Abstract:The widespread use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in text generation has raised increasing concerns about intellectual property disputes. Watermarking techniques, which embed meta information into AI-generated content (AIGC), have the potential to serve as judicial evidence. However, existing methods rely on statistical signals in token distributions, leading to inherently probabilistic detection and reduced reliability, especially in multi-bit encoding (e.g., timestamps). Moreover, such methods introduce detectable statistical patterns, making them vulnerable to forgery attacks and enabling model providers to fabricate arbitrary watermarks. To address these issues, we propose the concept of trustworthy watermark, which achieves reliable recovery with 100% identification accuracy while resisting both user-side statistical attacks and provider-side forgery. We focus on trustworthy time watermarking for use as judicial evidence. Our framework integrates cryptographic techniques and encodes time information into time-dependent secret keys under regulatory supervision, preventing arbitrary timestamp fabrication. The watermark payload is decoupled from time and generated as a random, non-stored bit sequence for each instance, eliminating statistical patterns. To ensure verifiability, we design a two-stage encoding mechanism, which, combined with error-correcting codes, enables reliable recovery of generation time with theoretically perfect accuracy. Both theoretical analysis and experiments demonstrate that our framework satisfies the reliability requirements for judicial evidence and offers a practical solution for future AIGC-related intellectual property disputes.
Abstract:Talent recruitment is a critical, yet costly process for many industries, with high recruitment costs and long hiring cycles. Existing talent recommendation systems increasingly adopt large language models (LLMs) due to their remarkable language understanding capabilities. However, most prior approaches follow a pointwise paradigm, which requires LLMs to repeatedly process some text and fails to capture the relationships among candidates in the list, resulting in higher token consumption and suboptimal recommendations. Besides, LLMs exhibit position bias and the lost-in-the-middle issue when answering multiple-choice questions and processing multiple long documents. To address these issues, we introduce an implicit strategy to utilize LLM's potential output for the recommendation task and propose L3TR, a novel framework for listwise talent recommendation with LLMs. In this framework, we propose a block attention mechanism and a local positional encoding method to enhance inter-document processing and mitigate the position bias and concurrent token bias issue. We also introduce an ID sampling method for resolving the inconsistency between candidate set sizes in the training phase and the inference phase. We design evaluation methods to detect position bias and token bias and training-free debiasing methods. Extensive experiments on two real-world datasets validated the effectiveness of L3TR, showing consistent improvements over existing baselines.
Abstract:Competency modeling is widely used in human resource management to select, develop, and evaluate talent. However, traditional expert-driven approaches rely heavily on manual analysis of large volumes of interview transcripts, making them costly and prone to randomness, ambiguity, and limited reproducibility. This study proposes a new competency modeling process built on large language models (LLMs). Instead of merely automating isolated steps, we reconstruct the workflow by decomposing expert practices into structured computational components. Specifically, we leverage LLMs to extract behavioral and psychological descriptions from raw textual data and map them to predefined competency libraries through embedding-based similarity. We further introduce a learnable parameter that adaptively integrates different information sources, enabling the model to determine the relative importance of behavioral and psychological signals. To address the long-standing challenge of validation, we develop an offline evaluation procedure that allows systematic model selection without requiring additional large-scale data collection. Empirical results from a real-world implementation in a software outsourcing company demonstrate strong predictive validity, cross-library consistency, and structural robustness. Overall, our framework transforms competency modeling from a largely qualitative and expert-dependent practice into a transparent, data-driven, and evaluable analytical process.




Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) have shown great promise in automating data science workflows, but existing models still struggle with multi-step reasoning and tool use, which limits their effectiveness on complex data analysis tasks. To address this, we propose a scalable pipeline that extracts high-quality, tool-based data analysis tasks and their executable multi-step solutions from real-world Jupyter notebooks and associated data files. Using this pipeline, we introduce NbQA, a large-scale dataset of standardized task-solution pairs that reflect authentic tool-use patterns in practical data science scenarios. To further enhance multi-step reasoning, we present Jupiter, a framework that formulates data analysis as a search problem and applies Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to generate diverse solution trajectories for value model learning. During inference, Jupiter combines the value model and node visit counts to efficiently collect executable multi-step plans with minimal search steps. Experimental results show that Qwen2.5-7B and 14B-Instruct models on NbQA solve 77.82% and 86.38% of tasks on InfiAgent-DABench, respectively-matching or surpassing GPT-4o and advanced agent frameworks. Further evaluations demonstrate improved generalization and stronger tool-use reasoning across diverse multi-step reasoning tasks.




Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited memorable strategic behaviors in social deductive games. However, the significance of opinion leadership exhibited by LLM-based agents has been overlooked, which is crucial for practical applications in multi-agent and human-AI interaction settings. Opinion leaders are individuals who have a noticeable impact on the beliefs and behaviors of others within a social group. In this work, we employ the Werewolf game as a simulation platform to assess the opinion leadership of LLMs. The game features the role of the Sheriff, tasked with summarizing arguments and recommending decision options, and therefore serves as a credible proxy for an opinion leader. We develop a framework integrating the Sheriff role and devise two novel metrics for evaluation based on the critical characteristics of opinion leaders. The first metric measures the reliability of the opinion leader, and the second assesses the influence of the opinion leader on other players' decisions. We conduct extensive experiments to evaluate LLMs of different scales. In addition, we collect a Werewolf question-answering dataset (WWQA) to assess and enhance LLM's grasp of the game rules, and we also incorporate human participants for further analysis. The results suggest that the Werewolf game is a suitable test bed to evaluate the opinion leadership of LLMs and few LLMs possess the capacity for opinion leadership.