Large language model (LLM) benchmarks inform LLM use decisions (e.g., "is this LLM safe to deploy for my use case and context?"). However, benchmarks may be rendered unreliable by various failure modes that impact benchmark bias, variance, coverage, or people's capacity to understand benchmark evidence. Using the National Institute of Standards and Technology's risk management process as a foundation, this research iteratively analyzed 26 popular benchmarks, identifying 57 potential failure modes and 196 corresponding mitigation strategies. The mitigations reduce failure likelihood and/or severity, providing a frame for evaluating "benchmark risk," which is scored to provide a metaevaluation benchmark: BenchRisk. Higher scores indicate that benchmark users are less likely to reach an incorrect or unsupported conclusion about an LLM. All 26 scored benchmarks present significant risk within one or more of the five scored dimensions (comprehensiveness, intelligibility, consistency, correctness, and longevity), which points to important open research directions for the field of LLM benchmarking. The BenchRisk workflow allows for comparison between benchmarks; as an open-source tool, it also facilitates the identification and sharing of risks and their mitigations.

Large Language Models exhibit logical inconsistency across multi-turn inference processes, undermining correctness in complex inferential tasks. Challenges arise from ensuring that outputs align with both factual correctness and human intent.

The selection of hyperparameters, such as prompt templates in large language models (LLMs), must often strike a balance between reliability and cost. In many cases, structural relationships between the expected reliability levels of the hyperparameters can be inferred from prior information and held-out data - e.g., longer prompt templates may be more detailed and thus more reliable. However, existing hyperparameter selection methods either do not provide formal reliability guarantees or are unable to incorporate structured knowledge in the hyperparameter space. This paper introduces reliability graph-based Pareto testing (RG-PT), a novel multi-objective hyperparameter selection framework that maintains formal reliability guarantees in terms of false discovery rate (FDR), while accounting for known relationships among hyperparameters via a directed acyclic graph. Edges in the graph reflect expected reliability and cost trade-offs among hyperparameters, which are inferred via the Bradley-Terry (BT) ranking model from prior information and held-out data. Experimental evaluations demonstrate that RG-PT significantly outperforms existing methods such as learn-then-test (LTT) and Pareto testing (PT) through a more efficient exploration of the hyperparameter space.

Knowledge graph-based retrieval-augmented generation seeks to mitigate hallucinations in Large Language Models (LLMs) caused by insufficient or outdated knowledge. However, existing methods often fail to fully exploit the prior knowledge embedded in knowledge graphs (KGs), particularly their structural information and explicit or implicit constraints. The former can enhance the faithfulness of LLMs' reasoning, while the latter can improve the reliability of response generations. Motivated by these, we propose a trustworthy reasoning framework, termed Deliberation over Priors (\texttt{DP}), which sufficiently utilizes the priors contained in KGs. Specifically, \texttt{DP} adopts a progressive knowledge distillation strategy that integrates structural priors into LLMs through a combination of supervised fine-tuning and Kahneman-Tversky Optimization, thereby improving the faithfulness of relation path generation. Furthermore, our framework employs a reasoning-introspection strategy, which guides LLMs to perform refined reasoning verification based on extracted constraint priors, ensuring the reliability of response generation. Extensive experiments on three benchmark datasets demonstrate that \texttt{DP} achieves new state-of-the-art performance, especially a H@1 improvement of 13% on the ComplexWebQuestions dataset, and generates highly trustworthy responses. We also conduct various analyses to verify its flexibility and practicality.

The increase in computing power and the necessity of AI-assisted decision-making boost the growing application of large language models (LLMs). Along with this, the potential retention of sensitive data of LLMs has spurred increasing research into machine unlearning. However, existing unlearning approaches face a critical dilemma: Aggressive unlearning compromises model utility, while conservative strategies preserve utility but risk hallucinated responses. This significantly limits LLMs' reliability in knowledge-intensive applications. To address this, we introduce a novel Attention-Shifting (AS) framework for selective unlearning.

GNNs have achieved remarkable performance across a range of tasks, but their reliability under distribution shifts remains a significant challenge. In particular, energy-based OOD detection methods--which compute energy scores from GNN logits--suffer from unstable performance due to a fundamental coupling between the norm and direction of node embeddings. Our analysis reveals that this coupling leads to systematic misclassification of high-norm OOD samples and hinders reliable ID-OOD separation. Interestingly, GNNs also exhibit a desirable inductive bias known as angular clustering, where embeddings of the same class align in direction. Motivated by these observations, we propose GeoEnergy (Geometric Logit Decoupling for Energy-Based OOD Detection), a plug-and-play framework that enforces hyperspherical logit geometry by normalizing class weights while preserving embedding norms. This decoupling yields more structured energy distributions, sharper intra-class alignment, and improved calibration. GeoEnergy can be integrated into existing energy-based GNNs without retraining or architectural modification. Extensive experiments demonstrate that GeoEnergy consistently improves OOD detection performance and confidence reliability across various benchmarks and distribution shifts.

Multimodal recommendation aims to integrate collaborative signals with heterogeneous content such as visual and textual information, but remains challenged by modality-specific noise, semantic inconsistency, and unstable propagation over user-item graphs. These issues are often exacerbated by naive fusion or shallow modeling strategies, leading to degraded generalization and poor robustness. While recent work has explored the frequency domain as a lens to separate stable from noisy signals, most methods rely on static filtering or reweighting, lacking the ability to reason over spectral structure or adapt to modality-specific reliability. To address these challenges, we propose a Structured Spectral Reasoning (SSR) framework for frequency-aware multimodal recommendation. Our method follows a four-stage pipeline: (i) Decompose graph-based multimodal signals into spectral bands via graph-guided transformations to isolate semantic granularity; (ii) Modulate band-level reliability with spectral band masking, a training-time masking with representation-consistency objective that suppresses brittle frequency components; (iii) Fuse complementary frequency cues using hyperspectral reasoning with low-rank cross-band interaction; and (iv) Align modality-specific spectral features via contrastive regularization to promote semantic and structural consistency. Experiments on three real-world benchmarks show consistent gains over strong baselines, particularly under sparse and cold-start settings. Additional analyses indicate that structured spectral modeling improves robustness and provides clearer diagnostics of how different bands contribute to performance.

Effective medication management in Parkinson's Disease (PD) is challenging due to heterogeneous disease progression, variable patient response, and medication side effects. While AI models can forecast levodopa equivalent daily dose (LEDD) as a measure of medication needs, standard uncertainty quantification often fails to communicate the reliability of these predictions, treating high and low confidence clinical decisions identically. We introduce CASCADE (Calibrated Adaptive Scaling via Conformal And Distributional Estimation), a novel conformal prediction framework that propagates epistemic uncertainty from a screening classifier to adapt downstream predictions. Unlike standard conformal methods that rely on auxiliary residual regression, we leverage epistemic uncertainty from a primary classification task (identifying whether a medication change is needed) to dynamically scale the prediction intervals of a secondary regression task (predicting how much change). By mapping Venn-Abers multi-probabilistic uncertainty directly to non-conformity scores, our framework achieves continuous risk adaptation. We demonstrate that this ``cascade effect'' produces highly efficient intervals for confident patients (38.9% narrower than standard conformal baselines) while automatically expanding intervals to ensure robust coverage for uncertain cases, bridging the gap between discrete clinical decision-making and continuous dose forecasting in PD.

Digital personas powered by Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed as substitutes for human survey respondents, yet it remains unclear when they can reliably approximate human survey findings. We answer this question using the LISS panel, constructing personas from respondents' background variables and pre-2023 survey histories, then testing them against the same respondents' held-out post-cutoff answers. Across four persona architectures, three LLMs, and two prediction tasks, we assess performance at the question, respondent, distributional, equity, and clustering levels. Digital personas improve alignment with human response distributions, especially in domains tied to stable attributes and values, but remain limited for individual prediction and fail to recover multivariate respondent structure. Retrieval-augmented architectures provide the clearest gains, but performance depends more on human response structure than on model choice: personas perform best for low-variability questions and common respondent patterns, and worst for subjective, heterogeneous, or rare responses. Our results provide practical guidance on when digital personas could be appropriate for survey research and when human validation remains necessary.

This paper presents a novel method to enhance the reliability of image classification models during deployment in the face of transient hardware errors. By utilizing enriched text embeddings derived from GPT-3 with question prompts per class and CLIP pretrained text encoder, we investigate their impact as an initialization for the classification layer. Our approach achieves a remarkable 5.5 average increase in hardware reliability (and up to 14) across various architectures in the most critical layer, with minimal accuracy drop (0.3% on average) compared to baseline PyTorch models. Furthermore, our method seamlessly integrates with any image classification backbone, showcases results across various network architectures, decreases parameter and FLOPs overhead, and follows a consistent training recipe. This research offers a practical and efficient solution to bolster the robustness of image classification models against hardware failures, with potential implications for future studies in this domain.