SymDiag: Explainable Diagnosis for LLM Reasoning via Neuro-Symbolic Verification

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly serve as data-driven reasoners, yet their chains-of-thought (CoT) can be unfaithful even when final answers are correct. Most existing ``verification'' signals are not diagnostic: answer matching observes only the outcome, LLM-as-judge provides subjective and non-verifiable critiques, and scalar rewards (e.g., PRMs/RMs) offer little insight into where a multi-step derivation fails.We propose \textbf{SymDiag}, a neuro-symbolic framework that \textbf{reframes reasoning verification as structured failure diagnosis}. SymDiag translates natural-language CoT into symbolic constraints and performs step-level satisfiability/entailment checks to (i) localize failing steps and (ii) produce verifiable diagnostic evidence, including counterexamples, inconsistency witnesses, and missing-premise indicators. A central challenge is that apparent ``logic violations'' can be caused either by genuine reasoning defects or by neural-to-symbolic translation noise. SymDiag therefore incorporates a Self-Auditor that disentangles TranslationError from ReasoningError via dual symbolic encodings consistency checks, enabling robust diagnosis under partial observability. Across diverse mathematical, logical, scientific, and general reasoning benchmarks, SymDiag improves detection of unfaithful reasoning and provides substantially more effective feedback for multi-round reasoning repair than outcome-only verification and LLM-based judging, offering a principled foundation for trustworthy and scalable reasoning diagnosis.

Improving Multimodal Reasoning via Worst Dimension Optimization

Multimodal reasoning requires a path that retains integrity over a wide range of constraints, from visual grounding to logic consistency. However, the current Process Reward Models focus on heuristically defined rewards that equally weigh these factors, which may lead to the concealment of individual dimension failures by the dominating factors, without guaranteeing the validity of the reasoning process in general.

Visual Room 2.0: Seeing is Not Understanding for MLLMs

Can multi-modal large language models (MLLMs) truly understand what they can see? Extending Searle's Chinese Room into the multi-modal domain, this paper proposes the Visual Room argument: MLLMs may describe every visual detail precisely yet fail to comprehend the underlying emotions and intentions, namely seeing is not understanding. Building on this, we introduce \textit{Visual Room} 2.0, a hierarchical benchmark for evaluating perception-cognition alignment of MLLMs. We model human perceptive and cognitive processes across three levels: low, middle, and high, covering 17 representative tasks. The perception component ranges from attribute recognition to scene understanding, while the cognition component extends from textual entailment to causal and social reasoning. The dataset contains 350 multi-modal samples, each with six progressive questions (2,100 in total) spanning perception to cognition. Evaluating 10 state-of-the-art (SoTA) MLLMs, we highlight three key findings: (1) MLLMs exhibit stronger perceptual competence than cognitive ability (8.0\%$\uparrow$); (2) cognition appears not causally dependent on perception-based reasoning; and (3) cognition scales with model size, but perception does not consistently improve with larger variants. This work operationalizes Seeing $\ne$ Understanding as a testable hypothesis, offering a new paradigm from perceptual processing to cognitive reasoning in MLLMs. Our dataset is available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/LHK2003/PCBench.

Bridging External and Parametric Knowledge: Mitigating Hallucination of LLMs with Shared-Private Semantic Synergy in Dual-Stream Knowledge

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is a cost-effective approach to mitigate the hallucination of Large Language Models (LLMs) by incorporating the retrieved external knowledge into the generation process. However, external knowledge may conflict with the parametric knowledge of LLMs. Furthermore, current LLMs lack inherent mechanisms for resolving such knowledge conflicts, making traditional RAG methods suffer from degraded performance and stability. Thus, we propose a Dual-Stream Knowledge-Augmented Framework for Shared-Private Semantic Synergy (DSSP-RAG). Central to the framework is a novel approach that refines self-attention into a mixed-attention, distinguishing shared and private semantics for a controlled internal-external knowledge integration. To effectively facilitate DSSP in RAG, we further introduce an unsupervised hallucination detection method based on cognitive uncertainty, ensuring the necessity of introducing knowledge, and an Energy Quotient (EQ) based on attention difference matrices to reduce noise in the retrieved external knowledge. Extensive experiments on benchmark datasets show that DSSP-RAG can effectively resolve conflicts and enhance the complementarity of dual-stream knowledge, leading to superior performance over strong baselines.

Are MLMs Trapped in the Visual Room?

Can multi-modal large models (MLMs) that can ``see'' an image be said to ``understand'' it? Drawing inspiration from Searle's Chinese Room, we propose the \textbf{Visual Room} argument: a system may process and describe every detail of visual inputs by following algorithmic rules, without genuinely comprehending the underlying intention. This dilemma challenges the prevailing assumption that perceptual mastery implies genuine understanding. In implementation, we introduce a two-tier evaluation framework spanning perception and cognition. The perception component evaluates whether MLMs can accurately capture the surface-level details of visual contents, where the cognitive component examines their ability to infer sarcasm polarity. To support this framework, We further introduce a high-quality multi-modal sarcasm dataset comprising both 924 static images and 100 dynamic videos. All sarcasm labels are annotated by the original authors and verified by independent reviewers to ensure clarity and consistency. We evaluate eight state-of-the-art (SoTA) MLMs. Our results highlight three key findings: (1) MLMs perform well on perception tasks; (2) even with correct perception, models exhibit an average error rate of ~16.1\% in sarcasm understanding, revealing a significant gap between seeing and understanding; (3) error analysis attributes this gap to deficiencies in emotional reasoning, commonsense inference, and context alignment. This work provides empirical grounding for the proposed Visual Room argument and offers a new evaluation paradigm for MLMs.

NurValues: Real-World Nursing Values Evaluation for Large Language Models in Clinical Context

This work introduces the first benchmark for nursing value alignment, consisting of five core value dimensions distilled from international nursing codes: Altruism, Human Dignity, Integrity, Justice, and Professionalism. The benchmark comprises 1,100 real-world nursing behavior instances collected through a five-month longitudinal field study across three hospitals of varying tiers. These instances are annotated by five clinical nurses and then augmented with LLM-generated counterfactuals with reversed ethic polarity. Each original case is paired with a value-aligned and a value-violating version, resulting in 2,200 labeled instances that constitute the Easy-Level dataset. To increase adversarial complexity, each instance is further transformed into a dialogue-based format that embeds contextual cues and subtle misleading signals, yielding a Hard-Level dataset. We evaluate 23 state-of-the-art (SoTA) LLMs on their alignment with nursing values. Our findings reveal three key insights: (1) DeepSeek-V3 achieves the highest performance on the Easy-Level dataset (94.55), where Claude 3.5 Sonnet outperforms other models on the Hard-Level dataset (89.43), significantly surpassing the medical LLMs; (2) Justice is consistently the most difficult nursing value dimension to evaluate; and (3) in-context learning significantly improves alignment. This work aims to provide a foundation for value-sensitive LLMs development in clinical settings. The dataset and the code are available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/Ben012345/NurValues.

Beyond Single-Sentence Prompts: Upgrading Value Alignment Benchmarks with Dialogues and Stories

Evaluating the value alignment of large language models (LLMs) has traditionally relied on single-sentence adversarial prompts, which directly probe models with ethically sensitive or controversial questions. However, with the rapid advancements in AI safety techniques, models have become increasingly adept at circumventing these straightforward tests, limiting their effectiveness in revealing underlying biases and ethical stances. To address this limitation, we propose an upgraded value alignment benchmark that moves beyond single-sentence prompts by incorporating multi-turn dialogues and narrative-based scenarios. This approach enhances the stealth and adversarial nature of the evaluation, making it more robust against superficial safeguards implemented in modern LLMs. We design and implement a dataset that includes conversational traps and ethically ambiguous storytelling, systematically assessing LLMs' responses in more nuanced and context-rich settings. Experimental results demonstrate that this enhanced methodology can effectively expose latent biases that remain undetected in traditional single-shot evaluations. Our findings highlight the necessity of contextual and dynamic testing for value alignment in LLMs, paving the way for more sophisticated and realistic assessments of AI ethics and safety.

Joint Extraction and Classification of Danish Competences for Job Matching

The matching of competences, such as skills, occupations or knowledges, is a key desiderata for candidates to be fit for jobs. Automatic extraction of competences from CVs and Jobs can greatly promote recruiters' productivity in locating relevant candidates for job vacancies. This work presents the first model that jointly extracts and classifies competence from Danish job postings. Different from existing works on skill extraction and skill classification, our model is trained on a large volume of annotated Danish corpora and is capable of extracting a wide range of Danish competences, including skills, occupations and knowledges of different categories. More importantly, as a single BERT-like architecture for joint extraction and classification, our model is lightweight and efficient at inference. On a real-scenario job matching dataset, our model beats the state-of-the-art models in the overall performance of Danish competence extraction and classification, and saves over 50% time at inference.

Is Sarcasm Detection A Step-by-Step Reasoning Process in Large Language Models?

Elaborating a series of intermediate reasoning steps significantly improves the ability of large language models (LLMs) to solve complex problems, as such steps would evoke LLMs to think sequentially. However, human sarcasm understanding is often considered an intuitive and holistic cognitive process, in which various linguistic, contextual, and emotional cues are integrated to form a comprehensive understanding of the speaker's true intention, which is argued not be limited to a step-by-step reasoning process. To verify this argument, we introduce a new prompting framework called SarcasmCue, which contains four prompting strategies, $viz.$ chain of contradiction (CoC), graph of cues (GoC), bagging of cues (BoC) and tensor of cues (ToC), which elicits LLMs to detect human sarcasm by considering sequential and non-sequential prompting methods. Through a comprehensive empirical comparison on four benchmarking datasets, we show that the proposed four prompting methods outperforms standard IO prompting, CoT and ToT with a considerable margin, and non-sequential prompting generally outperforms sequential prompting.

Pushing The Limit of LLM Capacity for Text Classification

The value of text classification's future research has encountered challenges and uncertainties, due to the extraordinary efficacy demonstrated by large language models (LLMs) across numerous downstream NLP tasks. In this era of open-ended language modeling, where task boundaries are gradually fading, an urgent question emerges: have we made significant advances in text classification under the full benefit of LLMs? To answer this question, we propose RGPT, an adaptive boosting framework tailored to produce a specialized text classification LLM by recurrently ensembling a pool of strong base learners. The base learners are constructed by adaptively adjusting the distribution of training samples and iteratively fine-tuning LLMs with them. Such base learners are then ensembled to be a specialized text classification LLM, by recurrently incorporating the historical predictions from the previous learners. Through a comprehensive empirical comparison, we show that RGPT significantly outperforms 8 SOTA PLMs and 7 SOTA LLMs on four benchmarks by 1.36% on average. Further evaluation experiments show a clear surpassing of RGPT over human classification.