LLMs Should Incorporate Explicit Mechanisms for Human Empathy

This paper argues that Large Language Models (LLMs) should incorporate explicit mechanisms for human empathy. As LLMs become increasingly deployed in high-stakes human-centered settings, their success depends not only on correctness or fluency but on faithful preservation of human perspectives. Yet, current LLMs systematically fail at this requirement: even when well-aligned and policy-compliant, they often attenuate affect, misrepresent contextual salience, and rigidify relational stance in ways that distort meaning. We formalize empathy as an observable behavioral property: the capacity to model and respond to human perspectives while preserving intention, affect, and context. Under this framing, we identify four recurring mechanisms of empathic failure in contemporary LLMs--sentiment attenuation, empathic granularity mismatch, conflict avoidance, and linguistic distancing--arising as structural consequences of prevailing training and alignment practices. We further organize these failures along three dimensions: cognitive, cultural, and relational empathy, to explain their manifestation across tasks. Empirical analyses show that strong benchmark performance can mask systematic empathic distortions, motivating empathy-aware objectives, benchmarks, and training signals as first-class components of LLM development.

MG$^2$-RAG: Multi-Granularity Graph for Multimodal Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) mitigates hallucinations in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), yet existing systems struggle with complex cross-modal reasoning. Flat vector retrieval often ignores structural dependencies, while current graph-based methods rely on costly ``translation-to-text'' pipelines that discard fine-grained visual information. To address these limitations, we propose \textbf{MG$^2$-RAG}, a lightweight \textbf{M}ulti-\textbf{G}ranularity \textbf{G}raph \textbf{RAG} framework that jointly improves graph construction, modality fusion, and cross-modal retrieval. MG$^2$-RAG constructs a hierarchical multimodal knowledge graph by combining lightweight textual parsing with entity-driven visual grounding, enabling textual entities and visual regions to be fused into unified multimodal nodes that preserve atomic evidence. Building on this representation, we introduce a multi-granularity graph retrieval mechanism that aggregates dense similarities and propagates relevance across the graph to support structured multi-hop reasoning. Extensive experiments across four representative multimodal tasks (i.e., retrieval, knowledge-based VQA, reasoning, and classification) demonstrate that MG$^2$-RAG consistently achieves state-of-the-art performance while reducing graph construction overhead with an average 43.3$\times$ speedup and 23.9$\times$ cost reduction compared with advanced graph-based frameworks.

When Abundance Conceals Weakness: Knowledge Conflict in Multilingual Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) encode vast world knowledge across multiple languages, yet their internal beliefs are often unevenly distributed across linguistic spaces. When external evidence contradicts these language-dependent memories, models encounter \emph{cross-lingual knowledge conflict}, a phenomenon largely unexplored beyond English-centric settings. We introduce \textbf{CLEAR}, a \textbf{C}ross-\textbf{L}ingual knowl\textbf{E}dge conflict ev\textbf{A}luation f\textbf{R}amework that systematically examines how multilingual LLMs reconcile conflicting internal beliefs and multilingual external evidence. CLEAR decomposes conflict resolution into four progressive scenarios, from multilingual parametric elicitation to competitive multi-source cross-lingual induction, and systematically evaluates model behavior across two complementary QA benchmarks with distinct task characteristics. We construct multilingual versions of ConflictQA and ConflictingQA covering 10 typologically diverse languages and evaluate six representative LLMs. Our experiments reveal a task-dependent decision dichotomy. In reasoning-intensive tasks, conflict resolution is dominated by language resource abundance, with high-resource languages exerting stronger persuasive power. In contrast, for entity-centric factual conflicts, linguistic affinity, not resource scale, becomes decisive, allowing low-resource but linguistically aligned languages to outperform distant high-resource ones.