Abstract:Existing prompting paradigms structure LLM reasoning in limited topologies: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) produces linear traces, while Tree-of-Thought (ToT) performs branching search. Yet complex reasoning often requires merging intermediate results, revisiting hypotheses, and integrating evidence from multiple sources. We propose Network-of-Thought (NoT), a framework that models reasoning as a directed graph with typed nodes and edges, guided by a heuristic-based controller policy. Across four benchmarks (GSM8K, Game of 24, HotpotQA, ProofWriter) and three models (GPT-4o-mini, Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct, Qwen2.5-72B-Instruct), we investigate when network topology outperforms chain or tree structures, whether LLM-generated heuristics can guide graph-based reasoning search, and the computation-accuracy tradeoff across topologies, evaluating each method on accuracy, topology simplicity, and token efficiency. Our results show that CoT remains effective for sequential tasks with GPT-4o-mini (89.5\% on GSM8K), while NoT surpasses ToT on multi-hop reasoning (91.0\% vs.\ 88.0\% on HotpotQA with LLM-as-Judge). With 72B open-source models, NoT achieves the highest accuracy on GSM8K (91.5\%), and Qwen2.5-72B achieves the best multi-hop QA result overall (91.7\% on HotpotQA). Self-generated controller heuristics outperform fixed and random strategies on logical reasoning, with uncertainty-only weighting achieving 57.0\% on ProofWriter. We also find that evaluation methodology significantly impacts method rankings: string-match underestimates all methods on open-ended QA, with the largest gap for NoT, a pattern consistent across all three models (14--18 percentage point gap on HotpotQA).
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) increasingly participate in morally sensitive decision-making, yet how they organize ethical frameworks across reasoning steps remains underexplored. We introduce \textit{moral reasoning trajectories}, sequences of ethical framework invocations across intermediate reasoning steps, and analyze their dynamics across six models and three benchmarks. We find that moral reasoning involves systematic multi-framework deliberation: 55.4--57.7\% of consecutive steps involve framework switches, and only 16.4--17.8\% of trajectories remain framework-consistent. Unstable trajectories remain 1.29$\times$ more susceptible to persuasive attacks ($p=0.015$). At the representation level, linear probes localize framework-specific encoding to model-specific layers (layer 63/81 for Llama-3.3-70B; layer 17/81 for Qwen2.5-72B), achieving 13.8--22.6\% lower KL divergence than the training-set prior baseline. Lightweight activation steering modulates framework integration patterns (6.7--8.9\% drift reduction) and amplifies the stability--accuracy relationship. We further propose a Moral Representation Consistency (MRC) metric that correlates strongly ($r=0.715$, $p<0.0001$) with LLM coherence ratings, whose underlying framework attributions are validated by human annotators (mean cosine similarity $= 0.859$).
Abstract:Demand forecasting is a cornerstone of e-commerce operations, directly impacting inventory planning and fulfillment scheduling. However, existing forecasting systems often fail during high-impact periods such as flash sales, holiday campaigns, and sudden policy interventions, where demand patterns shift abruptly and unpredictably. In this paper, we introduce EventCast, a modular forecasting framework that integrates future event knowledge into time-series prediction. Unlike prior approaches that ignore future interventions or directly use large language models (LLMs) for numerical forecasting, EventCast leverages LLMs solely for event-driven reasoning. Unstructured business data, which covers campaigns, holiday schedules, and seller incentives, from existing operational databases, is processed by an LLM that converts it into interpretable textual summaries leveraging world knowledge for cultural nuances and novel event combinations. These summaries are fused with historical demand features within a dual-tower architecture, enabling accurate, explainable, and scalable forecasts. Deployed on real-world e-commerce scenarios spanning 4 countries of 160 regions over 10 months, EventCast achieves up to 86.9% and 97.7% improvement on MAE and MSE compared to the variant without event knowledge, and reduces MAE by up to 57.0% and MSE by 83.3% versus the best industrial baseline during event-driven periods. EventCast has deployed into real-world industrial pipelines since March 2025, offering a practical solution for improving operational decision-making in dynamic e-commerce environments.
Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly employed in various question-answering tasks. However, recent studies showcase that LLMs are susceptible to persuasion and could adopt counterfactual beliefs. We present a systematic evaluation of LLM susceptibility to persuasion under the Source--Message--Channel--Receiver (SMCR) communication framework. Across five mainstream Large Language Models (LLMs) and three domains (factual knowledge, medical QA, and social bias), we analyze how different persuasive strategies influence belief stability over multiple interaction turns. We further examine whether meta-cognition prompting (i.e., eliciting self-reported confidence) affects resistance to persuasion. Results show that smaller models exhibit extreme compliance, with over 80% of belief changes occurring at the first persuasive turn (average end turn of 1.1--1.4). Contrary to expectations, meta-cognition prompting increases vulnerability by accelerating belief erosion rather than enhancing robustness. Finally, we evaluate adversarial fine-tuning as a defense. While GPT-4o-mini achieves near-complete robustness (98.6%) and Mistral~7B improves substantially (35.7% $\rightarrow$ 79.3%), Llama models remain highly susceptible (<14%) even when fine-tuned on their own failure cases. Together, these findings highlight substantial model-dependent limits of current robustness interventions and offer guidance for developing more trustworthy LLMs.
Abstract:We present XChoice, an explainable framework for evaluating AI-human alignment in constrained decision making. Moving beyond outcome agreement such as accuracy and F1 score, XChoice fits a mechanism-based decision model to human data and LLM-generated decisions, recovering interpretable parameters that capture the relative importance of decision factors, constraint sensitivity, and implied trade-offs. Alignment is assessed by comparing these parameter vectors across models, options, and subgroups. We demonstrate XChoice on Americans' daily time allocation using the American Time Use Survey (ATUS) as human ground truth, revealing heterogeneous alignment across models and activities and salient misalignment concentrated in Black and married groups. We further validate robustness of XChoice via an invariance analysis and evaluate targeted mitigation with a retrieval augmented generation (RAG) intervention. Overall, XChoice provides mechanism-based metrics that diagnose misalignment and support informed improvements beyond surface outcome matching.




Abstract:As Large Language Models (LLMs) have risen in prominence over the past few years, there has been concern over the potential biases in LLMs inherited from the training data. Previous studies have examined how LLMs exhibit implicit bias, such as when response generation changes when different social contexts are introduced. We argue that this implicit bias is not only an ethical, but also a technical issue, as it reveals an inability of LLMs to accommodate extraneous information. However, unlike other measures of LLM intelligence, there are no standard methods to benchmark this specific subset of LLM bias. To bridge this gap, we developed a method for calculating an easily interpretable benchmark, DIF (Demographic Implicit Fairness), by evaluating preexisting LLM logic and math problem datasets with sociodemographic personas. We demonstrate that this method can statistically validate the presence of implicit bias in LLM behavior and find an inverse trend between question answering accuracy and implicit bias, supporting our argument.




Abstract:Emotion recognition is an important component of affective computing, and also human-machine interaction. Unimodal emotion recognition is convenient, but the accuracy may not be high enough; on the contrary, multi-modal emotion recognition may be more accurate, but it also increases the complexity and cost of the data collection system. This paper considers cross-modal emotion recognition, i.e., using both electroencephalography (EEG) and eye movement in training, but only EEG or eye movement in test. We propose cross-modal contrastive representation distillation (CMCRD), which uses a pre-trained eye movement classification model to assist the training of an EEG classification model, improving feature extraction from EEG signals, or vice versa. During test, only EEG signals (or eye movement signals) are acquired, eliminating the need for multi-modal data. CMCRD not only improves the emotion recognition accuracy, but also makes the system more simplified and practical. Experiments using three different neural network architectures on three multi-modal emotion recognition datasets demonstrated the effectiveness of CMCRD. Compared with the EEG-only model, it improved the average classification accuracy by about 6.2%.




Abstract:Graph-based collaborative filtering has been established as a prominent approach in recommendation systems, leveraging the inherent graph topology of user-item interactions to model high-order connectivity patterns and enhance recommendation performance. Recent advances in Graph Contrastive Learning (GCL) have demonstrated promising potential to alleviate data sparsity issues by improving representation learning through contrastive view generation and mutual information maximization. However, existing approaches lack effective data augmentation strategies. Structural augmentation risks distorting fundamental graph topology, while feature-level perturbation techniques predominantly employ uniform noise scales that fail to account for node-specific characteristics. To solve these challenges, we propose Diffusion-augmented Contrastive Learning (DGCL), an innovative framework that integrates diffusion models with contrastive learning for enhanced collaborative filtering. Our approach employs a diffusion process that learns node-specific Gaussian distributions of representations, thereby generating semantically consistent yet diversified contrastive views through reverse diffusion sampling. DGCL facilitates adaptive data augmentation based on reconstructed representations, considering both semantic coherence and node-specific features. In addition, it explores unrepresented regions of the latent sparse feature space, thereby enriching the diversity of contrastive views. Extensive experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of DGCL on three public datasets.




Abstract:A profound gap persists between artificial intelligence (AI) and clinical practice in medicine, primarily due to the lack of rigorous and cost-effective evaluation methodologies. State-of-the-art and state-of-the-practice AI model evaluations are limited to laboratory studies on medical datasets or direct clinical trials with no or solely patient-centered controls. Moreover, the crucial role of clinicians in collaborating with AI, pivotal for determining its impact on clinical practice, is often overlooked. For the first time, we emphasize the critical necessity for rigorous and cost-effective evaluation methodologies for AI models in clinical practice, featuring patient/clinician-centered (dual-centered) AI randomized controlled trials (DC-AI RCTs) and virtual clinician-based in-silico trials (VC-MedAI) as an effective proxy for DC-AI RCTs. Leveraging 7500 diagnosis records from two-phase inaugural DC-AI RCTs across 14 medical centers with 125 clinicians, our results demonstrate the necessity of DC-AI RCTs and the effectiveness of VC-MedAI. Notably, VC-MedAI performs comparably to human clinicians, replicating insights and conclusions from prospective DC-AI RCTs. We envision DC-AI RCTs and VC-MedAI as pivotal advancements, presenting innovative and transformative evaluation methodologies for AI models in clinical practice, offering a preclinical-like setting mirroring conventional medicine, and reshaping development paradigms in a cost-effective and fast-iterative manner. Chinese Clinical Trial Registration: ChiCTR2400086816.




Abstract:We propose MonoBox, an innovative box-supervised segmentation method constrained by monotonicity to liberate its training from the user-unfriendly box-tightness assumption. In contrast to conventional box-supervised segmentation, where the box edges must precisely touch the target boundaries, MonoBox leverages imprecisely-annotated boxes to achieve robust pixel-wise segmentation. The 'linchpin' is that, within the noisy zones around box edges, MonoBox discards the traditional misguiding multiple-instance learning loss, and instead optimizes a carefully-designed objective, termed monotonicity constraint. Along directions transitioning from the foreground to background, this new constraint steers responses to adhere to a trend of monotonically decreasing values. Consequently, the originally unreliable learning within the noisy zones is transformed into a correct and effective monotonicity optimization. Moreover, an adaptive label correction is introduced, enabling MonoBox to enhance the tightness of box annotations using predicted masks from the previous epoch and dynamically shrink the noisy zones as training progresses. We verify MonoBox in the box-supervised segmentation task of polyps, where satisfying box-tightness is challenging due to the vague boundaries between the polyp and normal tissues. Experiments on both public synthetic and in-house real noisy datasets demonstrate that MonoBox exceeds other anti-noise state-of-the-arts by improving Dice by at least 5.5% and 3.3%, respectively. Codes are at https://github.com/Huster-Hq/MonoBox.