Abstract:The democratization of LLMs has accelerated the generation and circulation of highly fluent disinformation, making traditional syntax-semantic verification increasingly insufficient. Such deception rarely relies solely on surface-level falsity; instead, it often combines persuasive rhetoric, emotional manipulation, and narrative role construction to influence readers' interpretations through multiple cognitive pathways. However, existing detectors typically emphasize isolated signals -- such as syntax, external knowledge, persuasion, or affective cues -- and therefore struggle to capture the multi-faceted manipulative intents underlying disinformation or provide human-auditable explanations. To address this gap, we present \textbf{ExTax}, a taxonomy-aligned framework for explainable disinformation detection. ExTax unifies persuasive rhetoric, emotional manipulation, and narrative roles into a 17-dimensional taxonomic space, covering 6 persuasive-rhetoric strategies, 5 emotional-manipulation methods, and 6 narrative-role categories. It elicits attributes from multiple frontier LLMs, reconciles their disagreements through Entropy-driven Dynamic Label Smoothing, and fuses the resulting taxonomic representations with contextual encodings via Heterogeneous Multi-Head Attention, grounding each prediction in an interpretable manipulation profile. Across five cross-domain and cross-genre benchmarks, ExTax achieves an overall Macro $F_1$ of $0.8456$, outperforming state-of-the-art deep learning and LLM-based baselines. It also remains robust under severe genre imbalance, where the strongest deep baseline degrades from $0.9454$ to $0.6194$.
Abstract:Frontier multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have been reported to achieve over 90% accuracy on fine-grained perception benchmarks. However, such scores do not necessarily imply faithful use of visual evidence. Prior studies have identified three shortcuts that inflate benchmark performance. First, linguistic priors and lexical cues in questions often enable models to infer plausible answers without seeing the image. Second, coarse global semantics from the visual encoder can bypass fine-grained local details. Third, in some ``think-with-images'' benchmarks, corrupting the intermediate images returned by visual tools barely affects the final answer. These findings suggest that higher input resolution or larger question pools alone do not elicit genuine active visual search. To address this, we introduce VisualNeedle, a challenging, information-dense, and fine-grained benchmark for scenes where critical evidence is spatially constrained to minute regions and not discernible at a glance. We further propose a counterfactual crop-black setting, which replaces crops returned by tools with black images of the same size, to test whether tool-enabled performance truly relies on intermediate visual evidence. We evaluate 9 promninent MLLMs across three settings: no-tool, standard tool-enabled, and crop-black. No-tool accuracy stays below 20\%, and the best tool-enabled model reaches only 56.01\%, still trailing the 63.00% human majority-vote accuracy. These results reveal persistent limitations in fine-grained visual search, while the crop-black ablation confirms that success on VisualNeedle hinges on genuine intermediate visual evidence.
Abstract:Evaluating large language models (LLMs) is increasingly confounded by \emph{variant contamination}: the training corpus contains semantically equivalent yet lexically or syntactically altered versions of test items. Unlike verbatim leakage, these paraphrased or structurally transformed variants evade existing detectors based on sampling consistency or perplexity, thereby inflating benchmark scores via memorization rather than genuine reasoning. We formalize this problem and introduce \textbf{DVD} (\textbf{D}etection via \textbf{V}ariance of generation \textbf{D}istribution), a single-sample detector that models the local output distribution induced by temperature sampling. Our key insight is that contaminated items trigger alternation between a \emph{memory-adherence} state and a \emph{perturbation-drift} state, yielding abnormally high variance in the synthetic difficulty of low-probability tokens; uncontaminated items remain in drift with comparatively smooth variance. We construct the first benchmark for variant contamination across two domains Omni-MATH and SuperGPQA by generating and filtering semantically equivalent variants, and simulate contamination via fine-tuning models of different scales and architectures (Qwen2.5 and Llama3.1). Across datasets and models, \textbf{DVD} consistently outperforms perplexity-based, Min-$k$\%++, edit-distance (CDD), and embedding-similarity baselines, while exhibiting strong robustness to hyperparameters. Our results establish variance of the generation distribution as a principled and practical fingerprint for detecting variant contamination in LLM evaluation.
Abstract:Humor is a fundamental facet of human cognition and interaction. Yet, despite recent advances in natural language processing, humor detection remains a challenging task that is complicated by the scarcity of datasets that pair humorous texts with similar non-humorous counterparts. In our work, we investigate whether large language models (LLMs), can generate synthetic data for humor detection via editing texts. We benchmark LLMs on an existing human dataset and show that current LLMs display an impressive ability to `unfun' jokes, as judged by humans and as measured on the downstream task of humor detection. We extend our approach to a code-mixed English-Hindi humor dataset, where we find that GPT-4's synthetic data is highly rated by bilingual annotators and provides challenging adversarial examples for humor classifiers.