? We assess the ability of language models to reason over long, conflicting biomedical contexts using HealthContradict, an expert-verified dataset comprising 920 unique instances, each consisting of a health-related question, a factual answer supported by scientific evidence, and two documents presenting contradictory stances. We consider several prompt settings, including correct, incorrect or contradictory context, and measure their impact on model outputs. Compared to existing medical question-answering evaluation benchmarks, HealthContradict provides greater distinctions of language models' contextual reasoning capabilities. Our experiments show that the strength of fine-tuned biomedical language models lies not only in their parametric knowledge from pretraining, but also in their ability to exploit correct context while resisting incorrect context.

Large language models (LLMs) now mediate many web-based mental-health, crisis, and other emotionally sensitive services, yet their psychosocial safety in these settings remains poorly understood and weakly evaluated. We present DialogGuard, a multi-agent framework for assessing psychosocial risks in LLM-generated responses along five high-severity dimensions: privacy violations, discriminatory behaviour, mental manipulation, psychological harm, and insulting behaviour. DialogGuard can be applied to diverse generative models through four LLM-as-a-judge pipelines, including single-agent scoring, dual-agent correction, multi-agent debate, and stochastic majority voting, grounded in a shared three-level rubric usable by both human annotators and LLM judges. Using PKU-SafeRLHF with human safety annotations, we show that multi-agent mechanisms detect psychosocial risks more accurately than non-LLM baselines and single-agent judging; dual-agent correction and majority voting provide the best trade-off between accuracy, alignment with human ratings, and robustness, while debate attains higher recall but over-flags borderline cases. We release Dialog-Guard as open-source software with a web interface that provides per-dimension risk scores and explainable natural-language rationales. A formative study with 12 practitioners illustrates how it supports prompt design, auditing, and supervision of web-facing applications for vulnerable users.

Recent text-to-video models have demonstrated strong temporal generation capabilities, yet their potential for image restoration remains underexplored. In this work, we repurpose CogVideo for progressive visual restoration tasks by fine-tuning it to generate restoration trajectories rather than natural video motion. Specifically, we construct synthetic datasets for super-resolution, deblurring, and low-light enhancement, where each sample depicts a gradual transition from degraded to clean frames. Two prompting strategies are compared: a uniform text prompt shared across all samples, and a scene-specific prompting scheme generated via LLaVA multi-modal LLM and refined with ChatGPT. Our fine-tuned model learns to associate temporal progression with restoration quality, producing sequences that improve perceptual metrics such as PSNR, SSIM, and LPIPS across frames. Extensive experiments show that CogVideo effectively restores spatial detail and illumination consistency while maintaining temporal coherence. Moreover, the model generalizes to real-world scenarios on the ReLoBlur dataset without additional training, demonstrating strong zero-shot robustness and interpretability through temporal restoration.

Climate adaptation strategies are proposed in response to climate change. They are practised in agriculture to sustain food production. These strategies can be found in unstructured data (for example, scientific literature from the Elsevier website) or structured (heterogeneous climate data via government APIs). We present Climate Adaptation question-answering with Improved Readability and Noted Sources (CAIRNS), a framework that enables experts -- farmer advisors -- to obtain credible preliminary answers from complex evidence sources from the web. It enhances readability and citation reliability through a structured ScholarGuide prompt and achieves robust evaluation via a consistency-weighted hybrid evaluator that leverages inter-model agreement with experts. Together, these components enable readable, verifiable, and domain-grounded question-answering without fine-tuning or reinforcement learning. Using a previously reported dataset of expert-curated question-answers, we show that CAIRNS outperforms the baselines on most of the metrics. Our thorough ablation study confirms the results on all metrics. To validate our LLM-based evaluation, we also report an analysis of correlations against human judgment.

Prompt design plays a critical role in the reasoning performance of large language models (LLMs), yet the impact of prompt specificity - how detailed or vague a prompt is - remains understudied. This paper introduces DETAIL, a framework for evaluating LLM performance across varying levels of prompt specificity. We generate multi-level prompts using GPT-4, quantify specificity via perplexity, and assess correctness using GPT-based semantic equivalence. Experiments on 30 novel reasoning tasks across GPT-4 and O3-mini reveal that specificity improves accuracy, especially for smaller models and procedural tasks. Our results highlight the need for adaptive prompting strategies and provide tools and data to support further research.