Online learning to rank (OLTR) plays a critical role in information retrieval and machine learning systems, with a wide range of applications in search engines and content recommenders. However, despite their extensive adoption, the susceptibility of OLTR algorithms to coordinated adversarial attacks remains poorly understood. In this work, we present a novel framework for attacking some of the widely used OLTR algorithms. Our framework is designed to promote a set of target items so that they appear in the list of top-K recommendations for T - o(T) rounds, while simultaneously inducing linear regret in the learning algorithm. We propose two novel attack strategies: CascadeOFA for CascadeUCB1 and PBMOFA for PBM-UCB . We provide theoretical guarantees showing that both strategies require only O(log T) manipulations to succeed. Additionally, we supplement our theoretical analysis with empirical results on real-world data.

In this paper, we address this gap by dividing a typical patient's clinical journey

We thank the reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions. We respond to each point individually. R1: More description to highlight the unique contribution. We will add the missing references in "Related Work" and explain the difference with them in the revision. ML 2015] uses the mini-batch strategy to optimize the metric matrix in the positive semidefinite cone.

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has high sensitivity for breast cancer detection, but interpretation is time-consuming. Artificial intelligence may aid in pre-screening. Purpose: To evaluate the DINOv2-based Medical Slice Transformer (MST) for ruling out significant findings (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] >=4) in contrast-enhanced and non-contrast-enhanced abbreviated breast MRI. Materials and Methods: This institutional review board approved retrospective study included 1,847 single-breast MRI examinations (377 BI-RADS >=4) from an in-house dataset and 924 from an external validation dataset (Duke). Four abbreviated protocols were tested: T1-weighted early subtraction (T1sub), diffusion-weighted imaging with b=1500 s/mm2 (DWI1500), DWI1500+T2-weighted (T2w), and T1sub+T2w. Performance was assessed at 90%, 95%, and 97.5% sensitivity using five-fold cross-validation and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis. AUC differences were compared with the DeLong test. False negatives were characterized, and attention maps of true positives were rated in the external dataset. Results: A total of 1,448 female patients (mean age, 49 +/- 12 years) were included. T1sub+T2w achieved an AUC of 0.77 +/- 0.04; DWI1500+T2w, 0.74 +/- 0.04 (p=0.15). At 97.5% sensitivity, T1sub+T2w had the highest specificity (19% +/- 7%), followed by DWI1500+T2w (17% +/- 11%). Missed lesions had a mean diameter <10 mm at 95% and 97.5% thresholds for both T1sub and DWI1500, predominantly non-mass enhancements. External validation yielded an AUC of 0.77, with 88% of attention maps rated good or moderate. Conclusion: At 97.5% sensitivity, the MST framework correctly triaged cases without BI-RADS >=4, achieving 19% specificity for contrast-enhanced and 17% for non-contrast-enhanced MRI. Further research is warranted before clinical implementation.

The advancement of artificial intelligence in oral healthcare relies on the availability of large-scale multimodal datasets that capture the complexity of clinical practice. In this paper, we present a comprehensive multimodal dataset, comprising 8775 dental checkups from 4800 patients collected over eight years (2018-2025), with patients ranging from 10 to 90 years of age. The dataset includes 50000 intraoral images, 8056 radiographs, and detailed textual records, including diagnoses, treatment plans, and follow-up notes. The data were collected under standard ethical guidelines and annotated for benchmarking. To demonstrate its utility, we fine-tuned state-of-the-art large vision-language models, Qwen-VL 3B and 7B, and evaluated them on two tasks: classification of six oro-dental anomalies and generation of complete diagnostic reports from multimodal inputs. We compared the fine-tuned models with their base counterparts and GPT-4o. The fine-tuned models achieved substantial gains over these baselines, validating the dataset and underscoring its effectiveness in advancing AI-driven oro-dental healthcare solutions. The dataset is publicly available, providing an essential resource for future research in AI dentistry.

This study evaluates a 40-item mathematics placement examination administered to 198 students using a multi-method framework combining Classical Test Theory, machine learning, and unsupervised clustering. Classical Test Theory analysis reveals that 55\% of items achieve excellent discrimination ($D \geq 0.40$) while 30\% demonstrate poor discrimination ($D < 0.20$) requiring replacement. Question 6 (Graph Interpretation) emerges as the examination's most powerful discriminator, achieving perfect discrimination ($D = 1.000$), highest ANOVA F-statistic ($F = 4609.1$), and maximum Random Forest feature importance (0.206), accounting for 20.6\% of predictive power. Machine learning algorithms demonstrate exceptional performance, with Random Forest and Gradient Boosting achieving 97.5\% and 96.0\% cross-validation accuracy. K-means clustering identifies a natural binary competency structure with a boundary at 42.5\%, diverging from the institutional threshold of 55\% and suggesting potential overclassification into remedial categories. The two-cluster solution exhibits exceptional stability (bootstrap ARI = 0.855) with perfect lower-cluster purity. Convergent evidence across methods supports specific refinements: replace poorly discriminating items, implement a two-stage assessment, and integrate Random Forest predictions with transparency mechanisms. These findings demonstrate that multi-method integration provides a robust empirical foundation for evidence-based mathematics placement optimization.

The debate over whether "thinking machines" could replace human intellectual labor has existed in both public and expert discussions since the mid-twentieth century, when the concept and terminology of Artificial Intelligence (AI) first emerged. For decades, this idea remained largely theoretical. However, with the recent advent of Generative AI - particularly Large Language Models (LLMs) - and the widespread adoption of tools such as ChatGPT, the issue has become a practical reality. Many fields that rely on human intellectual effort are now being reshaped by AI tools that both expand human capabilities and challenge the necessity of certain forms of work once deemed uniquely human but now easily automated. Education, somewhat unexpectedly, faces a pivotal responsibility: to devise long-term strategies for cultivating human skills that will remain relevant in an era of pervasive AI in the intellectual domain. In this context, we identify the limitations of current AI systems - especially those rooted in LLM technology - argue that the fundamental causes of these weaknesses cannot be resolved through existing methods, and propose directions within the constructivist paradigm for transforming education to preserve the long-term advantages of human intelligence over AI tools.

Patent examination remains an ongoing challenge in the NLP literature even after the advent of large language models (LLMs), as it requires an extensive yet nuanced human judgment on whether a submitted claim meets the statutory standards of novelty and non-obviousness against previously granted claims -- prior art -- in expert domains. Previous NLP studies have approached this challenge as a prediction task (e.g., forecasting grant outcomes) with high-level proxies such as similarity metrics or classifiers trained on historical labels. However, this approach often overlooks the step-by-step evaluations that examiners must make with profound information, including rationales for the decisions provided in office actions documents, which also makes it harder to measure the current state of techniques in patent review processes. To fill this gap, we construct PANORAMA, a dataset of 8,143 U.S. patent examination records that preserves the full decision trails, including original applications, all cited references, Non-Final Rejections, and Notices of Allowance. Also, PANORAMA decomposes the trails into sequential benchmarks that emulate patent professionals' patent review processes and allow researchers to examine large language models' capabilities at each step of them. Our findings indicate that, although LLMs are relatively effective at retrieving relevant prior art and pinpointing the pertinent paragraphs, they struggle to assess the novelty and non-obviousness of patent claims. We discuss these results and argue that advancing NLP, including LLMs, in the patent domain requires a deeper understanding of real-world patent examination. Our dataset is openly available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/LG-AI-Research/PANORAMA.

In this paper, we present a framework for training large language models (LLMs) as diagnostic agents with reinforcement learning, enabling them to manage multi-turn diagnostic processes, adaptively select examinations, and commit to final diagnoses. Unlike instruction-tuned models trained on static case summaries, our method acquires diagnostic strategies through interactive exploration and outcome-based feedback. Our contributions are fourfold: (i) We present DiagGym, a diagnostics world model trained with electronic health records that emits examination outcomes conditioned on patient history and recommended examination, serving as a virtual clinical environment for realistic diagnosis training and evaluation; (ii) We train DiagAgent via end-to-end, multi-turn reinforcement learning to learn diagnostic policies that optimize both information yield and diagnostic accuracy; (iii) We introduce DiagBench, a diagnostic benchmark comprising 750 cases with physician-validated examination recommendations and 99 cases annotated with 973 physician-written rubrics on diagnosis process; (iv) we demonstrate superior performance across diverse diagnostic settings. DiagAgent significantly outperforms 10 state-of-the-art LLMs, including DeepSeek-v3 and GPT-4o, as well as two prompt-engineered agents. In single-turn settings, DiagAgent achieves 9.34% higher diagnostic accuracy and 44.03% improvement in examination recommendation hit ratio. In end-to-end settings, it delivers 15.12% increase in diagnostic accuracy and 23.09% boost in examination recommendation F1 score. In rubric-based evaluation, it surpasses the next-best model, Claude-sonnet-4, by 7.1% in weighted rubric score. These findings indicate that learning policies in interactive clinical environments confers dynamic and clinically meaningful diagnostic management abilities unattainable through passive training alone.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being used in education, yet their correctness alone does not capture the quality, reliability, or pedagogical validity of their problem-solving behavior, especially in mathematics, where multistep logic, symbolic reasoning, and conceptual clarity are critical. Conventional evaluation methods largely focus on final answer accuracy and overlook the reasoning process. To address this gap, we introduce a novel interpretability framework for analyzing LLM-generated solutions using undergraduate calculus problems as a representative domain. Our approach combines reasoning flow extraction and decomposing solutions into semantically labeled operations and concepts with prompt ablation analysis to assess input salience and output stability. Using structured metrics such as reasoning complexity, phrase sensitivity, and robustness, we evaluated the model behavior on real Calculus I to III university exams. Our findings revealed that LLMs often produce syntactically fluent yet conceptually flawed solutions, with reasoning patterns sensitive to prompt phrasing and input variation. This framework enables fine-grained diagnosis of reasoning failures, supports curriculum alignment, and informs the design of interpretable AI-assisted feedback tools. This is the first study to offer a structured, quantitative, and pedagogically grounded framework for interpreting LLM reasoning in mathematics education, laying the foundation for the transparent and responsible deployment of AI in STEM learning environments.