Africa pose, partial view, color diapers The Americas vs. Africa pose, color, partial view pet foods Asia vs.

Background Recent developments in artificial intelligence (AI), particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), have shown promise in automating previously unavailable aspects of student writing assessment and providing detailed, individuated feedback. Our previous research demonstrated that AI systems can reliably assess student writing using standardized rubrics, achieving consistency 2 rates of over 99% over five iterations (Heywood & Carrier, 2024). However, while these systems excel at providing holistic assessment using broad categories, their potential to provide detailed, granular feedback about specific writing errors has not yet been fully explored . This study builds upon our earlier work by developing and testing a sophisticated error classification system that can identify, categorize, and describe writing errors at both the word and sentence levels. The system employs a detailed taxonomy of errors based on established linguistic theory in the area of error classification (Corder, 1967, 1975, 1981; Richards, 1971, 1974; James, 1998). The AI analysis is implemented through carefully designed API calls to Claude 3.5 Sonnet in Python. With this enhanced error classification system, the present study analyzes an error ridden dialogue from an infamous text, English as she is spoke (Fonseca et al., 2004). We also provide the results of a review of the AI analysis by a human panel of experts.

Peer review is a cornerstone of scientific publishing, including at premier machine learning conferences such as ICLR. As submission volumes increase, understanding the nature and dynamics of the review process is crucial for improving its efficiency, effectiveness, and the quality of published papers. We present a large-scale analysis of the ICLR 2024 and 2025 peer review processes, focusing on before- and after-rebuttal scores and reviewer-author interactions. We examine review scores, author-reviewer engagement, temporal patterns in review submissions, and co-reviewer influence effects. Combining quantitative analyses with LLM-based categorization of review texts and rebuttal discussions, we identify common strengths and weaknesses for each rating group, as well as trends in rebuttal strategies that are most strongly associated with score changes. Our findings show that initial scores and the ratings of co-reviewers are the strongest predictors of score changes during the rebuttal, pointing to a degree of reviewer influence. Rebuttals play a valuable role in improving outcomes for borderline papers, where thoughtful author responses can meaningfully shift reviewer perspectives. More broadly, our study offers evidence-based insights to improve the peer review process, guiding authors on effective rebuttal strategies and helping the community design fairer and more efficient review processes. Our code and score changes data are available at https://github.com/papercopilot/iclr-insights.

The result of PC 2 vs. PC 3 (Figure 1) suggests that the first quadrant represents concepts describing

BERTScore has become a widely adopted metric for evaluating semantic similarity between natural language sentences. However, we identify a critical limitation: BERTScore exhibits low sensitivity to numerical variation, a significant weakness in finance where numerical precision directly affects meaning (e.g., distinguishing a 2% gain from a 20% loss). We introduce FinNuE, a diagnostic dataset constructed with controlled numerical perturbations across earnings calls, regulatory filings, social media, and news articles. Using FinNuE, demonstrate that BERTScore fails to distinguish semantically critical numerical differences, often assigning high similarity scores to financially divergent text pairs. Our findings reveal fundamental limitations of embedding-based metrics for finance and motivate numerically-aware evaluation frameworks for financial NLP.

Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new avenues to simulate online communities and social media. Potential applications range from testing the design of content recommendation algorithms to estimating the effects of content policies and interventions. However, the validity of using LLMs to simulate conversations between various users remains largely untested. We evaluated whether LLMs can convincingly mimic human group conversations on social media. We collected authentic human conversations from Reddit and generated artificial conversations on the same topic with two LLMs: Llama 3 70B and GPT-4o. When presented side-by-side to study participants, LLM-generated conversations were mistaken for human-created content 39\% of the time. In particular, when evaluating conversations generated by Llama 3, participants correctly identified them as AI-generated only 56\% of the time, barely better than random chance. Our study demonstrates that LLMs can generate social media conversations sufficiently realistic to deceive humans when reading them, highlighting both a promising potential for social simulation and a warning message about the potential misuse of LLMs to generate new inauthentic social media content.

This paper comprehensively elaborates on the construction methodology, multi-dimensional evaluation system, and underlying design philosophy of CUFEInse v1.0. Adhering to the principles of "quantitative-oriented, expert-driven, and multi-validation," the benchmark establishes an evaluation framework covering 5 core dimensions, 54 sub-indicators, and 14,430 high-quality questions, encompassing insurance theoretical knowledge, industry understanding, safety and compliance, intelligent agent application, and logical rigor. Based on this benchmark, a comprehensive evaluation was conducted on 11 mainstream large language models. The evaluation results reveal that general-purpose models suffer from common bottlenecks such as weak actuarial capabilities and inadequate compliance adaptation. High-quality domain-specific training demonstrates significant advantages in insurance vertical scenarios but exhibits shortcomings in business adaptation and compliance. The evaluation also accurately identifies the common bottlenecks of current large models in professional scenarios such as insurance actuarial, underwriting and claim settlement reasoning, and compliant marketing copywriting. The establishment of CUFEInse not only fills the gap in professional evaluation benchmarks for the insurance field, providing academia and industry with a professional, systematic, and authoritative evaluation tool, but also its construction concept and methodology offer important references for the evaluation paradigm of large models in vertical fields, serving as an authoritative reference for academic model optimization and industrial model selection. Finally, the paper looks forward to the future iteration direction of the evaluation benchmark and the core development direction of "domain adaptation + reasoning enhancement" for insurance large models.

This study addresses critical industrial challenges in e-commerce product categorization, namely platform heterogeneity and the structural limitations of existing taxonomies, by developing and deploying a multimodal hierarchical classification framework. Using a dataset of 271,700 products from 40 international fashion e-commerce platforms, we integrate textual features (RoBERTa), visual features (ViT), and joint vision-language representations (CLIP). We investigate fusion strategies, including early, late, and attention-based fusion within a hierarchical architecture enhanced by dynamic masking to ensure taxonomic consistency. Results show that CLIP embeddings combined via an MLP-based late-fusion strategy achieve the highest hierarchical F1 (98.59%), outperforming unimodal baselines. To address shallow or inconsistent categories, we further introduce a self-supervised "product recategorization" pipeline using SimCLR, UMAP, and cascade clustering, which discovered new, fine-grained categories (for example, subtypes of "Shoes") with cluster purities above 86%. Cross-platform experiments reveal a deployment-relevant trade-off: complex late-fusion methods maximize accuracy with diverse training data, while simpler early-fusion methods generalize more effectively to unseen platforms. Finally, we demonstrate the framework's industrial scalability through deployment in EURWEB's commercial transaction intelligence platform via a two-stage inference pipeline, combining a lightweight RoBERTa stage with a GPU-accelerated multimodal stage to balance cost and accuracy.

The increasing deployment of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) raises safety concerns under potential malicious inputs. However, existing multimodal safety evaluations primarily focus on model vulnerabilities exposed by static image inputs, ignoring the temporal dynamics of video that may induce distinct safety risks. To bridge this gap, we introduce Video-SafetyBench, the first comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate the safety of LVLMs under video-text attacks. It comprises 2,264 video-text pairs spanning 48 fine-grained unsafe categories, each pairing a synthesized video with either a harmful query, which contains explicit malice, or a benign query, which appears harmless but triggers harmful behavior when interpreted alongside the video. To generate semantically accurate videos for safety evaluation, we design a controllable pipeline that decomposes video semantics into subject images (what is shown) and motion text (how it moves), which jointly guide the synthesis of query-relevant videos. To effectively evaluate uncertain or borderline harmful outputs, we propose RJScore, a novel LLM-based metric that incorporates the confidence of judge models and human-aligned decision threshold calibration. Extensive experiments show that benign-query video composition achieves average attack success rates of 67.2%, revealing consistent vulnerabilities to video-induced attacks. We believe Video-SafetyBench will catalyze future research into video-based safety evaluation and defense strategies.