As LLMs gain persuasive agentic capabilities through extended dialogues, they introduce novel risks in multi-turn conversational scams that single-turn safety evaluations fail to capture. We systematically study these risks using a controlled LLM-to-LLM simulation framework across multi-turn scam scenarios. Evaluating eight state-of-the-art models in English and Chinese, we analyze dialogue outcomes and qualitatively annotate attacker strategies, defensive responses, and failure modes. Results reveal that scam interactions follow recurrent escalation patterns, while defenses employ verification and delay mechanisms. Furthermore, interactional failures frequently stem from safety guardrail activation and role instability. Our findings highlight multi-turn interactional safety as a critical, distinct dimension of LLM behavior.
This paper addresses the topic of robustness under sensing noise, ambiguous instructions, and human-robot interaction. We take a radically different tack to the issue of reliable embodied AI: instead of focusing on formal verification methods aimed at achieving model predictability and robustness, we emphasise the dynamic, ambiguous and subjective nature of human-robot interactions that requires embodied AI systems to perceive, interpret, and respond to human intentions in a manner that is consistent, comprehensible and aligned with human expectations. We argue that when embodied agents operate in human environments that are inherently social, multimodal, and fluid, reliability is contextually determined and only has meaning in relation to the goals and expectations of humans involved in the interaction. This calls for a fundamentally different approach to achieving reliable embodied AI that is centred on building and updating an accessible "explicit world model" representing the common ground between human and AI, that is used to align robot behaviours with human expectations.
Background. Defect prediction has been a highly active topic among researchers in the Empirical Software Engineering field. Previous literature has successfully achieved the most accurate prediction of an incoming fault and identified the features and anomalies that precede it through just-in-time prediction. As software systems evolve continuously, there is a growing need for time-sensitive methods capable of forecasting defects before they manifest. Aim. Our study seeks to explore the effectiveness of time-sensitive techniques for defect forecasting. Moreover, we aim to investigate the early indicators that precede the occurrence of a defect. Method. We will train multiple time-sensitive forecasting techniques to forecast the future bug density of a software project, as well as identify the early symptoms preceding the occurrence of a defect. Expected results. Our expected results are translated into empirical evidence on the effectiveness of our approach for early estimation of bug proneness.
Aspect Extraction (AE) is a key task in Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis (ABSA), yet it remains difficult to apply in low-resource and code-switched contexts like Taglish, a mix of Tagalog and English commonly used in Filipino e-commerce reviews. This paper introduces a comprehensive AE pipeline designed for Taglish, combining rule-based, large language model (LLM)-based, and fine-tuning techniques to address both aspect identification and extraction. A Hierarchical Aspect Framework (HAF) is developed through multi-method topic modeling, along with a dual-mode tagging scheme for explicit and implicit aspects. For aspect identification, four distinct models are evaluated: a Rule-Based system, a Generative LLM (Gemini 2.0 Flash), and two Fine-Tuned Gemma-3 1B models trained on different datasets (Rule-Based vs. LLM-Annotated). Results indicate that the Generative LLM achieved the highest performance across all tasks (Macro F1 0.91), demonstrating superior capability in handling implicit aspects. In contrast, the fine-tuned models exhibited limited performance due to dataset imbalance and architectural capacity constraints. This work contributes a scalable and linguistically adaptive framework for enhancing ABSA in diverse, code-switched environments.
Segmenting speech transcripts into thematic sections benefits both downstream processing and users who depend on written text for accessibility. We introduce a novel approach to hierarchical topic segmentation in transcripts, generating multi-level tables of contents that capture both topic and subtopic boundaries. We compare zero-shot prompting and LoRA fine-tuning on large language models, while also exploring the integration of high-level speech pause features. Evaluations on English meeting recordings and multilingual lecture transcripts (Portuguese, German) show significant improvements over established topic segmentation baselines. Additionally, we adapt a common evaluation measure for multi-level segmentation, taking into account all hierarchical levels within one metric.
In the face of adverse motives, it is indispensable to achieve a consensus. Elections have been the canonical way by which modern democracy has operated since the 17th century. Nowadays, they regulate markets, provide an engine for modern recommender systems or peer-to-peer networks, and remain the main approach to represent democracy. However, a desirable universal voting rule that satisfies all hypothetical scenarios is still a challenging topic, and the design of these systems is at the forefront of mechanism design research. Automated mechanism design is a promising approach, and recent works have demonstrated that set-invariant architectures are uniquely suited to modelling electoral systems. However, various concerns prevent the direct application to real-world settings, such as robustness to strategic voting. In this paper, we generalise the expressive capability of learned voting rules, and combine improvements in neural network architecture with adversarial training to improve the resilience of voting rules while maximizing social welfare. We evaluate the effectiveness of our methods on both synthetic and real-world datasets. Our method resolves critical limitations of prior work regarding learning voting rules by representing elections using bipartite graphs, and learning such voting rules using graph neural networks. We believe this opens new frontiers for applying machine learning to real-world elections.
This work addresses critical challenges to academic integrity, including plagiarism, fabrication, and verification of authorship of educational content, by proposing a Natural Language Processing (NLP)-based framework for authenticating students' content through author attribution and style change detection. Despite some initial efforts, several aspects of the topic are yet to be explored. In contrast to existing solutions, the paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the topic by targeting four relevant tasks, including (i) classification of human and machine text, (ii) differentiating in single and multi-authored documents, (iii) author change detection within multi-authored documents, and (iv) author recognition in collaboratively produced documents. The solutions proposed for the tasks are evaluated on two datasets generated with Gemini using two different prompts, including a normal and a strict set of instructions. During experiments, some reduction in the performance of the proposed solutions is observed on the dataset generated through the strict prompt, demonstrating the complexities involved in detecting machine-generated text with cleverly crafted prompts. The generated datasets, code, and other relevant materials are made publicly available on GitHub, which are expected to provide a baseline for future research in the domain.
We present a systematic framework of indices designed to characterize Large Language Model (LLM) responses when challenged with rebuttals during a chat. Assessing how LLMs respond to user dissent is crucial for understanding their reliability and behavior patterns, yet the complexity of human-LLM interactions makes systematic evaluation challenging. Our approach employs a fictitious-response rebuttal method that quantifies LLM behavior when presented with multiple-choice questions followed by deliberate challenges to their fictitious previous response. The indices are specifically designed to detect and measure what could be characterized as sycophantic behavior (excessive agreement with user challenges) or stubborn responses (rigid adherence to the fictitious response in the chat history) from LLMs. These metrics allow investigation of the relationships between sycophancy, stubbornness, and the model's actual mastery of the subject matter. We demonstrate the utility of these indices using two physics problems as test scenarios with various OpenAI models. The framework is intentionally generalizable to any multiple-choice format question, including on topics without universally accepted correct answers. Our results reveal measurable differences across OpenAI model generations, with trends indicating that newer models and those employing greater "Reasoning Effort" exhibit reduced sycophantic behavior. The FR pairing method combined with our proposed indices provides a practical, adaptable toolkit for systematically comparing LLM dialogue behaviors across different models and contexts.
Understanding affective polarization in online discourse is crucial for evaluating the societal impact of social media interactions. This study presents a novel framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) and domain-informed heuristics to systematically analyze and quantify affective polarization in discussions on divisive topics such as climate change and gun control. Unlike most prior approaches that relied on sentiment analysis or predefined classifiers, our method integrates LLMs to extract stance, affective tone, and agreement patterns from large-scale social media discussions. We then apply a rule-based scoring system capable of quantifying affective polarization even in small conversations consisting of single interactions, based on stance alignment, emotional content, and interaction dynamics. Our analysis reveals distinct polarization patterns that are event dependent: (i) anticipation-driven polarization, where extreme polarization escalates before well-publicized events, and (ii) reactive polarization, where intense affective polarization spikes immediately after sudden, high-impact events. By combining AI-driven content annotation with domain-informed scoring, our framework offers a scalable and interpretable approach to measuring affective polarization. The source code is publicly available at: https://github.com/hasanjawad001/llm-social-media-polarization.
The capability of Unified Multimodal Models (UMMs) to apply world knowledge across diverse tasks remains a critical, unresolved challenge. Existing benchmarks fall short, offering only siloed, single-task evaluations with limited diagnostic power. To bridge this gap, we propose AEGIS (\emph{i.e.}, \textbf{A}ssessing \textbf{E}diting, \textbf{G}eneration, \textbf{I}nterpretation-Understanding for \textbf{S}uper-intelligence), a comprehensive multi-task benchmark covering visual understanding, generation, editing, and interleaved generation. AEGIS comprises 1,050 challenging, manually-annotated questions spanning 21 topics (including STEM, humanities, daily life, etc.) and 6 reasoning types. To concretely evaluate the performance of UMMs in world knowledge scope without ambiguous metrics, we further propose Deterministic Checklist-based Evaluation (DCE), a protocol that replaces ambiguous prompt-based scoring with atomic ``Y/N'' judgments, to enhance evaluation reliability. Our extensive experiments reveal that most UMMs exhibit severe world knowledge deficits and that performance degrades significantly with complex reasoning. Additionally, simple plug-in reasoning modules can partially mitigate these vulnerabilities, highlighting a promising direction for future research. These results highlight the importance of world-knowledge-based reasoning as a critical frontier for UMMs.