Segmentation, the task of delineating and isolating distinct objects, is a fundamental problem in computer vision. Much of the current approaches are supervised, relying on expensive manual annotations.

Machine learning (ML) models have been widely used to make predictions.

Despite their remarkable successes, state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs), including vision-and-language models (VLMs) and unimodal language models (ULMs), fail to understand precise semantics. For example, semantically equivalent sentences expressed using different lexical compositions elicit diverging representations. The degree of this divergence and its impact on encoded semantics is not very well understood. In this paper, we introduce the SUGARCREPE++ dataset to analyze the sensitivity of VLMs and ULMs to lexical and semantic alterations. Each sample in SUGARCREPE++ dataset consists of an image and a corresponding triplet of captions: a pair of semantically equivalent but lexically different positive captions and one hard negative caption.

Large language models (LLMs) are integrated into applications like shopping reviews, summarization, or medical diagnosis support, where their use affects human decisions. We investigate the extent to which LLMs expose users to biased content and demonstrate its effect on human decision-making. We assess five LLM families in summarization and news fact-checking tasks, evaluating the consistency of LLMs with their context and their tendency to hallucinate on a new self-updating dataset. Our findings show that LLMs expose users to content that changes the context's sentiment in 26.42% of cases (framing bias), hallucinate on 60.33% of post-knowledge-cutoff questions, and highlight context from earlier parts of the prompt (primacy bias) in 10.12% of cases, averaged across all tested models. We further find that humans are 32% more likely to purchase the same product after reading a summary of the review generated by an LLM rather than the original review. To address these issues, we evaluate 18 mitigation methods across three LLM families and find the effectiveness of targeted interventions.

Real-world conversations are rich with pragmatic elements, such as entity mentions, references, and implicatures. Understanding such nuances is a requirement for successful natural communication, and often requires building a local world model which encodes such elements and captures the dynamics of their evolving states. However, it is not well-understood whether language models (LMs) construct or maintain a robust implicit representation of conversations. In this work, we evaluate the ability of LMs to encode and update their internal world model in dyadic conversations and test their malleability under linguistic alterations. To facilitate this, we apply seven minimal linguistic alterations to conversations sourced from popular datasets and construct two benchmarks comprising yes-no questions. We evaluate a wide range of open and closed source LMs and observe that they struggle to maintain robust accuracy. Our analysis unveils that LMs struggle to memorize crucial details, such as tracking entities under linguistic alterations to conversations. We then propose a dual-perspective interpretability framework which identifies transformer layers that are useful or harmful and highlights linguistic alterations most influenced by harmful layers, typically due to encoding spurious signals or relying on shortcuts. Inspired by these insights, we propose two layer-regularization based fine-tuning strategies that suppress the effect of the harmful layers.

Machine learning (ML) has achieved remarkable success in prediction tasks.

Segmentation, the task of delineating and isolating distinct objects, is a fundamental problem in computer vision. Much of the current approaches are supervised, relying on expensive manual annotations.

Accurate fetal brain segmentation is crucial for extracting biomarkers and assessing neurodevelopment, especially in conditions such as corpus callosum dysgenesis (CCD), which can induce drastic anatomical changes. However, the rarity of CCD severely limits annotated data, hindering the generalization of deep learning models. To address this, we propose a pathology-informed domain randomization strategy that embeds prior knowledge of CCD manifestations into a synthetic data generation pipeline. By simulating diverse brain alterations from healthy data alone, our approach enables robust segmentation without requiring pathological annotations. We validate our method on a cohort comprising 248 healthy fetuses, 26 with CCD, and 47 with other brain pathologies, achieving substantial improvements on CCD cases while maintaining performance on both healthy fetuses and those with other pathologies. From the predicted segmentations, we derive clinically relevant biomarkers, such as corpus callosum length (LCC) and volume, and show their utility in distinguishing CCD subtypes. Our pathology-informed augmentation reduces the LCC estimation error from 1.89 mm to 0.80 mm in healthy cases and from 10.9 mm to 0.7 mm in CCD cases. Beyond these quantitative gains, our approach yields segmentations with improved topological consistency relative to available ground truth, enabling more reliable shape-based analyses. Overall, this work demonstrates that incorporating domain-specific anatomical priors into synthetic data pipelines can effectively mitigate data scarcity and enhance analysis of rare but clinically significant malformations.