Active Tabular Augmentation via Policy-Guided Diffusion Inpainting

Generative tabular augmentation is appealing in data-scarce domains, yet the prevailing focus on distributional fidelity does not reliably translate into better downstream models. We formalize a fidelity-utility gap: common generative objectives prioritize distributional plausibility, whereas augmentation succeeds only when injected samples reduce the current learner's held-out evaluation loss. This gap motivates learning not just how to generate, but what to generate and when to inject as training evolves. We propose TAP (Tabular Augmentation Policy), which couples diffusion inpainting with a lightweight, learner-conditioned policy to steer generation toward high-utility regions and controls safe injection via explicit gating and conservative windowed commitment. Under severe data scarcity, TAP consistently outperforms strong generative baselines on seven real-world datasets, improving classification accuracy by up to 15.6 percentage points and reducing regression RMSE by up to 32%.

SAGE: Sparse Adaptive Guidance for Dependency-Aware Tabular Data Generation

Generating high-fidelity synthetic tabular data remains a critical challenge for enhancing data availability in privacy-sensitive and low-resource domains. Recent approaches leverage LLMs by representing table rows as sequences, yet suffer from two fundamental limitations: (1) they model feature dependencies densely, introducing spurious correlations; and (2) they assume static relationships between features, ignoring how these dependencies vary with feature values. To overcome these limitations, we introduce SAGE (Sparse Adaptive Guidance), a novel LLM-based generation framework that enforces sparse and dynamic dependency guidance. SAGE discretizes features into value-aware pseudo-features and constructs a mutual information-based sparse dependency graph. This graph adaptively guides generation through explicit context selection or implicit logit correction, enabling LLMs to focus on truly relevant information during synthesis. Our extensive experiments across six datasets and multiple tasks reveal that SAGE not only improves data fidelity and downstream utility, boosting F1 scores by 10% compared to previous LLM-based methods, but also reduces policy violations by one point. These results highlight the importance of adaptive structure in tabular data generation and provide new insights into context-sensitive control of LLMs.

TabSCM: A practical Framework for Generating Realistic Tabular Data

Most tabular-data generators match marginal statistics yet ignore causal structure, leading downstream models to learn spurious or unfair patterns. We present TabSCM, a mixed-type generator that preserves those causal dependencies. Starting from a Completed Partially Directed Acyclic Graph (CPDAG) found by any causal structure discovery algorithm, TabSCM (i) orients edges to a DAG, (ii) fits root-node marginals with KDE or categorical frequencies, and (iii) learns topologically ordered structural assignments. Such assignments are achieved using conditional diffusion models for continuous variables as child nodes and gradient-boosted trees for categorical ones. Ancestral sampling yields semantically valid records and enables exact counterfactual queries. On seven public datasets, encompassing healthcare, finance, housing, environment, TabSCM matches or surpasses state-of-the-art GAN, diffusion, and LLM baselines in statistical fidelity, downstream utility, and privacy risk, while also cutting rule-violation rates and providing causally meaningful and robust conditional interventions. Because generation is decomposed into explicit equations, it runs up to 583$\times$ faster than diffusion-only models and exposes interpretable knobs for fairness auditing and policy simulation, making TabSCM a practical choice for realism, explainability, and causal soundness.

Analysing the Safety Pitfalls of Steering Vectors

Activation steering has emerged as a powerful tool to shape LLM behavior without the need for weight updates. While its inherent brittleness and unreliability are well-documented, its safety implications remain underexplored. In this work, we present a systematic safety audit of steering vectors obtained with Contrastive Activation Addition (CAA), a widely used steering approach, under a unified evaluation protocol. Using JailbreakBench as benchmark, we show that steering vectors consistently influence the success rate of jailbreak attacks, with stronger amplification under simple template-based attacks. Across LLM families and sizes, steering the model in specific directions can drastically increase (up to 57%) or decrease (up to 50%) its attack success rate (ASR), depending on the targeted behavior. We attribute this phenomenon to the overlap between the steering vectors and the latent directions of refusal behavior. Thus, we offer a traceable explanation for this discovery. Together, our findings reveal the previously unobserved origin of this safety gap in LLMs, highlighting a trade-off between controllability and safety.

A Multi-Agent Framework for Interpreting Multivariate Physiological Time Series

Continuous physiological monitoring is central to emergency care, yet deploying trustworthy AI is challenging. While LLMs can translate complex physiological signals into clinical narratives, it is unclear how agentic systems perform relative to zero-shot inference. To address these questions, we present Vivaldi, a role-structured multi-agent system that explains multivariate physiological time series. Due to regulatory constraints that preclude live deployment, we instantiate Vivaldi in a controlled, clinical pilot to a small, highly qualified cohort of emergency medicine experts, whose evaluations reveal a context-dependent picture that contrasts with prevailing assumptions that agentic reasoning uniformly improves performance. Our experiments show that agentic pipelines substantially benefit non-thinking and medically fine-tuned models, improving expert-rated explanation justification and relevance by +6.9 and +9.7 points, respectively. Contrarily, for thinking models, agentic orchestration often degrades explanation quality, including a 14-point drop in relevance, while improving diagnostic precision (ESI F1 +3.6). We also find that explicit tool-based computation is decisive for codifiable clinical metrics, whereas subjective targets, such as pain scores and length of stay, show limited or inconsistent changes. Expert evaluation further indicates that gains in clinical utility depend on visualization conventions, with medically specialized models achieving the most favorable trade-offs between utility and clarity. Together, these findings show that the value of agentic AI lies in the selective externalization of computation and structure rather than in maximal reasoning complexity, and highlight concrete design trade-offs and learned lessons, broadly applicable to explainable AI in safety-critical healthcare settings.

Beyond Edge Deletion: A Comprehensive Approach to Counterfactual Explanation in Graph Neural Networks

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) are increasingly adopted across domains such as molecular biology and social network analysis, yet their black-box nature hinders interpretability and trust. This is especially problematic in high-stakes applications, such as predicting molecule toxicity, drug discovery, or guiding financial fraud detections, where transparent explanations are essential. Counterfactual explanations - minimal changes that flip a model's prediction - offer a transparent lens into GNNs' behavior. In this work, we introduce XPlore, a novel technique that significantly broadens the counterfactual search space. It consists of gradient-guided perturbations to adjacency and node feature matrices. Unlike most prior methods, which focus solely on edge deletions, our approach belongs to the growing class of techniques that optimize edge insertions and node-feature perturbations, here jointly performed under a unified gradient-based framework, enabling a richer and more nuanced exploration of counterfactuals. To quantify both structural and semantic fidelity, we introduce a cosine similarity metric for learned graph embeddings that addresses a key limitation of traditional distance-based metrics, and demonstrate that XPlore produces more coherent and minimal counterfactuals. Empirical results on 13 real-world and 5 synthetic benchmarks show up to +56.3% improvement in validity and +52.8% in fidelity over state-of-the-art baselines, while retaining competitive runtime.

Reinforcement Unlearning via Group Relative Policy Optimization

During pretraining, LLMs inadvertently memorize sensitive or copyrighted data, posing significant compliance challenges under legal frameworks like the GDPR and the EU AI Act. Fulfilling these mandates demands techniques that can remove information from a deployed model without retraining from scratch. Existing unlearning approaches attempt to address this need, but often leak the very data they aim to erase, sacrifice fluency and robustness, or depend on costly external reward models. We introduce PURGE (Policy Unlearning through Relative Group Erasure), a novel method grounded in the Group Relative Policy Optimization framework that formulates unlearning as a verifiable problem. PURGE uses an intrinsic reward signal that penalizes any mention of forbidden concepts, allowing safe and consistent unlearning. Our approach reduces token usage per target by up to a factor of 46 compared with SotA methods, while improving fluency by 5.48 percent and adversarial robustness by 12.02 percent over the base model. On the Real World Knowledge Unlearning (RWKU) benchmark, PURGE achieves 11 percent unlearning effectiveness while preserving 98 percent of original utility. PURGE shows that framing LLM unlearning as a verifiable task, enables more reliable, efficient, and scalable forgetting, suggesting a promising new direction for unlearning research that combines theoretical guarantees, improved safety, and practical deployment efficiency.

Moral Lenses, Political Coordinates: Towards Ideological Positioning of Morally Conditioned LLMs

While recent research has systematically documented political orientation in large language models (LLMs), existing evaluations rely primarily on direct probing or demographic persona engineering to surface ideological biases. In social psychology, however, political ideology is also understood as a downstream consequence of fundamental moral intuitions. In this work, we investigate the causal relationship between moral values and political positioning by treating moral orientation as a controllable condition. Rather than simply assigning a demographic persona, we condition models to endorse or reject specific moral values and evaluate the resulting shifts on their political orientations, using the Political Compass Test. By treating moral values as lenses, we observe how moral conditioning actively steers model trajectories across economic and social dimensions. Our findings show that such conditioning induces pronounced, value-specific shifts in models' political coordinates. We further notice that these effects are systematically modulated by role framing and model scale, and are robust across alternative assessment instruments instantiating the same moral value. This highlights that effective alignment requires anchoring political assessments within the context of broader social values including morality, paving the way for more socially grounded alignment techniques.

Injecting Falsehoods: Adversarial Man-in-the-Middle Attacks Undermining Factual Recall in LLMs

LLMs are now an integral part of information retrieval. As such, their role as question answering chatbots raises significant concerns due to their shown vulnerability to adversarial man-in-the-middle (MitM) attacks. Here, we propose the first principled attack evaluation on LLM factual memory under prompt injection via Xmera, our novel, theory-grounded MitM framework. By perturbing the input given to "victim" LLMs in three closed-book and fact-based QA settings, we undermine the correctness of the responses and assess the uncertainty of their generation process. Surprisingly, trivial instruction-based attacks report the highest success rate (up to ~85.3%) while simultaneously having a high uncertainty for incorrectly answered questions. To provide a simple defense mechanism against Xmera, we train Random Forest classifiers on the response uncertainty levels to distinguish between attacked and unattacked queries (average AUC of up to ~96%). We believe that signaling users to be cautious about the answers they receive from black-box and potentially corrupt LLMs is a first checkpoint toward user cyberspace safety.

CURE: Controlled Unlearning for Robust Embeddings -- Mitigating Conceptual Shortcuts in Pre-Trained Language Models

Pre-trained language models have achieved remarkable success across diverse applications but remain susceptible to spurious, concept-driven correlations that impair robustness and fairness. In this work, we introduce CURE, a novel and lightweight framework that systematically disentangles and suppresses conceptual shortcuts while preserving essential content information. Our method first extracts concept-irrelevant representations via a dedicated content extractor reinforced by a reversal network, ensuring minimal loss of task-relevant information. A subsequent controllable debiasing module employs contrastive learning to finely adjust the influence of residual conceptual cues, enabling the model to either diminish harmful biases or harness beneficial correlations as appropriate for the target task. Evaluated on the IMDB and Yelp datasets using three pre-trained architectures, CURE achieves an absolute improvement of +10 points in F1 score on IMDB and +2 points on Yelp, while introducing minimal computational overhead. Our approach establishes a flexible, unsupervised blueprint for combating conceptual biases, paving the way for more reliable and fair language understanding systems.