MALM: A Multi-Information Adapter for Large Language Models to Mitigate Hallucination

Large language models (LLMs) are prone to three types of hallucination: Input-Conflicting, Context-Conflicting and Fact-Conflicting hallucinations. The purpose of this study is to mitigate the different types of hallucination by exploiting the interdependence between them. For this purpose, we propose a Multi-Information Adapter for Large Language Models (MALM). This framework employs a tailored multi-graph learning approach designed to elucidate the interconnections between original inputs, contextual information, and external factual knowledge, thereby alleviating the three categories of hallucination within a cohesive framework. Experiments were carried out on four benchmarking datasets: HaluEval, TruthfulQA, Natural Questions, and TriviaQA. We evaluated the proposed framework in two aspects: (1) adaptability to different base LLMs on HaluEval and TruthfulQA, to confirm if MALM is effective when applied on 7 typical LLMs. MALM showed significant improvements over LLaMA-2; (2) generalizability to retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) by combining MALM with three representative retrievers (BM25, Spider and DPR) separately. Furthermore, automated and human evaluations were conducted to substantiate the correctness of experimental results, where GPT-4 and 3 human volunteers judged which response was better between LLaMA-2 and MALM. The results showed that both GPT-4 and human preferred MALM in 79.4% and 65.6% of cases respectively. The results validate that incorporating the complex interactions between the three types of hallucination through a multilayered graph attention network into the LLM generation process is effective to mitigate the them. The adapter design of the proposed approach is also proven flexible and robust across different base LLMs.

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.

Emotion-o1: Adaptive Long Reasoning for Emotion Understanding in LLMs

Emotion understanding includes basic tasks (e.g., sentiment/emotion classification) and advanced tasks (e.g., sarcasm/humor detection). Current methods rely on fixed-length CoT reasoning, failing to adapt to the varying complexity of emotions. We propose a task-adaptive reasoning framework that employs DeepSeek-R1 to generate variable-length reasoning chains for different emotion tasks. By combining fine-tuning with reinforcement learning, we design a composite reward function that balances four objectives: prediction accuracy, adaptive reasoning depth control, structural diversity in reasoning paths, and suppression of repetitive logic. This approach achieves dynamic context-sensitive inference while enabling LLMs to autonomously develop deep reasoning capabilities. Experimental results demonstrate consistent improvements in both Acc and F1 scores across four tasks: emotion, sentiment, humor, and sarcasm. Notably, peak enhancements reached 3.56% F1 (2.76% Acc) for basic tasks and 37.95% F1 (23.14% Acc) for advanced tasks. Our work bridges rigid CoT reasoning and emotional complexity through adaptive-depth analysis.

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.

Commander-GPT: Fully Unleashing the Sarcasm Detection Capability of Multi-Modal Large Language Models

Sarcasm detection, as a crucial research direction in the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP), has attracted widespread attention. Traditional sarcasm detection tasks have typically focused on single-modal approaches (e.g., text), but due to the implicit and subtle nature of sarcasm, such methods often fail to yield satisfactory results. In recent years, researchers have shifted the focus of sarcasm detection to multi-modal approaches. However, effectively leveraging multi-modal information to accurately identify sarcastic content remains a challenge that warrants further exploration. Leveraging the powerful integrated processing capabilities of Multi-Modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) for various information sources, we propose an innovative multi-modal Commander-GPT framework. Inspired by military strategy, we first decompose the sarcasm detection task into six distinct sub-tasks. A central commander (decision-maker) then assigns the best-suited large language model to address each specific sub-task. Ultimately, the detection results from each model are aggregated to identify sarcasm. We conducted extensive experiments on MMSD and MMSD 2.0, utilizing four multi-modal large language models and six prompting strategies. Our experiments demonstrate that our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance, with a 19.3% improvement in F1 score, without necessitating fine-tuning or ground-truth rationales.

SarcasmBench: Towards Evaluating Large Language Models on Sarcasm Understanding

In the era of large language models (LLMs), the task of ``System I''~-~the fast, unconscious, and intuitive tasks, e.g., sentiment analysis, text classification, etc., have been argued to be successfully solved. However, sarcasm, as a subtle linguistic phenomenon, often employs rhetorical devices like hyperbole and figuration to convey true sentiments and intentions, involving a higher level of abstraction than sentiment analysis. There is growing concern that the argument about LLMs' success may not be fully tenable when considering sarcasm understanding. To address this question, we select eleven SOTA LLMs and eight SOTA pre-trained language models (PLMs) and present comprehensive evaluations on six widely used benchmark datasets through different prompting approaches, i.e., zero-shot input/output (IO) prompting, few-shot IO prompting, chain of thought (CoT) prompting. Our results highlight three key findings: (1) current LLMs underperform supervised PLMs based sarcasm detection baselines across six sarcasm benchmarks. This suggests that significant efforts are still required to improve LLMs' understanding of human sarcasm. (2) GPT-4 consistently and significantly outperforms other LLMs across various prompting methods, with an average improvement of 14.0\%$\uparrow$. Claude 3 and ChatGPT demonstrate the next best performance after GPT-4. (3) Few-shot IO prompting method outperforms the other two methods: zero-shot IO and few-shot CoT. The reason is that sarcasm detection, being a holistic, intuitive, and non-rational cognitive process, is argued not to adhere to step-by-step logical reasoning, making CoT less effective in understanding sarcasm compared to its effectiveness in mathematical reasoning tasks.

Towards Evaluating Large Language Models on Sarcasm Understanding

In the era of large language models (LLMs), the task of ``System I''~-~the fast, unconscious, and intuitive tasks, e.g., sentiment analysis, text classification, etc., have been argued to be successfully solved. However, sarcasm, as a subtle linguistic phenomenon, often employs rhetorical devices like hyperbole and figuration to convey true sentiments and intentions, involving a higher level of abstraction than sentiment analysis. There is growing concern that the argument about LLMs' success may not be fully tenable when considering sarcasm understanding. To address this question, we select eleven SOTA LLMs and eight SOTA pre-trained language models (PLMs) and present comprehensive evaluations on six widely used benchmark datasets through different prompting approaches, i.e., zero-shot input/output (IO) prompting, few-shot IO prompting, chain of thought (CoT) prompting. Our results highlight three key findings: (1) current LLMs underperform supervised PLMs based sarcasm detection baselines across six sarcasm benchmarks. This suggests that significant efforts are still required to improve LLMs' understanding of human sarcasm. (2) GPT-4 consistently and significantly outperforms other LLMs across various prompting methods, with an average improvement of 14.0\%$\uparrow$. Claude 3 and ChatGPT demonstrate the next best performance after GPT-4. (3) Few-shot IO prompting method outperforms the other two methods: zero-shot IO and few-shot CoT. The reason is that sarcasm detection, being a holistic, intuitive, and non-rational cognitive process, is argued not to adhere to step-by-step logical reasoning, making CoT less effective in understanding sarcasm compared to its effectiveness in mathematical reasoning tasks.

Chain of Stance: Stance Detection with Large Language Models

Stance detection is an active task in natural language processing (NLP) that aims to identify the author's stance towards a particular target within a text. Given the remarkable language understanding capabilities and encyclopedic prior knowledge of large language models (LLMs), how to explore the potential of LLMs in stance detection has received significant attention. Unlike existing LLM-based approaches that focus solely on fine-tuning with large-scale datasets, we propose a new prompting method, called \textit{Chain of Stance} (CoS). In particular, it positions LLMs as expert stance detectors by decomposing the stance detection process into a series of intermediate, stance-related assertions that culminate in the final judgment. This approach leads to significant improvements in classification performance. We conducted extensive experiments using four SOTA LLMs on the SemEval 2016 dataset, covering the zero-shot and few-shot learning setups. The results indicate that the proposed method achieves state-of-the-art results with an F1 score of 79.84 in the few-shot setting.

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.