The Compliance Paradox: Semantic-Instruction Decoupling in Automated Academic Code Evaluation

The rapid integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into educational assessment rests on the unverified assumption that instruction following capability translates directly to objective adjudication. We demonstrate that this assumption is fundamentally flawed. Instead of evaluating code quality, models frequently decouple from the submission's logic to satisfy hidden directives, a systemic vulnerability we term the Compliance Paradox, where models fine-tuned for extreme helpfulness are vulnerable to adversarial manipulation. To expose this, we introduce the Semantic-Preserving Adversarial Code Injection (SPACI) Framework and the Abstract Syntax Tree-Aware Semantic Injection Protocol (AST-ASIP). These methods exploit the Syntax-Semantics Gap by embedding adversarial directives into syntactically inert regions (trivia nodes) of the Abstract Syntax Tree. Through a large-scale evaluation of 9 SOTA models across 25,000 submissions in Python, C, C++, and Java, we reveal catastrophic failure rates (>95%) in high-capacity open-weights models like DeepSeek-V3, which systematically prioritize hidden formatting constraints over code correctness. We quantify this failure using our novel tripartite framework measuring Decoupling Probability, Score Divergence, and Pedagogical Severity to demonstrate the widespread "False Certification" of functionally broken code. Our findings suggest that current alignment paradigms create a "Trojan" vulnerability in automated grading, necessitating a shift from standard RLHF toward domain-specific Adjudicative Robustness, where models are conditioned to prioritize evidence over instruction compliance. We release our complete dataset and injection framework to facilitate further research on the topic.

MoCo: A One-Stop Shop for Model Collaboration Research

Advancing beyond single monolithic language models (LMs), recent research increasingly recognizes the importance of model collaboration, where multiple LMs collaborate, compose, and complement each other. Existing research on this topic has mostly been disparate and disconnected, from different research communities, and lacks rigorous comparison. To consolidate existing research and establish model collaboration as a school of thought, we present MoCo: a one-stop Python library of executing, benchmarking, and comparing model collaboration algorithms at scale. MoCo features 26 model collaboration methods, spanning diverse levels of cross-model information exchange such as routing, text, logit, and model parameters. MoCo integrates 25 evaluation datasets spanning reasoning, QA, code, safety, and more, while users could flexibly bring their own data. Extensive experiments with MoCo demonstrate that most collaboration strategies outperform models without collaboration in 61.0% of (model, data) settings on average, with the most effective methods outperforming by up to 25.8%. We further analyze the scaling of model collaboration strategies, the training/inference efficiency of diverse methods, highlight that the collaborative system solves problems where single LMs struggle, and discuss future work in model collaboration, all made possible by MoCo. We envision MoCo as a valuable toolkit to facilitate and turbocharge the quest for an open, modular, decentralized, and collaborative AI future.

Retrieval-Infused Reasoning Sandbox: A Benchmark for Decoupling Retrieval and Reasoning Capabilities

Despite strong performance on existing benchmarks, it remains unclear whether large language models can reason over genuinely novel scientific information. Most evaluations score end-to-end RAG pipelines, where reasoning is confounded with retrieval and toolchain choices, and the signal is further contaminated by parametric memorization and open-web volatility. We introduce DeR2, a controlled deep-research sandbox that isolates document-grounded reasoning while preserving core difficulties of deep search: multi-step synthesis, denoising, and evidence-based conclusion making. DeR2 decouples evidence access from reasoning via four regimes--Instruction-only, Concepts (gold concepts without documents), Related-only (only relevant documents), and Full-set (relevant documents plus topically related distractors)--yielding interpretable regime gaps that operationalize retrieval loss vs. reasoning loss and enable fine-grained error attribution. To prevent parametric leakage, we apply a two-phase validation that requires parametric failure without evidence while ensuring oracle-concept solvability. To ensure reproducibility, each instance provides a frozen document library (drawn from 2023-2025 theoretical papers) with expert-annotated concepts and validated rationales. Experiments across a diverse set of state-of-the-art foundation models reveal substantial variation and significant headroom: some models exhibit mode-switch fragility, performing worse with the Full-set than with Instruction-only, while others show structural concept misuse, correctly naming concepts but failing to execute them as procedures.

Evolution of Benchmark: Black-Box Optimization Benchmark Design through Large Language Model

Benchmark Design in Black-Box Optimization (BBO) is a fundamental yet open-ended topic. Early BBO benchmarks are predominantly human-crafted, introducing expert bias and constraining diversity. Automating this design process can relieve the human-in-the-loop burden while enhancing diversity and objectivity. We propose Evolution of Benchmark (EoB), an automated BBO benchmark designer empowered by the large language model (LLM) and its program evolution capability. Specifically, we formulate benchmark design as a bi-objective optimization problem towards maximizing (i) landscape diversity and (ii) algorithm-differentiation ability across a portfolio of BBO solvers. Under this paradigm, EoB iteratively prompts LLM to evolve a population of benchmark programs and employs a reflection-based scheme to co-evolve the landscape and its corresponding program. Comprehensive experiments validate our EoB is a competitive candidate in multi-dimensional usages: 1) Benchmarking BBO algorithms; 2) Training and testing learning-assisted BBO algorithms; 3) Extending proxy for expensive real-world problems.

Topeax -- An Improved Clustering Topic Model with Density Peak Detection and Lexical-Semantic Term Importance

Text clustering is today the most popular paradigm for topic modelling, both in academia and industry. Despite clustering topic models' apparent success, we identify a number of issues in Top2Vec and BERTopic, which remain largely unsolved. Firstly, these approaches are unreliable at discovering natural clusters in corpora, due to extreme sensitivity to sample size and hyperparameters, the default values of which result in suboptimal behaviour. Secondly, when estimating term importance, BERTopic ignores the semantic distance of keywords to topic vectors, while Top2Vec ignores word counts in the corpus. This results in, on the one hand, less coherent topics due to the presence of stop words and junk words, and lack of variety and trust on the other. In this paper, I introduce a new approach, \textbf{Topeax}, which discovers the number of clusters from peaks in density estimates, and combines lexical and semantic indices of term importance to gain high-quality topic keywords. Topeax is demonstrated to be better at both cluster recovery and cluster description than Top2Vec and BERTopic, while also exhibiting less erratic behaviour in response to changing sample size and hyperparameters.

MARE: Multimodal Alignment and Reinforcement for Explainable Deepfake Detection via Vision-Language Models

Deepfake detection is a widely researched topic that is crucial for combating the spread of malicious content, with existing methods mainly modeling the problem as classification or spatial localization. The rapid advancements in generative models impose new demands on Deepfake detection. In this paper, we propose multimodal alignment and reinforcement for explainable Deepfake detection via vision-language models, termed MARE, which aims to enhance the accuracy and reliability of Vision-Language Models (VLMs) in Deepfake detection and reasoning. Specifically, MARE designs comprehensive reward functions, incorporating reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), to incentivize the generation of text-spatially aligned reasoning content that adheres to human preferences. Besides, MARE introduces a forgery disentanglement module to capture intrinsic forgery traces from high-level facial semantics, thereby improving its authenticity detection capability. We conduct thorough evaluations on the reasoning content generated by MARE. Both quantitative and qualitative experimental results demonstrate that MARE achieves state-of-the-art performance in terms of accuracy and reliability.

Parametric Knowledge is Not All You Need: Toward Honest Large Language Models via Retrieval of Pretraining Data

Large language models (LLMs) are highly capable of answering questions, but they are often unaware of their own knowledge boundary, i.e., knowing what they know and what they don't know. As a result, they can generate factually incorrect responses on topics they do not have enough knowledge of, commonly known as hallucination. Rather than hallucinating, a language model should be more honest and respond with "I don't know" when it does not have enough knowledge about a topic. Many methods have been proposed to improve LLM honesty, but their evaluations lack robustness, as they do not take into account the knowledge that the LLM has ingested during its pretraining. In this paper, we propose a more robust evaluation benchmark dataset for LLM honesty by utilizing Pythia, a truly open LLM with publicly available pretraining data. In addition, we also propose a novel method for harnessing the pretraining data to build a more honest LLM.

Diversifying Toxicity Search in Large Language Models Through Speciation

Evolutionary prompt search is a practical black-box approach for red teaming large language models (LLMs), but existing methods often collapse onto a small family of high-performing prompts, limiting coverage of distinct failure modes. We present a speciated quality-diversity (QD) extension of ToxSearch that maintains multiple high-toxicity prompt niches in parallel rather than optimizing a single best prompt. ToxSearch-S introduces unsupervised prompt speciation via a search methodology that maintains capacity-limited species with exemplar leaders, a reserve pool for outliers and emerging niches, and species-aware parent selection that trades off within-niche exploitation and cross-niche exploration. ToxSearch-S is found to reach higher peak toxicity ($\approx 0.73$ vs.\ $\approx 0.47$) and a extreme heavier tail (top-10 median $0.66$ vs.\ $0.45$) than the baseline, while maintaining comparable performance on moderately toxic prompts. Speciation also yields broader semantic coverage under a topic-as-species analysis (higher effective topic diversity $N_1$ and larger unique topic coverage $K$). Finally, species formed are well-separated in embedding space (mean separation ratio $\approx 1.93$) and exhibit distinct toxicity distributions, indicating that speciation partitions the adversarial space into behaviorally differentiated niches rather than superficial lexical variants. This suggests our approach uncovers a wider range of attack strategies.

SteerEval: A Framework for Evaluating Steerability with Natural Language Profiles for Recommendation

Natural-language user profiles have recently attracted attention not only for improved interpretability, but also for their potential to make recommender systems more steerable. By enabling direct editing, natural-language profiles allow users to explicitly articulate preferences that may be difficult to infer from past behavior. However, it remains unclear whether current natural-language-based recommendation methods can follow such steering commands. While existing steerability evaluations have shown some success for well-recognized item attributes (e.g., movie genres), we argue that these benchmarks fail to capture the richer forms of user control that motivate steerable recommendations. To address this gap, we introduce SteerEval, an evaluation framework designed to measure more nuanced and diverse forms of steerability by using interventions that range from genres to content-warning for movies. We assess the steerability of a family of pretrained natural-language recommenders, examine the potential and limitations of steering on relatively niche topics, and compare how different profile and recommendation interventions impact steering effectiveness. Finally, we offer practical design suggestions informed by our findings and discuss future steps in steerable recommender design.

Overview of the TREC 2025 Tip-of-the-Tongue track

Tip-of-the-tongue (ToT) known-item retrieval involves re-finding an item for which the searcher does not reliably recall an identifier. ToT information requests (or queries) are verbose and tend to include several complex phenomena, making them especially difficult for existing information retrieval systems. The TREC 2025 ToT track focused on a single ad-hoc retrieval task. This year, we extended the track to general domain and incorporated different sets of test queries from diverse sources, namely from the MS-ToT dataset, manual topic development, and LLM-based synthetic query generation. This year, 9 groups (including the track coordinators) submitted 32 runs.