Selecting interpretable feature sets in underdetermined ($n \ll p$) and highly correlated regimes constitutes a fundamental challenge in data science, particularly when analyzing physical measurements. In such settings, multiple distinct sparse subsets may explain the response equally well. Identifying these alternatives is crucial for generating domain-specific insights into the underlying mechanisms, yet conventional methods typically isolate a single solution, obscuring the full spectrum of plausible explanations. We present GEMSS (Gaussian Ensemble for Multiple Sparse Solutions), a variational Bayesian framework specifically designed to simultaneously discover multiple, diverse sparse feature combinations. The method employs a structured spike-and-slab prior for sparsity, a mixture of Gaussians to approximate the intractable multimodal posterior, and a Jaccard-based penalty to further control solution diversity. Unlike sequential greedy approaches, GEMSS optimizes the entire ensemble of solutions within a single objective function via stochastic gradient descent. The method is validated on a comprehensive benchmark comprising 128 synthetic experiments across classification and regression tasks. Results demonstrate that GEMSS scales effectively to high-dimensional settings ($p=5000$) with sample size as small as $n = 50$, generalizes seamlessly to continuous targets, handles missing data natively, and exhibits remarkable robustness to class imbalance and Gaussian noise. GEMSS is available as a Python package 'gemss' at PyPI. The full GitHub repository at https://github.com/kat-er-ina/gemss/ also includes a free, easy-to-use application suitable for non-coders.

Despite high performance on clinical benchmarks, large language models may reach correct conclusions through faulty reasoning, a failure mode with safety implications for oncology decision support that is not captured by accuracy-based evaluation. In this two-cohort retrospective study, we developed a hierarchical taxonomy of reasoning errors from GPT-4 chain-of-thought responses to real oncology notes and tested its clinical relevance. Using breast and pancreatic cancer notes from the CORAL dataset, we annotated 600 reasoning traces to define a three-tier taxonomy mapping computational failures to cognitive bias frameworks. We validated the taxonomy on 822 responses from prostate cancer consult notes spanning localized through metastatic disease, simulating extraction, analysis, and clinical recommendation tasks. Reasoning errors occurred in 23 percent of interpretations and dominated overall errors, with confirmation bias and anchoring bias most common. Reasoning failures were associated with guideline-discordant and potentially harmful recommendations, particularly in advanced disease management. Automated evaluators using state-of-the-art language models detected error presence but could not reliably classify subtypes. These findings show that large language models may provide fluent but clinically unsafe recommendations when reasoning is flawed. The taxonomy provides a generalizable framework for evaluating and improving reasoning fidelity before clinical deployment.

Financial institutions deploy Large Language Models (LLMs) for reconciliations, regulatory reporting, and client communications, but nondeterministic outputs (output drift) undermine auditability and trust. We quantify drift across five model architectures (7B-120B parameters) on regulated financial tasks, revealing a stark inverse relationship: smaller models (Granite-3-8B, Qwen2.5-7B) achieve 100% output consistency at T=0.0, while GPT-OSS-120B exhibits only 12.5% consistency (95% CI: 3.5-36.0%) regardless of configuration (p<0.0001, Fisher's exact test). This finding challenges conventional assumptions that larger models are universally superior for production deployment. Our contributions include: (i) a finance-calibrated deterministic test harness combining greedy decoding (T=0.0), fixed seeds, and SEC 10-K structure-aware retrieval ordering; (ii) task-specific invariant checking for RAG, JSON, and SQL outputs using finance-calibrated materiality thresholds (plus or minus 5%) and SEC citation validation; (iii) a three-tier model classification system enabling risk-appropriate deployment decisions; and (iv) an audit-ready attestation system with dual-provider validation. We evaluated five models (Qwen2.5-7B via Ollama, Granite-3-8B via IBM watsonx.ai, Llama-3.3-70B, Mistral-Medium-2505, and GPT-OSS-120B) across three regulated financial tasks. Across 480 runs (n=16 per condition), structured tasks (SQL) remain stable even at T=0.2, while RAG tasks show drift (25-75%), revealing task-dependent sensitivity. Cross-provider validation confirms deterministic behavior transfers between local and cloud deployments. We map our framework to Financial Stability Board (FSB), Bank for International Settlements (BIS), and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) requirements, demonstrating practical pathways for compliance-ready AI deployments.

The deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) in embodied agents creates an urgent need to measure their privacy awareness in the physical world. Existing evaluation methods, however, are confined to natural language based scenarios. To bridge this gap, we introduce EAPrivacy, a comprehensive evaluation benchmark designed to quantify the physical-world privacy awareness of LLM-powered agents. EAPrivacy utilizes procedurally generated scenarios across four tiers to test an agent's ability to handle sensitive objects, adapt to changing environments, balance task execution with privacy constraints, and resolve conflicts with social norms. Our measurements reveal a critical deficit in current models. The top-performing model, Gemini 2.5 Pro, achieved only 59\% accuracy in scenarios involving changing physical environments. Furthermore, when a task was accompanied by a privacy request, models prioritized completion over the constraint in up to 86\% of cases. In high-stakes situations pitting privacy against critical social norms, leading models like GPT-4o and Claude-3.5-haiku disregarded the social norm over 15\% of the time. These findings, demonstrated by our benchmark, underscore a fundamental misalignment in LLMs regarding physically grounded privacy and establish the need for more robust, physically-aware alignment. Codes and datasets will be available at https://github.com/Graph-COM/EAPrivacy.

This research introduces the Judge's Verdict Benchmark, a novel two-step methodology to evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) as judges for response accuracy evaluation tasks. We assess how well 54 LLMs can replicate human judgment when scoring responses from RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) or Agentic pipelines against ground truth answers. Our methodology progresses from traditional correlation analysis to comprehensive Cohen's Kappa analysis that measures actual agreement patterns. The two-step approach includes: (1) a correlation test that filters judges with strong alignment, followed by (2) a human-likeness test using z-scores to identify two distinct judgment patterns: human-like judgment (|z| < 1) that mimics natural human variation, and super-consistent judgment (z > 1) that exceeds typical human-to-human agreement levels. This methodology reveals that 27 out of 54 tested LLMs achieve Tier 1 performance: 23 models exhibit human-like patterns that preserve the nuances of human judgment, while 4 models demonstrate super-consistent behavior, a pattern that could indicate either enhanced reliability or oversimplification of complex judgments. Testing 43 open-source models (1B-405B parameters) and 11 closed models (GPT, Gemini, Claude variants), we demonstrate that judge excellence is not solely dependent on model size but on specific training strategies. Our key contributions include: (1) establishing that correlation alone is insufficient for judge evaluation, (2) introducing a "Turing Test for judges" based on agreement patterns, and (3) providing a standardized benchmark for classifying LLM judges into distinct performance tiers for different evaluation needs.

Many incarcerated individuals face significant and complex challenges, including mental illness, substance dependence, and homelessness, yet jails and prisons are often poorly equipped to address these needs. With little support from the existing criminal justice system, these needs can remain untreated and worsen, often leading to further offenses and a cycle of incarceration with adverse outcomes both for the individual and for public safety, with particularly large impacts on communities of color that continue to widen the already extensive racial disparities in criminal justice outcomes. Responding to these failures, a growing number of criminal justice stakeholders are seeking to break this cycle through innovative approaches such as community-driven and alternative approaches to policing, mentoring, community building, restorative justice, pretrial diversion, holistic defense, and social service connections. Here we report on a collaboration between Johnson County, Kansas, and Carnegie Mellon University to perform targeted, proactive mental health outreach in an effort to reduce reincarceration rates. This paper describes the data used, our predictive modeling approach and results, as well as the design and analysis of a field trial conducted to confirm our model's predictive power, evaluate the impact of this targeted outreach, and understand at what level of reincarceration risk outreach might be most effective. Through this trial, we find that our model is highly predictive of new jail bookings, with more than half of individuals in the trial's highest-risk group returning to jail in the following year. Outreach was most effective among these highest-risk individuals, with impacts on mental health utilization, EMS dispatches, and criminal justice involvement.

--Cardiovascular disease (CVD) prediction remains a tremendous challenge due to its multifactorial etiology and global burden of morbidity and mortality. Despite the growing availability of genomic and electrophysiological data, extracting biologically meaningful insights from such high-dimensional, noisy, and sparsely annotated datasets remains a non-trivial task. Recently, LLMs has been applied effectively to predict structural variations in biological sequences. In this work, we explore the potential of fine-tuned LLMs to predict cardiac diseases and SNPs potentially leading to CVD risk using genetic markers derived from high-throughput genomic profiling. We investigate the effect of genetic patterns associated with cardiac conditions and evaluate how LLMs can learn latent biological relationships from structured and semi-structured genomic data obtained by mapping genetic aspects that are inherited from the family tree. By framing the problem as a Chain of Thought (CoT) reasoning task, the models are prompted to generate disease labels and articulate informed clinical deductions across diverse patient profiles and phenotypes. The findings highlight the promise of LLMs in contributing to early detection, risk assessment, and ultimately, the advancement of personalized medicine in cardiac care. Cardiovascular disease (CVDs) remain the most common cause of mortality globally. In 2023, approximately 20.5 million people died from CVDs [1], accounting for about one-third of all global deaths. This marks a significant increase from the estimated 17.9 million CVD deaths in 2019.

Large language models have paved the way to powerful and flexible AI agents, assisting humans by increasingly integrating into their daily life. This flexibility, potential, and growing adoption demands a holistic and cross-disciplinary approach to developing, monitoring and discussing the capabilities required for agent-driven user experiences. However, current guidance on human-centered AI agent development is scattered: UX heuristics focus on interface behaviors, engineering taxonomies describe internal pipelines, and ethics checklists address high-level governance. There is no concise, user-facing vocabulary that tells teams what an agent should fundamentally be able to do. We introduce ADEPTS, a capability framework defining a set of core user-facing capabilities to provide unified guidance around the development of AI agents. ADEPTS is based on six principles for human-centered agent design, that express the minimal, user-facing capabilities an AI agent should demonstrate to be understandable, controllable and trustworthy in everyday use. ADEPTS complements existing frameworks and taxonomies; differently from them, it sits at the interface between technical and experience development. By presenting ADEPTS, we aim to condense complex AI-UX requirements into a compact framework that is actionable guidance for AI researchers, designers, engineers, and policy reviewers alike. We believe ADEPTS has the potential of accelerating the improvement of user-relevant agent capabilities, of easing the design of experiences that take advantage of those capabilities, and of providing a shared language to track and discuss progress around the development of AI agents.

Understanding and explaining differences between audio recordings is crucial for fields like audio forensics, quality assessment, and audio generation. This involves identifying and describing audio events, acoustic scenes, signal characteristics, and their emotional impact on listeners. This paper stands out as the first work to comprehensively study the task of explaining audio differences and then propose benchmark, baselines for the task. First, we present two new datasets for audio difference explanation derived from the AudioCaps and Clotho audio captioning datasets. Using Large Language Models (LLMs), we generate three levels of difference explanations: (1) concise descriptions of audio events and objects, (2) brief sentences about audio events, acoustic scenes, and signal properties, and (3) comprehensive explanations that include semantics and listener emotions. For the baseline, we use prefix tuning where audio embeddings from two audio files are used to prompt a frozen language model. Our empirical analysis and ablation studies reveal that the naive baseline struggles to distinguish perceptually similar sounds and generate detailed tier 3 explanations. To address these limitations, we propose ADIFF, which introduces a cross-projection module, position captioning, and a three-step training process to enhance the model's ability to produce detailed explanations. We evaluate our model using objective metrics and human evaluation and show our model enhancements lead to significant improvements in performance over naive baseline and SoTA Audio-Language Model (ALM) Qwen Audio. Lastly, we conduct multiple ablation studies to study the effects of cross-projection, language model parameters, position captioning, third stage fine-tuning, and present our findings. Our benchmarks, findings, and strong baseline pave the way for nuanced and human-like explanations of audio differences.

With the rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence, particularly in Natural Language Processing, Large Language Models (LLMs) have become pivotal in educational question-answering systems, especially university admission chatbots. Concepts such as Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and other advanced techniques have been developed to enhance these systems by integrating specific university data, enabling LLMs to provide informed responses on admissions and academic counseling. However, these enhanced RAG techniques often involve high operational costs and require the training of complex, specialized modules, which poses challenges for practical deployment. Additionally, in the educational context, it is crucial to provide accurate answers to prevent misinformation, a task that LLM-based systems find challenging without appropriate strategies and methods. In this paper, we introduce the Unified RAG (URAG) Framework, a hybrid approach that significantly improves the accuracy of responses, particularly for critical queries. Experimental results demonstrate that URAG enhances our in-house, lightweight model to perform comparably to state-of-the-art commercial models. Moreover, to validate its practical applicability, we conducted a case study at our educational institution, which received positive feedback and acclaim. This study not only proves the effectiveness of URAG but also highlights its feasibility for real-world implementation in educational settings.