Topic modeling is a type of statistical modeling for discovering the abstract topics that occur in a collection of documents.




Choosing the number of topics $T$ in Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) is a key design decision that strongly affects both the statistical fit and interpretability of topic models. In this work, we formulate the selection of $T$ as a discrete black-box optimization problem, where each function evaluation corresponds to training an LDA model and measuring its validation perplexity. Under a fixed evaluation budget, we compare four families of optimizers: two hand-designed evolutionary methods - Genetic Algorithm (GA) and Evolution Strategy (ES) - and two learned, amortized approaches, Preferential Amortized Black-Box Optimization (PABBO) and Sharpness-Aware Black-Box Optimization (SABBO). Our experiments show that, while GA, ES, PABBO, and SABBO eventually reach a similar band of final perplexity, the amortized optimizers are substantially more sample- and time-efficient. SABBO typically identifies a near-optimal topic number after essentially a single evaluation, and PABBO finds competitive configurations within a few evaluations, whereas GA and ES require almost the full budget to approach the same region.
Cochlear Implant (CI) surgery treats severe hearing loss by inserting an electrode array into the cochlea to stimulate the auditory nerve. An important step in this procedure is mastoidectomy, which removes part of the mastoid region of the temporal bone to provide surgical access. Accurate mastoidectomy shape prediction from preoperative imaging improves pre-surgical planning, reduces risks, and enhances surgical outcomes. Despite its importance, there are limited deep-learning-based studies regarding this topic due to the challenges of acquiring ground-truth labels. We address this gap by investigating self-supervised and weakly-supervised learning models to predict the mastoidectomy region without human annotations. We propose a hybrid self-supervised and weakly-supervised learning framework to predict the mastoidectomy region directly from preoperative CT scans, where the mastoid remains intact. Our hybrid method achieves a mean Dice score of 0.72 when predicting the complex and boundary-less mastoidectomy shape, surpassing state-of-the-art approaches and demonstrating strong performance. The method provides groundwork for constructing 3D postmastoidectomy surfaces directly from the corresponding preoperative CT scans. To our knowledge, this is the first work that integrating self-supervised and weakly-supervised learning for mastoidectomy shape prediction, offering a robust and efficient solution for CI surgical planning while leveraging 3D T-distribution loss in weakly-supervised medical imaging.
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.
Traditional Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) effectively supports single-hop question answering with large language models but faces significant limitations in multi-hop question answering tasks, which require combining evidence from multiple documents. Existing chunk-based retrieval often provides irrelevant and logically incoherent context, leading to incomplete evidence chains and incorrect reasoning during answer generation. To address these challenges, we propose SentGraph, a sentence-level graph-based RAG framework that explicitly models fine-grained logical relationships between sentences for multi-hop question answering. Specifically, we construct a hierarchical sentence graph offline by first adapting Rhetorical Structure Theory to distinguish nucleus and satellite sentences, and then organizing them into topic-level subgraphs with cross-document entity bridges. During online retrieval, SentGraph performs graph-guided evidence selection and path expansion to retrieve fine-grained sentence-level evidence. Extensive experiments on four multi-hop question answering benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of SentGraph, validating the importance of explicitly modeling sentence-level logical dependencies for multi-hop reasoning.
Correcting misinformation in public online spaces often exposes users to hostility and ad hominem attacks, discouraging participation in corrective discourse. This study presents empirical evidence that invoking Grok, the native large language model on X, rather than directly confronting other users, is associated with different social responses during misinformation correction. Using an observational design, 100 correction replies across five high-conflict misinformation topics were analyzed, with corrections balanced between Grok-mediated and direct human-issued responses. The primary outcome was whether a correction received at least one ad hominem attack within a 24-hour window. Ad hominem attacks occurred in 72 percent of human-issued corrections and in none of the Grok-mediated corrections. A chi-square test confirmed a statistically significant association with a large effect size. These findings suggest that AI-mediated correction may alter the social dynamics of public disagreement by reducing interpersonal hostility during misinformation responses.
Multilingual Retrieval-Augmented Generation (mRAG) systems often exhibit a perceived preference for high-resource languages, particularly English, resulting in the widespread adoption of English pivoting. While prior studies attribute this advantage to the superior English-centric capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), we find that such measurements are significantly distorted by structural priors inherent in evaluation benchmarks. Specifically, we identify exposure bias and a gold availability prior-both driven by the disproportionate concentration of resources in English-as well as cultural priors rooted in topic locality, as factors that hinder accurate assessment of genuine language preference. To address these biases, we propose DeLP (Debiased Language Preference), a calibrated metric designed to explicitly factor out these structural confounds. Our analysis using DeLP reveals that the previously reported English preference is largely a byproduct of evidence distribution rather than an inherent model bias. Instead, we find that retrievers fundamentally favor monolingual alignment between the query and the document language. Building on this insight, we introduce DELTA (DEbiased Language preference-guided Text Augmentation), a lightweight and efficient mRAG framework that strategically leverages monolingual alignment to optimize cross-lingual retrieval and generation. Experimental results demonstrate that DELTA consistently outperforms English pivoting and mRAG baselines across diverse languages.
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.
The increasing production of waste, driven by population growth, has created challenges in managing and recycling materials effectively. Manual waste sorting is a common practice; however, it remains inefficient for handling large-scale waste streams and presents health risks for workers. On the other hand, existing automated sorting approaches still struggle with the high variability, clutter, and visual complexity of real-world waste streams. The lack of real-world datasets for waste sorting is a major reason automated systems for this problem are underdeveloped. Accordingly, we introduce SortWaste, a densely annotated object detection dataset collected from a Material Recovery Facility. Additionally, we contribute to standardizing waste detection in sorting lines by proposing ClutterScore, an objective metric that gauges the scene's hardness level using a set of proxies that affect visual complexity (e.g., object count, class and size entropy, and spatial overlap). In addition to these contributions, we provide an extensive benchmark of state-of-the-art object detection models, detailing their results with respect to the hardness level assessed by the proposed metric. Despite achieving promising results (mAP of 59.7% in the plastic-only detection task), performance significantly decreases in highly cluttered scenes. This highlights the need for novel and more challenging datasets on the topic.
To develop a reliable AI for psychological assessment, we introduce \texttt{PsychEval}, a multi-session, multi-therapy, and highly realistic benchmark designed to address three key challenges: \textbf{1) Can we train a highly realistic AI counselor?} Realistic counseling is a longitudinal task requiring sustained memory and dynamic goal tracking. We propose a multi-session benchmark (spanning 6-10 sessions across three distinct stages) that demands critical capabilities such as memory continuity, adaptive reasoning, and longitudinal planning. The dataset is annotated with extensive professional skills, comprising over 677 meta-skills and 4577 atomic skills. \textbf{2) How to train a multi-therapy AI counselor?} While existing models often focus on a single therapy, complex cases frequently require flexible strategies among various therapies. We construct a diverse dataset covering five therapeutic modalities (Psychodynamic, Behaviorism, CBT, Humanistic Existentialist, and Postmodernist) alongside an integrative therapy with a unified three-stage clinical framework across six core psychological topics. \textbf{3) How to systematically evaluate an AI counselor?} We establish a holistic evaluation framework with 18 therapy-specific and therapy-shared metrics across Client-Level and Counselor-Level dimensions. To support this, we also construct over 2,000 diverse client profiles. Extensive experimental analysis fully validates the superior quality and clinical fidelity of our dataset. Crucially, \texttt{PsychEval} transcends static benchmarking to serve as a high-fidelity reinforcement learning environment that enables the self-evolutionary training of clinically responsible and adaptive AI counselors.
In the rapidly evolving landscape of enterprise natural language processing (NLP), the demand for efficient, lightweight models capable of handling multi-domain text automation tasks has intensified. This study conducts a comparative analysis of three prominent lightweight Transformer models - DistilBERT, MiniLM, and ALBERT - across three distinct domains: customer sentiment classification, news topic classification, and toxicity and hate speech detection. Utilizing datasets from IMDB, AG News, and the Measuring Hate Speech corpus, we evaluated performance using accuracy-based metrics including accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score, as well as efficiency metrics such as model size, inference time, throughput, and memory usage. Key findings reveal that no single model dominates all performance dimensions. ALBERT achieves the highest task-specific accuracy in multiple domains, MiniLM excels in inference speed and throughput, and DistilBERT demonstrates the most consistent accuracy across tasks while maintaining competitive efficiency. All results reflect controlled fine-tuning under fixed enterprise-oriented constraints rather than exhaustive hyperparameter optimization. These results highlight trade-offs between accuracy and efficiency, recommending MiniLM for latency-sensitive enterprise applications, DistilBERT for balanced performance, and ALBERT for resource-constrained environments.