Large language model-powered chatbots have transformed how people seek information, especially in high-stakes contexts like mental health. Despite their support capabilities, safe detection and response to crises such as suicidal ideation and self-harm are still unclear, hindered by the lack of unified crisis taxonomies and clinical evaluation standards. We address this by creating: (1) a taxonomy of six crisis categories; (2) a dataset of over 2,000 inputs from 12 mental health datasets, classified into these categories; and (3) a clinical response assessment protocol. We also use LLMs to identify crisis inputs and audit five models for response safety and appropriateness. First, we built a clinical-informed crisis taxonomy and evaluation protocol. Next, we curated 2,252 relevant examples from over 239,000 user inputs, then tested three LLMs for automatic classification. In addition, we evaluated five models for the appropriateness of their responses to a user's crisis, graded on a 5-point Likert scale from harmful (1) to appropriate (5). While some models respond reliably to explicit crises, risks still exist. Many outputs, especially in self-harm and suicidal categories, are inappropriate or unsafe. Different models perform variably; some, like gpt-5-nano and deepseek-v3.2-exp, have low harm rates, but others, such as gpt-4o-mini and grok-4-fast, generate more unsafe responses. All models struggle with indirect signals, default replies, and context misalignment. These results highlight the urgent need for better safeguards, crisis detection, and context-aware responses in LLMs. They also show that alignment and safety practices, beyond scale, are crucial for reliable crisis support. Our taxonomy, datasets, and evaluation methods support ongoing AI mental health research, aiming to reduce harm and protect vulnerable users.

Human-AI collaboration outcomes depend strongly on human self-confidence calibration, which drives reliance or resistance toward AI's suggestions. This work presents two studies examining whether calibration of self-confidence before decision tasks, low versus high levels of Need for Cognition (NFC), and Actively Open-Minded Thinking (AOT), leads to differences in decision accuracy, self-confidence appropriateness during the tasks, and metacognitive perceptions (global and affective). The first study presents strategies to identify well-calibrated users, also comparing decision accuracy and the appropriateness of self-confidence across NFC and AOT levels. The second study investigates the effects of calibrated self-confidence in AI-assisted decision-making (no AI, two-stage AI, and personalized AI), also considering different NFC and AOT levels. Our results show the importance of human self-confidence calibration and psychological traits when designing AI-assisted decision systems. We further propose design recommendations to address the challenge of calibrating self-confidence and supporting tailored, user-centric AI that accounts for individual traits.

Unplanned extubation (UE)--the unintended removal of an airway tube--remains a critical patient safety concern in intensive care units (ICUs), often leading to severe complications or death. Real-time UE detection has been limited, largely due to the ethical and privacy challenges of obtaining annotated ICU video data. We propose Augmented Unplanned Removal Alert (AURA), a vision-based risk detection system developed and validated entirely on a fully synthetic video dataset. By leveraging text-to-video diffusion, we generated diverse and clinically realistic ICU scenarios capturing a range of patient behaviors and care contexts. The system applies pose estimation to identify two high-risk movement patterns: collision, defined as hand entry into spatial zones near airway tubes, and agitation, quantified by the velocity of tracked anatomical keypoints. Expert assessments confirmed the realism of the synthetic data, and performance evaluations showed high accuracy for collision detection and moderate performance for agitation recognition. This work demonstrates a novel pathway for developing privacy-preserving, reproducible patient safety monitoring systems with potential for deployment in intensive care settings.

Clinical vignettes are essential educational tools in speech-language pathology (SLP), but manual creation is time-intensive. While general-purpose large language models (LLMs) can generate text, they lack domain-specific knowledge, leading to hallucinations and requiring extensive expert revision. This study presents a proof-of-concept system integrating retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) with curated knowledge bases to generate pediatric SLP case materials. A multi-model RAG-based system was prototyped integrating curated domain knowledge with engineered prompt templates, supporting five commercial (GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 2.5 Pro) and open-source (Llama 3.2, Qwen 2.5-7B) LLMs. Seven test scenarios spanning diverse disorder types and grade levels were systematically designed. Generated cases underwent automated quality assessment using a multi-dimensional rubric evaluating structural completeness, internal consistency, clinical appropriateness, and IEP goal/session note quality. This proof-of-concept demonstrates technical feasibility for RAG-augmented generation of pediatric SLP vignettes. Commercial models showed marginal quality advantages, but open-source alternatives achieved acceptable performance, suggesting potential for privacy-preserving institutional deployment. Integration of curated knowledge bases enabled content generation aligned with professional guidelines. Extensive validation through expert review, student pilot testing, and psychometric evaluation is required before educational or research implementation. Future applications may extend to clinical decision support, automated IEP goal generation, and clinical reflection training.

Conversational AI is constrained in many real-world settings where only one side of a dialogue can be recorded, such as telemedicine, call centers, and smart glasses. We formalize this as the one-sided conversation problem (1SC): inferring and learning from one side of a conversation. We study two tasks: (1) reconstructing the missing speaker's turns for real-time use cases, and (2) generating summaries from one-sided transcripts. Evaluating prompting and finetuned models on MultiWOZ, DailyDialog, and Candor with both human A/B testing and LLM-as-a-judge metrics, we find that access to one future turn and information about utterance length improves reconstruction, placeholder prompting helps to mitigate hallucination, and while large models generate promising reconstructions with prompting, smaller models require finetuning. Further, high-quality summaries can be generated without reconstructing missing turns. We present 1SC as a novel challenge and report promising results that mark a step toward privacy-aware conversational AI.

Role-play has become a key testbed for generative models, expanding from text-only dialogue to multimodal interaction. Extending role-play to speech captures prosody, emotion, and delivery, but also poses new evaluation challenges. Current pipelines often use audio large language models (ALLMs) as zero-shot judges, which miss paralinguistic cues, collapse multiple aspects into coarse scores, and rely on synthetic speech references that fail to reflect real-world roles. We present Speech-DRAME, a unified framework that contributes at three levels: (i) Speech-DRAME-EvalBench, an evaluation benchmark with bilingual human-annotated data and protocols for training and testing speech evaluation models (SEMs), (ii) DRAME-Eval, a fine-tuned evaluation model, which substantially outperforms zero-shot and few-shot ALLMs, and (iii) Speech-DRAME-RoleBench, a speech role-play benchmark that leverages DRAME-Eval as an automatic judge to compare speech foundation models (SFMs). Speech-DRAME distinguishes between two complementary evaluation strategies: Archetype Evaluation, a top-down approach measuring adherence to broad role archetypes, and Realism Evaluation, a bottom-up approach grounded in real human speech that emphasizes nuanced role quality. Compared to zero-shot ALLM judges, DRAME-Eval achieves stronger agreement with human ratings (Pearson correlation from 0.480 to 0.629 in archetypes, and 0.390 to 0.625 in realism). By integrating transparent benchmark resources, modeling approaches, and system-level evaluation, Speech-DRAME provides the first comprehensive, reproducible foundation for assessing spoken role-play.

The emergence of agentic Artificial Intelligence (AI) is set to trigger a "Cambrian explosion" of new kinds of personhood. This paper proposes a pragmatic framework for navigating this diversification by treating personhood not as a metaphysical property to be discovered, but as a flexible bundle of obligations (rights and responsibilities) that societies confer upon entities for a variety of reasons, especially to solve concrete governance problems. We argue that this traditional bundle can be unbundled, creating bespoke solutions for different contexts. This will allow for the creation of practical tools -- such as facilitating AI contracting by creating a target "individual" that can be sanctioned -- without needing to resolve intractable debates about an AI's consciousness or rationality. We explore how individuals fit in to social roles and discuss the use of decentralized digital identity technology, examining both "personhood as a problem", where design choices can create "dark patterns" that exploit human social heuristics, and "personhood as a solution", where conferring a bundle of obligations is necessary to ensure accountability or prevent conflict. By rejecting foundationalist quests for a single, essential definition of personhood, this paper offers a more pragmatic and flexible way to think about integrating AI agents into our society.

The deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) in embodied agents creates an urgent need to measure their privacy awareness in the physical world. Existing evaluation methods, however, are confined to natural language based scenarios. To bridge this gap, we introduce EAPrivacy, a comprehensive evaluation benchmark designed to quantify the physical-world privacy awareness of LLM-powered agents. EAPrivacy utilizes procedurally generated scenarios across four tiers to test an agent's ability to handle sensitive objects, adapt to changing environments, balance task execution with privacy constraints, and resolve conflicts with social norms. Our measurements reveal a critical deficit in current models. The top-performing model, Gemini 2.5 Pro, achieved only 59\% accuracy in scenarios involving changing physical environments. Furthermore, when a task was accompanied by a privacy request, models prioritized completion over the constraint in up to 86\% of cases. In high-stakes situations pitting privacy against critical social norms, leading models like GPT-4o and Claude-3.5-haiku disregarded the social norm over 15\% of the time. These findings, demonstrated by our benchmark, underscore a fundamental misalignment in LLMs regarding physically grounded privacy and establish the need for more robust, physically-aware alignment. Codes and datasets will be available at https://github.com/Graph-COM/EAPrivacy.