Correct model interpretation in high-stakes settings is critical, yet both post-hoc feature attribution methods and so-called intrinsically interpretable models can systematically attribute false-positive importance to non-informative features such as suppressor variables. Specifically, both linear models and their powerful nonlinear generalisation such as General Additive Models (GAMs) are susceptible to spurious attributions to suppressors. We present a principled generalisation of activation patterns - originally developed to make linear models interpretable - to additive models, correctly rejecting suppressor effects for non-linear features. This yields PatternGAM, an importance attribution method based on univariate generative surrogate models for the broad family of additive models, and PatternQLR for polynomial models. Empirical evaluations on the XAI-TRIS benchmark with a novel false-negative invariant formulation of the earth mover's distance accuracy metric demonstrates significant improvements over popular feature attribution methods and the traditional interpretation of additive models. Finally, real-world case studies on the COMPAS and MIMIC-IV datasets provide new insights into the role of specific features by disentangling genuine target-related information from suppression effects that would mislead conventional GAM interpretations.

Despite the promising potential of large language model (LLM) based register-transfer-level (RTL) code generation, the overall success rate remains unsatisfactory. Errors arise from various factors, with limited understanding of specific failure causes hindering improvement. To address this, we conduct a comprehensive error analysis and manual categorization. Our findings reveal that most errors stem not from LLM reasoning limitations, but from insufficient RTL programming knowledge, poor understanding of circuit concepts, ambiguous design descriptions, or misinterpretation of complex multimodal inputs. Leveraging in-context learning, we propose targeted error correction techniques. Specifically, we construct a domain-specific knowledge base and employ retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to supply necessary RTL knowledge. To mitigate ambiguity errors, we introduce design description rules and implement a rule-checking mechanism. For multimodal misinterpretation, we integrate external tools to convert inputs into LLM-compatible meta-formats. For remaining errors, we adopt an iterative debugging loop (simulation-error localization-correction). Integrating these techniques into an LLM-based framework significantly improves performance. We incorporate these error correction techniques into a foundational LLM-based RTL code generation framework, resulting in significantly improved performance. Experimental results show that our enhanced framework achieves 91.0\% accuracy on the VerilogEval benchmark, surpassing the baseline code generation approach by 32.7\%, demonstrating the effectiveness of our methods.

When exposed to complex queries containing multiple conditions, today's large language models (LLMs) tend to produce responses that only partially satisfy the query while neglecting certain conditions. We therefore introduce the concept of Intent Hallucination. In this phenomenon, LLMs either omit (neglecting to address certain parts) or misinterpret (responding to invented query parts) elements of the given query, leading to intent hallucinated generation. To systematically evaluate intent hallucination, we introduce FAITHQA, a novel benchmark for intent hallucination that contains 20,068 problems, covering both query-only and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) setups with varying topics and difficulty. FAITHQA is the first hallucination benchmark that goes beyond factual verification, tailored to identify the fundamental cause of intent hallucination. By evaluating various LLMs on FAITHQA, we find that (1) intent hallucination is a common issue even for state-of-the-art models, and (2) the phenomenon stems from omission or misinterpretation of LLMs. To facilitate future research, we introduce an automatic LLM generation evaluation metric, CONSTRAINT SCORE, for detecting intent hallucination. Human evaluation results demonstrate that CONSTRAINT SCORE is closer to human performance for intent hallucination compared to baselines.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performances in tasks related to coreference resolution. However, previous studies mostly assessed LLM performance on coreference resolution with nouns and third person pronouns. This study evaluates LLM performance on coreference resolution with indexical like I, you, here and tomorrow, which come with unique challenges due to their linguistic properties. We present the first study examining how LLMs interpret indexicals in English, releasing the English Indexical Dataset with 1600 multiple-choice questions. We evaluate pioneering LLMs, including GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 1.5 Pro, and DeepSeek V3. Our results reveal that LLMs exhibit an impressive performance with some indexicals (I), while struggling with others (you, here, tomorrow), and that syntactic cues (e.g. quotation) contribute to LLM performance with some indexicals, while they reduce performance with others. Code and data are available at: https://github.com/metehanoguzz/LLMs-Indexicals-English.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly evaluated on multiple-choice question answering (MCQA) tasks using *first-token probability* (FTP), which selects the answer option whose initial token has the highest likelihood. While efficient, FTP can be fragile: models may assign high probability to unrelated tokens (*misalignment*) or use a valid token merely as part of a generic preamble rather than as a clear answer choice (*misinterpretation*), undermining the reliability of symbolic evaluation. We propose a simple solution: the *prefilling attack*, a structured natural-language prefix (e.g., "*The correct option is:*") prepended to the model output. Originally explored in AI safety, we repurpose prefilling to steer the model to respond with a clean, valid option, without modifying its parameters. Empirically, the FTP with prefilling strategy substantially improves accuracy, calibration, and output consistency across a broad set of LLMs and MCQA benchmarks. It outperforms standard FTP and often matches the performance of open-ended generation approaches that require full decoding and external classifiers, while being significantly more efficient. Our findings suggest that prefilling is a simple, robust, and low-cost method to enhance the reliability of FTP-based evaluation in multiple-choice settings.

Reasoning abilities of LLMs have been a key focus in recent years. One challenging reasoning domain with interesting nuances is legal reasoning, which requires careful application of rules, and precedents while balancing deductive and analogical reasoning, and conflicts between rules. Although there have been a few works on using LLMs for legal reasoning, their focus has been on overall accuracy. In this paper, we dig deeper to do a step-by-step analysis and figure out where they commit errors. We use the college-level Multiple Choice Question-Answering (MCQA) task from the \textit{Civil Procedure} dataset and propose a new error taxonomy derived from initial manual analysis of reasoning chains with respect to several LLMs, including two objective measures: soundness and correctness scores. We then develop an LLM-based automated evaluation framework to identify reasoning errors and evaluate the performance of LLMs. The computation of soundness and correctness on the dataset using the auto-evaluator framework reveals several interesting insights. Furthermore, we show that incorporating the error taxonomy as feedback in popular prompting techniques marginally increases LLM performance. Our work will also serve as an evaluation framework that can be used in detailed error analysis of reasoning chains for logic-intensive complex tasks.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across various domains. Math Word Problems (MWPs) serve as a crucial benchmark for evaluating LLMs' reasoning abilities. While most research primarily focuses on improving accuracy, it often neglects understanding and addressing the underlying patterns of errors. Current error classification methods rely on static and predefined categories, which limit their ability to capture the full spectrum of error patterns in mathematical reasoning. To enable systematic error analysis, we collect error samples from 15 different LLMs of varying sizes across four distinct MWP datasets using multiple sampling strategies. Based on this extensive collection, we introduce MWPES-300K, a comprehensive dataset containing 304,865 error samples that cover diverse error patterns and reasoning paths. To reduce human bias and enable fine-grained analysis of error patterns, we propose a novel framework for automated dynamic error classification in mathematical reasoning. Experimental results demonstrate that dataset characteristics significantly shape error patterns, which evolve from basic to complex manifestations as model capabilities increase. With deeper insights into error patterns, we propose error-aware prompting that incorporates common error patterns as explicit guidance, leading to significant improvements in mathematical reasoning performance.

The rapid development of vision language models (VLMs) demands rigorous and reliable evaluation. However, current visual question answering (VQA) benchmarks often depend on open-ended questions, making accurate evaluation difficult due to the variability in natural language responses. To address this, we introduce AutoConverter, an agentic framework that automatically converts these open-ended questions into multiple-choice format, enabling objective evaluation while reducing the costly question creation process. Our experiments demonstrate that AutoConverter can generate correct and challenging multiple-choice questions, with VLMs demonstrating consistently similar or lower accuracy on these questions compared to human-created ones. Using AutoConverter, we construct VMCBench, a benchmark created by transforming 20 existing VQA datasets into a unified multiple-choice format, totaling 9,018 questions. We comprehensively evaluate 33 state-of-the-art VLMs on VMCBench, setting a new standard for scalable, consistent, and reproducible VLM evaluation.

In reading garden-path sentences, people must resolve competing interpretations, though initial misinterpretations can linger despite reanalysis. This study examines the role of inhibitory control (IC) in managing these misinterpretations among Chinese-English bilinguals. Using self-paced reading tasks, we investigated how IC influences recovery from garden-path sentences in Chinese (L1) and its interaction with language proficiency during English (L2) processing. Results indicate that IC does not affect garden-path recovery in Chinese, suggesting reliance on semantic context may reduce the need for IC. In contrast, findings for English L2 learners reveal a complex relationship between language proficiency and IC: Participants with low L2 proficiency but high IC showed lingering misinterpretations, while those with high proficiency exhibited none. These results support and extend the Model of Cognitive Control (Ness et al., 2023). Moreover, our comparison of three Stroop task versions identifies L1 colour-word Stroop task as the preferred measure of IC in bilingual research.

Recent text-to-image diffusion models leverage cross-attention layers, which have been effectively utilized to enhance a range of visual generative tasks. However, our understanding of cross-attention layers remains somewhat limited. In this study, we present a method for constructing Head Relevance Vectors (HRVs) that align with useful visual concepts. An HRV for a given visual concept is a vector with a length equal to the total number of cross-attention heads, where each element represents the importance of the corresponding head for the given visual concept. We develop and employ an ordered weakening analysis to demonstrate the effectiveness of HRVs as interpretable features. To demonstrate the utility of HRVs, we propose concept strengthening and concept adjusting methods and apply them to enhance three visual generative tasks. We show that misinterpretations of polysemous words in image generation can be corrected in most cases, five challenging attributes in image editing can be successfully modified, and catastrophic neglect in multi-concept generation can be mitigated. Overall, our work provides an advancement in understanding cross-attention layers and introduces new approaches for fine-controlling these layers at the head level.