Abstract:Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) improves large language models by grounding generation in external evidence, but it also introduces a source trust problem: retrieved context may be useful, irrelevant, or even misleading. Existing RAG systems often apply a fixed trust policy toward retrieved evidence, which can either over-trust incorrect context or underuse context when the user explicitly asks for context-following behavior. Therefore, we propose Intent-Guided Decoding (IGD), a framework that arbitrates between retrieved context and parametric memory according to user intent. IGD uses answer-level filtering and token-level correction to steer the final decoding trajectory between retrieved context and parametric memory. We evaluate IGD on three faithful QA benchmarks and three factual-conflict benchmarks across five LLMs, IGD substantially improves factual recovery, achieving gains of up to 65.4 percentage points on factual-conflict benchmarks over Direct RAG, while preserving or improving strict context-following behavior, this findings highlight the importance of balancing factuality and faithfulness in RAG.
Abstract:Vision-Language-Action (VLA) systems, built on pretrained vision-language models (VLMs), have shown rapidly improving performance on robot manipulation benchmarks. These gains are commonly interpreted as evidence that semantic representations learned from internet-scale data transfer to physical execution generalization. This position paper argues that the assumption underlying this interpretation -- that semantic generalization is sufficient to support physical action decisions -- has not been independently verified and cannot be tested under current evaluation protocols. We support this claim by decomposing VLA policies into semantic mapping and physical action decision, and showing that task success rate -- the dominant evaluation metric -- cannot distinguish between these two sources of capability. As a result, improvements in benchmark performance are consistent with multiple competing explanations, including semantic matching, distributional overlap, and genuine physical generalization. We further argue that this identifiability gap has been reinforced through narrative drift, whereby successive systems inherit and strengthen prior interpretations of performance gains without isolating the underlying causal mechanism. To address this limitation, we propose a research direction based on evaluation designs that introduce controlled variation to separately measure semantic and physical generalization. Such designs make it possible to causally attribute performance without requiring access to model internals, and to empirically assess the role of VLM backbones as semantic interfaces rather than implicit sources of physical competence. Our goal is not to refute the role of VLMs in robotics, but to clarify the conditions under which claims of physical generalization can be meaningfully evaluated.
Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly being adopted in low-code and no-code automation platforms, where non-expert users design workflows that combine natural language understanding with external services and APIs. LLM agents are LLM systems that use LLMs as a core "brain" to reason, plan, and autonomously execute complex, multi-step tasks. In this paper, we present the first large-scale empirical study of LLM agentic workflows in low-code automation platforms. We analyze more than 6,000 publicly available n8n workflows and examine four aspects of their design: task distribution, structural and tool use patterns, reliability mechanisms, and autonomy levels. Our analysis shows that LLM workflows are not merely prompt response pipelines. Instead, LLMs are commonly embedded within broader automation structures involving control logic, external tools, communication services, storage systems, and human review points. We further find that while many workflows include lightweight post-processing or routing logic after LLM execution, explicit reliability mechanisms such as structured fallback paths, repair loops, failure-specific alerts, and human approval gates remain relatively uncommon. These results reveal a gap between the increasing deployment of LLM agents in practical automation ecosystems and the limited engineering support for reliability, safety, and governance. Overall, our study provides ten empirical findings and five research takeaways for researchers, platform developers, and practitioners seeking to understand and improve real-world LLM agentic workflows.
Abstract:Large language model (LLM) agents often rely on long sequences of low-level textual actions, resulting in large effective decision horizons and high inference cost. While prior work has focused on improving inference efficiency through system-level optimizations or prompt engineering, we argue that a key bottleneck lies in the representation of the action space itself. We propose Latent Action Reparameterization (LAR), a framework that learns a compact latent action space in which each latent action corresponds to a multi-step semantic behavior. By reparameterizing agent actions into latent units, LAR enables decision making over a shorter effective horizon while preserving the expressiveness of the original action space. Unlike hand-crafted macros or hierarchical controllers, latent actions are learned from agent trajectories and integrated directly into the model, allowing both planning and execution to operate over abstract action representations. Across a range of LLM-based agent benchmarks, LAR significantly reduces the effective action horizon and improves inference efficiency under fixed compute budgets. As a consequence, our approach achieves substantial reductions in action tokens and corresponding wall-clock inference time, while maintaining or improving task success rates. These results suggest that action representation learning is a critical and underexplored factor in scaling efficient LLM agent inference, complementary to advances in model architecture and hardware.
Abstract:Large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent simulation offers a powerful testbed for studying social opinion dynamics. Yet current approaches often adopt two contrasting methods: either relying on fixed update rules with limited cognitive grounding or delegating belief change largely to unconstrained LLM interaction. We introduce ScioMind, a cognitively grounded simulation framework that bridges these paradigms by combining structured opinion dynamics with LLM-based agent reasoning. ScioMind integrates three key components: 1) a memory-anchored belief update rule that modulates susceptibility to influence via personality-conditioned anchoring strength; 2) a hierarchical memory architecture that supports persistent, experience-driven belief formation; and 3) dynamic agent profiles derived from a corpus-grounded retrieval pipeline, enabling heterogeneous personalities, rationales, and evolving internal states. We evaluate ScioMind on multiple case studies in a real-world policy debate scenario. Across metrics including polarisation, diversity, extremization, and trajectory stability, the proposed components consistently yield improvements in behavioural realism. In particular, dynamic profiles increase opinion diversity, memory and reflection reduce unstable oscillation, and anchoring induces persistent belief trajectories that better align with patterns reported in political psychology. These results suggest that our cognitively grounded design provides a novel solution to LLM-based social simulation that improves both stable and behavioural realism
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) have become essential tools in software development, widely used for requirements engineering, code generation and review tasks. Software engineers often rely on LLMs to verify if code implementation satisfy task requirements, thereby ensuring code robustness and accuracy. However, it remains unclear whether LLMs can reliably determine code against the given task descriptions, which is usually in a form of natural language specifications. In this paper, we uncover a systematic failure of LLMs in matching code to natural language requirements. Specifically, with widely adopted benchmarks and unified prompts design, we demonstrate that LLMs frequently misclassify correct code implementation as non-compliant or defective. Surprisingly, we find that more detailed prompt design, particularly with those requiring explanations and proposed corrections, leads to higher misjudgment rates, highlighting critical reliability issues for LLM-based code assistants. We further analyze the mechanisms driving these failures and evaluate the reliability of rationale-required judgments. Building on these findings, we propose a Fix-guided Verification Filter that treats the model proposed fix as executable counterfactual evidence, and validates the original and revised implementations using benchmark tests and spec-constrained augmented tests. Our results expose previously under-explored limitations in LLM-based code review capabilities, and provide practical guidance for integrating LLM-based reviewers with safeguards in automated review and development pipelines.
Abstract:Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is one of the leading causes of vision loss worldwide, making early and accurate DR grading critical for timely intervention. Recent clinical practices leverage multi-view fundus images for DR detection with a wide coverage of the field of view (FOV), motivating deep learning methods to explore the potential of multi-view learning for DR grading. However, existing methods often overlook the inter-view correlations when fusing multi-view fundus images, failing to fully exploit the inherent consistency across views originating from the same patient. In this work, we present MVGFDR, an end-to-end Multi-View Graph Fusion framework for DR grading. Different from existing methods that directly fuse visual features from multiple views, MVGFDR is equipped with a novel Multi-View Graph Fusion (MVGF) module to explicitly disentangle the shared and view-specific visual features. Specifically, MVGF comprises three key components: (1) Multi-view Graph Initialization, which constructs visual graphs via residual-guided connections and employs Discrete Cosine Transform (DCT) coefficients as frequency-domain anchors; (2) Multi-view Graph Fusion, which integrates selective nodes across multi-view graphs based on frequency-domain relevance to capture complementary view-specific information; and (3) Masked Cross-view Reconstruction, which leverages masked reconstruction of shared information across views to facilitate view-invariant representation learning. Extensive experimental results on MFIDDR, by far the largest multi-view fundus image dataset, demonstrate the superiority of our proposed approach over existing state-of-the-art approaches in diabetic retinopathy grading.
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in domains where errors carry high social, scientific, or safety costs. Yet standard confidence estimators, such as token likelihood, semantic similarity and multi-sample consistency, remain brittle under distribution shift, domain-specialised text, and compute limits. In this work, we present Structural Confidence, a single-pass, model-agnostic framework that enhances output correctness prediction based on multi-scale structural signals derived from a model's final-layer hidden-state trajectory. By combining spectral, local-variation, and global shape descriptors, our method captures internal stability patterns that are missed by probabilities and sentence embeddings. We conduct extensive, cross-domain evaluation across four heterogeneous benchmarks-FEVER (fact verification), SciFact (scientific claims), WikiBio-hallucination (biographical consistency), and TruthfulQA (truthfulness-oriented QA). Our Structural Confidence framework demonstrates strong performance compared with established baselines in terms of AUROC and AUPR. More importantly, unlike sampling-based consistency methods which require multiple stochastic generations and an auxiliary model, our approach uses a single deterministic forward pass, offering a practical basis for efficient, robust post-hoc confidence estimation in socially impactful, resource-constrained LLM applications.




Abstract:As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted in safety-critical and regulated sectors, the retention of sensitive or prohibited knowledge introduces escalating risks, ranging from privacy leakage to regulatory non-compliance to to potential misuse, and so on. Recent studies suggest that machine unlearning can help ensure deployed models comply with evolving legal, safety, and governance requirements. However, current unlearning techniques assume clean separation between forget and retain datasets, which is challenging in operational settings characterized by highly entangled distributions. In such scenarios, perturbation-based methods often degrade general model utility or fail to ensure safety. To address this, we propose Selective Representation Misdirection for Unlearning (SRMU), a novel principled activation-editing framework that enforces feature-aware and directionally controlled perturbations. Unlike indiscriminate model weights perturbations, SRMU employs a structured misdirection vector with an activation importance map. The goal is to allow SRMU selectively suppresses harmful representations while preserving the utility on benign ones. Experiments are conducted on the widely used WMDP benchmark across low- and high-entanglement configurations. Empirical results reveal that SRMU delivers state-of-the-art unlearning performance with minimal utility losses, and remains effective under 20-30\% overlap where existing baselines collapse. SRMU provides a robust foundation for safety-driven model governance, privacy compliance, and controlled knowledge removal in the emerging LLM-based applications. We release the replication package at https://figshare.com/s/d5931192a8824de26aff.
Abstract:Federated learning (FL) enables privacy-preserving collaborative model training but remains vulnerable to adversarial behaviors that compromise model utility or fairness across sensitive groups. While extensive studies have examined attacks targeting either objective, strategies that simultaneously degrade both utility and fairness remain largely unexplored. To bridge this gap, we introduce the Dual-Facet Attack (DFA), a novel threat model that concurrently undermines predictive accuracy and group fairness. Two variants, Synchronous DFA (S-DFA) and Split DFA (Sp-DFA), are further proposed to capture distinct real-world collusion scenarios. Experimental results show that existing robust FL defenses, including hybrid aggregation schemes, fail to resist DFAs effectively. To counter these threats, we propose GuardFed, a self-adaptive defense framework that maintains a fairness-aware reference model using a small amount of clean server data augmented with synthetic samples. In each training round, GuardFed computes a dual-perspective trust score for every client by jointly evaluating its utility deviation and fairness degradation, thereby enabling selective aggregation of trustworthy updates. Extensive experiments on real-world datasets demonstrate that GuardFed consistently preserves both accuracy and fairness under diverse non-IID and adversarial conditions, achieving state-of-the-art performance compared with existing robust FL methods.