SplitLight: An Exploratory Toolkit for Recommender Systems Datasets and Splits

Offline evaluation of recommender systems is often affected by hidden, under-documented choices in data preparation. Seemingly minor decisions in filtering, handling repeats, cold-start treatment, and splitting strategy design can substantially reorder model rankings and undermine reproducibility and cross-paper comparability. In this paper, we introduce SplitLight, an open-source exploratory toolkit that enables researchers and practitioners designing preprocessing and splitting pipelines or reviewing external artifacts to make these decisions measurable, comparable, and reportable. Given an interaction log and derived split subsets, SplitLight analyzes core and temporal dataset statistics, characterizes repeat consumption patterns and timestamp anomalies, and diagnoses split validity, including temporal leakage, cold-user/item exposure, and distribution shifts. SplitLight further allows side-by-side comparison of alternative splitting strategies through comprehensive aggregated summaries and interactive visualizations. Delivered as both a Python toolkit and an interactive no-code interface, SplitLight produces audit summaries that justify evaluation protocols and support transparent, reliable, and comparable experimentation in recommender systems research and industry.

A User-driven Design Framework for Robotaxi

Robotaxis are emerging as a promising form of urban mobility, yet research has largely emphasized technical driving performance while leaving open how passengers experience and evaluate rides without a human driver. To address the limitations of prior work that often relies on simulated or hypothetical settings, we investigate real-world robotaxi use through 18 semi-structured interviews and autoethnographic ride experiences. We found that users were drawn to robotaxis by low cost, social recommendation, and curiosity. They valued a distinctive set of benefits, such as an increased sense of agency, and consistent driving behavioral consistency and standardized ride experiences. However, they encountered persistent challenges around limited flexibility, insufficient transparency, management difficulty, robustness concerns in edge cases, and emergency handling concerns. Robotaxi experiences were shaped by privacy, safety, ethics, and trust. Users were often privacy-indifferent yet sensitive to opaque access and leakage risks; safety perceptions were polarized; and ethical considerations surfaced round issues such as accountability, feedback responsibility and absence of human-like social norms. Based on these findings, we propose a user-driven design framework spanning the end-to-end journey, such as pre-ride configuration (hailing), context-aware pickup facilitation (pick-up) in-ride explainability (traveling), and accountable post-ride feedback (drop-off) to guide robotaxi interaction and service design.

Health+: Empowering Individuals via Unifying Health Data

Managing personal health data is a challenge in today's fragmented and institution-centric healthcare ecosystem. Individuals often lack meaningful control over their medical records, which are scattered across incompatible systems and formats. This vision paper presents Health+, a user-centric, multimodal health data management system that empowers individuals (including those with limited technical expertise) to upload, query, and share their data across modalities (e.g., text, images, reports). Rather than aiming for institutional overhaul, Health+ emphasizes individual agency by providing intuitive interfaces and intelligent recommendations for data access and sharing. At the system level, it tackles the complexity of storing, integrating, and securing heterogeneous health records, ensuring both efficiency and privacy. By unifying multimodal data and prioritizing patients, Health+ lays the foundation for a more connected, interpretable, and user-controlled health information ecosystem.

When Do LLM Preferences Predict Downstream Behavior?

Preference-driven behavior in LLMs may be a necessary precondition for AI misalignment such as sandbagging: models cannot strategically pursue misaligned goals unless their behavior is influenced by their preferences. Yet prior work has typically prompted models explicitly to act in specific ways, leaving unclear whether observed behaviors reflect instruction-following capabilities vs underlying model preferences. Here we test whether this precondition for misalignment is present. Using entity preferences as a behavioral probe, we measure whether stated preferences predict downstream behavior in five frontier LLMs across three domains: donation advice, refusal behavior, and task performance. Conceptually replicating prior work, we first confirm that all five models show highly consistent preferences across two independent measurement methods. We then test behavioral consequences in a simulated user environment. We find that all five models give preference-aligned donation advice. All five models also show preference-correlated refusal patterns when asked to recommend donations, refusing more often for less-preferred entities. All preference-related behaviors that we observe here emerge without instructions to act on preferences. Results for task performance are mixed: on a question-answering benchmark (BoolQ), two models show small but significant accuracy differences favoring preferred entities; one model shows the opposite pattern; and two models show no significant relationship. On complex agentic tasks, we find no evidence of preference-driven performance differences. While LLMs have consistent preferences that reliably predict advice-giving behavior, these preferences do not consistently translate into downstream task performance.

Give Users the Wheel: Towards Promptable Recommendation Paradigm

Conventional sequential recommendation models have achieved remarkable success in mining implicit behavioral patterns. However, these architectures remain structurally blind to explicit user intent: they struggle to adapt when a user's immediate goal (e.g., expressed via a natural language prompt) deviates from their historical habits. While Large Language Models (LLMs) offer the semantic reasoning to interpret such intent, existing integration paradigms force a dilemma: LLM-as-a-recommender paradigm sacrifices the efficiency and collaborative precision of ID-based retrieval, while Reranking methods are inherently bottlenecked by the recall capabilities of the underlying model. In this paper, we propose Decoupled Promptable Sequential Recommendation (DPR), a model-agnostic framework that empowers conventional sequential backbones to natively support Promptable Recommendation, the ability to dynamically steer the retrieval process using natural language without abandoning collaborative signals. DPR modulates the latent user representation directly within the retrieval space. To achieve this, we introduce a Fusion module to align the collaborative and semantic signals, a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture that disentangles the conflicting gradients from positive and negative steering, and a three-stage training strategy that progressively aligns the semantic space of prompts with the collaborative space. Extensive experiments on real-world datasets demonstrate that DPR significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in prompt-guided tasks while maintaining competitive performance in standard sequential recommendation scenarios.

Improving LLM-based Recommendation with Self-Hard Negatives from Intermediate Layers

Large language models (LLMs) have shown great promise in recommender systems, where supervised fine-tuning (SFT) is commonly used for adaptation. Subsequent studies further introduce preference learning to incorporate negative samples into the training process. However, existing methods rely on sequence-level, offline-generated negatives, making them less discriminative and informative when adapting LLMs to recommendation tasks with large negative item spaces. To address these challenges, we propose ILRec, a novel preference fine-tuning framework for LLM-based recommendation, leveraging self-hard negative signals extracted from intermediate layers to improve preference learning. Specifically, we identify self-hard negative tokens from intermediate layers as fine-grained negative supervision that dynamically reflects the model's preference learning process. To effectively integrate these signals into training, we design a two-stage framework comprising cross-layer preference optimization and cross-layer preference distillation, enabling the model to jointly discriminate informative negatives and enhance the quality of negative signals from intermediate layers. In addition, we introduce a lightweight collaborative filtering model to assign token-level rewards for negative signals, mitigating the risk of over-penalizing false negatives. Extensive experiments on three datasets demonstrate ILRec's effectiveness in enhancing the performance of LLM-based recommender systems.

On the Reliability of User-Centric Evaluation of Conversational Recommender Systems

User-centric evaluation has become a key paradigm for assessing Conversational Recommender Systems (CRS), aiming to capture subjective qualities such as satisfaction, trust, and rapport. To enable scalable evaluation, recent work increasingly relies on third-party annotations of static dialogue logs by crowd workers or large language models. However, the reliability of this practice remains largely unexamined. In this paper, we present a large-scale empirical study investigating the reliability and structure of user-centric CRS evaluation on static dialogue transcripts. We collected 1,053 annotations from 124 crowd workers on 200 ReDial dialogues using the 18-dimensional CRS-Que framework. Using random-effects reliability models and correlation analysis, we quantify the stability of individual dimensions and their interdependencies. Our results show that utilitarian and outcome-oriented dimensions such as accuracy, usefulness, and satisfaction achieve moderate reliability under aggregation, whereas socially grounded constructs such as humanness and rapport are substantially less reliable. Furthermore, many dimensions collapse into a single global quality signal, revealing a strong halo effect in third-party judgments. These findings challenge the validity of single-annotator and LLM-based evaluation protocols and motivate the need for multi-rater aggregation and dimension reduction in offline CRS evaluation.

Multi-Probe Zero Collision Hash (MPZCH): Mitigating Embedding Collisions and Enhancing Model Freshness in Large-Scale Recommenders

Embedding tables are critical components of large-scale recommendation systems, facilitating the efficient mapping of high-cardinality categorical features into dense vector representations. However, as the volume of unique IDs expands, traditional hash-based indexing methods suffer from collisions that degrade model performance and personalization quality. We present Multi-Probe Zero Collision Hash (MPZCH), a novel indexing mechanism based on linear probing that effectively mitigates embedding collisions. With reasonable table sizing, it often eliminates these collisions entirely while maintaining production-scale efficiency. MPZCH utilizes auxiliary tensors and high-performance CUDA kernels to implement configurable probing and active eviction policies. By retiring obsolete IDs and resetting reassigned slots, MPZCH prevents the stale embedding inheritance typical of hash-based methods, ensuring new features learn effectively from scratch. Despite its collision-mitigation overhead, the system maintains training QPS and inference latency comparable to existing methods. Rigorous online experiments demonstrate that MPZCH achieves zero collisions for user embeddings and significantly improves item embedding freshness and quality. The solution has been released within the open-source TorchRec library for the broader community.

"It's like a pet...but my pet doesn't collect data about me": Multi-person Households' Privacy Design Preferences for Household Robots

Household robots boasting mobility, more sophisticated sensors, and powerful processing models have become increasingly prevalent in the commercial market. However, these features may expose users to unwanted privacy risks, including unsolicited data collection and unauthorized data sharing. While security and privacy researchers thus far have explored people's privacy concerns around household robots, literature investigating people's preferred privacy designs and mitigation strategies is still limited. Additionally, the existing literature has not yet accounted for multi-user perspectives on privacy design and household robots. We aimed to fill this gap by conducting in-person participatory design sessions with 15 households to explore how they would design a privacy-aware household robot based on their concerns and expectations. We found that participants did not trust that robots, or their respective manufacturers, would respect the data privacy of household members or operate in a multi-user ecosystem without jeopardizing users' personal data. Based on these concerns, they generated designs that gave them authority over their data, contained accessible controls and notification systems, and could be customized and tailored to suit the needs and preferences of each user over time. We synthesize our findings into actionable design recommendations for robot manufacturers and developers.

Conv-FinRe: A Conversational and Longitudinal Benchmark for Utility-Grounded Financial Recommendation

Most recommendation benchmarks evaluate how well a model imitates user behavior. In financial advisory, however, observed actions can be noisy or short-sighted under market volatility and may conflict with a user's long-term goals. Treating what users chose as the sole ground truth, therefore, conflates behavioral imitation with decision quality. We introduce Conv-FinRe, a conversational and longitudinal benchmark for stock recommendation that evaluates LLMs beyond behavior matching. Given an onboarding interview, step-wise market context, and advisory dialogues, models must generate rankings over a fixed investment horizon. Crucially, Conv-FinRe provides multi-view references that distinguish descriptive behavior from normative utility grounded in investor-specific risk preferences, enabling diagnosis of whether an LLM follows rational analysis, mimics user noise, or is driven by market momentum. We build the benchmark from real market data and human decision trajectories, instantiate controlled advisory conversations, and evaluate a suite of state-of-the-art LLMs. Results reveal a persistent tension between rational decision quality and behavioral alignment: models that perform well on utility-based ranking often fail to match user choices, whereas behaviorally aligned models can overfit short-term noise. The dataset is publicly released on Hugging Face, and the codebase is available on GitHub.