Traffic Signal Control (TSC) involves a challenging trade-off: classic heuristics are efficient but oversimplified, while Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) achieves high performance yet suffers from poor generalization and opaque policies. Online Large Language Models (LLMs) provide general reasoning but incur high latency and lack environment-specific optimization. To address these issues, we propose Temporal Policy Evolution for Traffic (\textbf{\method{}}), which uses LLMs as an evolution engine to derive specialized heuristic policies. The framework introduces two key modules: (1) Structured State Abstraction (SSA), converting high-dimensional traffic data into temporal-logical facts for reasoning; and (2) Credit Assignment Feedback (CAF), tracing flawed micro-decisions to poor macro-outcomes for targeted critique. Operating entirely at the prompt level without training, \method{} yields lightweight, robust policies optimized for specific traffic environments, outperforming both heuristics and online LLM actors.

CAF introduces acceleration as an additional learnable variable, allowing for more expressive and accurate estimation of the ODE flow.

After the seminal work of [1], the argumentation community's focus has shifted to the relation between arguments, abstracting the content of the arguments. Thus, debates or discussions are represented as directed graphs, with arguments as nodes and attacks between arguments as directed edges. Several extension-based semantics have been defined to obtain conclusions from argumentation graphs. Such semantics identify subsets of arguments (called extensions), representing consistent conclusions [2, 3, 4]. Motivated by the work of [5], researchers started to focus on semantics which could give a more gradual view on arguments' acceptability by ranking them from the "less attacked" to the most (not necessarily based on the cardinality or quality of the attackers) [6].

Large Language Models (LLMs) are capable of generating persuasive Natural Language Explanations (NLEs) to justify their answers. However, the faithfulness of these explanations should not be readily trusted at face value. Recent studies have proposed various methods to measure the faithfulness of NLEs, typically by inserting perturbations at the explanation or feature level. We argue that these approaches are neither comprehensive nor correctly designed according to the established definition of faithfulness. Moreover, we highlight the risks of grounding faithfulness findings on out-of-distribution samples. In this work, we leverage a causal mediation technique called activation patching, to measure the faithfulness of an explanation towards supporting the explained answer. Our proposed metric, Causal Faithfulness quantifies the consistency of causal attributions between explanations and the corresponding model outputs as the indicator of faithfulness. We experimented across models varying from 2B to 27B parameters and found that models that underwent alignment tuning tend to produce more faithful and plausible explanations. We find that Causal Faithfulness is a promising improvement over existing faithfulness tests by taking into account the model's internal computations and avoiding out of distribution concerns that could otherwise undermine the validity of faithfulness assessments. We release the code in \url{https://github.com/wj210/Causal-Faithfulness}

Rectified flow and reflow procedures have significantly advanced fast generation by progressively straightening ordinary differential equation (ODE) flows. They operate under the assumption that image and noise pairs, known as couplings, can be approximated by straight trajectories with constant velocity. However, we observe that modeling with constant velocity and using reflow procedures have limitations in accurately learning straight trajectories between pairs, resulting in suboptimal performance in few-step generation. To address these limitations, we introduce Constant Acceleration Flow (CAF), a novel framework based on a simple constant acceleration equation. CAF introduces acceleration as an additional learnable variable, allowing for more expressive and accurate estimation of the ODE flow. Moreover, we propose two techniques to further improve estimation accuracy: initial velocity conditioning for the acceleration model and a reflow process for the initial velocity. Our comprehensive studies on toy datasets, CIFAR-10, and ImageNet 64 64 demonstrate that CAF outperforms state-of-the-art baselines for one-step generation. We also show that CAF dramatically improves few-step coupling preservation and inversion over Rectified flow. Code is available at https://github.com/mlvlab/CAF.

Abstract argumentation is a popular toolkit for modeling, evaluating, and comparing arguments. Relationships between arguments are specified in argumentation frameworks (AFs), and conditions are placed on sets (extensions) of arguments that allow AFs to be evaluated. For more expressiveness, AFs are augmented with \emph{acceptance conditions} on directly interacting arguments or a constraint on the admissible sets of arguments, resulting in dialectic frameworks or constrained argumentation frameworks. In this paper, we consider flexible conditions for \emph{rejecting} an argument from an extension, which we call rejection conditions (RCs). On the technical level, we associate each argument with a specific logic program. We analyze the resulting complexity, including the structural parameter treewidth. Rejection AFs are highly expressive, giving rise to natural problems on higher levels of the polynomial hierarchy.

Randomized smoothing has become a leading method for achieving certified robustness in deep classifiers against l_{p}-norm adversarial perturbations. Current approaches for achieving certified robustness, such as data augmentation with Gaussian noise and adversarial training, require expensive training procedures that tune large models for different Gaussian noise levels and thus cannot leverage high-performance pre-trained neural networks. In this work, we introduce a novel certifying adapters framework (CAF) that enables and enhances the certification of classifier adversarial robustness. Our approach makes few assumptions about the underlying training algorithm or feature extractor and is thus broadly applicable to different feature extractor architectures (e.g., convolutional neural networks or vision transformers) and smoothing algorithms. We show that CAF (a) enables certification in uncertified models pre-trained on clean datasets and (b) substantially improves the performance of certified classifiers via randomized smoothing and SmoothAdv at multiple radii in CIFAR-10 and ImageNet. We demonstrate that CAF achieves improved certified accuracies when compared to methods based on random or denoised smoothing, and that CAF is insensitive to certifying adapter hyperparameters. Finally, we show that an ensemble of adapters enables a single pre-trained feature extractor to defend against a range of noise perturbation scales.

Graph neural networks have shown great ability in representation (GNNs) learning on graphs, facilitating various tasks. Despite their great performance in modeling graphs, recent works show that GNNs tend to inherit and amplify the bias from training data, causing concerns of the adoption of GNNs in high-stake scenarios. Hence, many efforts have been taken for fairness-aware GNNs. However, most existing fair GNNs learn fair node representations by adopting statistical fairness notions, which may fail to alleviate bias in the presence of statistical anomalies. Motivated by causal theory, there are several attempts utilizing graph counterfactual fairness to mitigate root causes of unfairness. However, these methods suffer from non-realistic counterfactuals obtained by perturbation or generation. In this paper, we take a causal view on fair graph learning problem. Guided by the casual analysis, we propose a novel framework CAF, which can select counterfactuals from training data to avoid non-realistic counterfactuals and adopt selected counterfactuals to learn fair node representations for node classification task. Extensive experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets show the effectiveness of CAF. Our code is available at https://github.com/TimeLovercc/CAF-GNN.

A common feature of non-monotonic logics is that the classical notion of equivalence does not preserve the intended meaning in light of additional information. Consequently, the term strong equivalence was coined in the literature and thoroughly investigated. In the present paper, the knowledge representation formalism under consideration is claim-augmented argumentation frameworks (CAFs) which provide a formal basis to analyze conclusion-oriented problems in argumentation by adapting a claim-focused perspective. CAFs extend Dung AFs by associating a claim to each argument representing its conclusion. In this paper, we investigate both ordinary and strong equivalence in CAFs. Thereby, we take the fact into account that one might either be interested in the actual arguments or their claims only. The former point of view naturally yields an extension of strong equivalence for AFs to the claim-based setting while the latter gives rise to a novel equivalence notion which is genuine for CAFs. We tailor, examine and compare these notions and obtain a comprehensive study of this matter for CAFs. We conclude by investigating the computational complexity of naturally arising decision problems.