Label Shift Estimation With Incremental Prior Update

An assumption often made in supervised learning is that the training and testing sets have the same label distribution. However, in real-life scenarios, this assumption rarely holds. For example, medical diagnosis result distributions change over time and across locations; fraud detection models must adapt as patterns of fraudulent activity shift; the category distribution of social media posts changes based on trending topics and user demographics. In the task of label shift estimation, the goal is to estimate the changing label distribution $p_t(y)$ in the testing set, assuming the likelihood $p(x|y)$ does not change, implying no concept drift. In this paper, we propose a new approach for post-hoc label shift estimation, unlike previous methods that perform moment matching with confusion matrix estimated from a validation set or maximize the likelihood of the new data with an expectation-maximization algorithm. We aim to incrementally update the prior on each sample, adjusting each posterior for more accurate label shift estimation. The proposed method is based on intuitive assumptions on classifiers that are generally true for modern probabilistic classifiers. The proposed method relies on a weaker notion of calibration compared to other methods. As a post-hoc approach for label shift estimation, the proposed method is versatile and can be applied to any black-box probabilistic classifier. Experiments on CIFAR-10 and MNIST show that the proposed method consistently outperforms the current state-of-the-art maximum likelihood-based methods under different calibrations and varying intensities of label shift.

HingeMem: Boundary Guided Long-Term Memory with Query Adaptive Retrieval for Scalable Dialogues

Long-term memory is critical for dialogue systems that support continuous, sustainable, and personalized interactions. However, existing methods rely on continuous summarization or OpenIE-based graph construction paired with fixed Top-\textit{k} retrieval, leading to limited adaptability across query categories and high computational overhead. In this paper, we propose HingeMem, a boundary-guided long-term memory that operationalizes event segmentation theory to build an interpretable indexing interface via boundary-triggered hyperedges over four elements: person, time, location, and topic. When any such element changes, HingeMem draws a boundary and writes the current segment, thereby reducing redundant operations and preserving salient context. To enable robust and efficient retrieval under diverse information needs, HingeMem introduces query-adaptive retrieval mechanisms that jointly decide (a) \textit{what to retrieve}: determine the query-conditioned routing over the element-indexed memory; (b) \textit{how much to retrieve}: control the retrieval depth based on the estimated query type. Extensive experiments across LLM scales (from 0.6B to production-tier models; \textit{e.g.}, Qwen3-0.6B to Qwen-Flash) on LOCOMO show that HingeMem achieves approximately $20\%$ relative improvement over strong baselines without query categories specification, while reducing computational cost (68\%$\downarrow$ question answering token cost compared to HippoRAG2). Beyond advancing memory modeling, HingeMem's adaptive retrieval makes it a strong fit for web applications requiring efficient and trustworthy memory over extended interactions.

FormalProofBench: Can Models Write Graduate Level Math Proofs That Are Formally Verified?

We present FormalProofBench, a private benchmark designed to evaluate whether AI models can produce formally verified mathematical proofs at the graduate level. Each task pairs a natural-language problem with a Lean~4 formal statement, and a model must output a Lean proof accepted by the Lean 4 checker. FormalProofBench targets advanced undergraduate and graduate mathematics, with problems drawn from qualifying exams and standard textbooks across topics including analysis, algebra, probability, and logic. We evaluate a range of frontier models with an agentic harness, and find that the best-performing foundation model achieves 33.5% accuracy, with performance dropping rapidly after that. In addition to the accuracy numbers, we also provide empirical analysis of tool-use, failure modes, cost and latency, thereby providing a thorough evaluation of the formal-theorem proving abilities of frontier models.

Optimizing RAG Rerankers with LLM Feedback via Reinforcement Learning

Rerankers play a pivotal role in refining retrieval results for Retrieval-Augmented Generation. However, current reranking models are typically optimized on static human annotated relevance labels in isolation, decoupled from the downstream generation process. This isolation leads to a fundamental misalignment: documents identified as topically relevant by information retrieval metrics often fail to provide the actual utility required by the LLM for precise answer generation. To bridge this gap, we introduce ReRanking Preference Optimization (RRPO), a reinforcement learning framework that directly aligns reranking with the LLM's generation quality. By formulating reranking as a sequential decision-making process, RRPO optimizes for context utility using LLM feedback, thereby eliminating the need for expensive human annotations. To ensure training stability, we further introduce a reference-anchored deterministic baseline. Extensive experiments on knowledge-intensive benchmarks demonstrate that RRPO significantly outperforms strong baselines, including the powerful list-wise reranker RankZephyr. Further analysis highlights the versatility of our framework: it generalizes seamlessly to diverse readers (e.g., GPT-4o), integrates orthogonally with query expansion modules like Query2Doc, and remains robust even when trained with noisy supervisors.

How AI Aggregation Affects Knowledge

Artificial intelligence (AI) changes social learning when aggregated outputs become training data for future predictions. To study this, we extend the DeGroot model by introducing an AI aggregator that trains on population beliefs and feeds synthesized signals back to agents. We define the learning gap as the deviation of long-run beliefs from the efficient benchmark, allowing us to capture how AI aggregation affects learning. Our main result identifies a threshold in the speed of updating: when the aggregator updates too quickly, there is no positive-measure set of training weights that robustly improves learning across a broad class of environments, whereas such weights exist when updating is sufficiently slow. We then compare global and local architectures. Local aggregators trained on proximate or topic-specific data robustly improve learning in all environments. Consequently, replacing specialized local aggregators with a single global aggregator worsens learning in at least one dimension of the state.

The LLM Effect on IR Benchmarks: A Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness, Baselines, and Contamination

Benchmark collections have long enabled controlled comparison and cumulative progress in Information Retrieval (IR). However, prior meta-analyses have shown that reported effectiveness gains often fail to accumulate, in part due to the use of weak or outdated baselines. While large language models are increasingly used in retrieval pipelines, their impact on established IR benchmarks has not been systematically analyzed. In this study, we analyze 143 publications reporting results on the TREC Robust04 collection and the TREC Deep Learning 2020 (DL20) passage retrieval benchmark to examine longitudinal trends in retrieval effectiveness and baseline strength. We observe what we term an \emph{LLM effect}: recent systems incorporating LLM components achieve 8.8\% higher nDCG@10 on DL20 compared to the best result from TREC 2020 and approximately 20\% higher on Robust04 since 2023. However, adapting a data contamination detection approach to reranking reveals measurable contamination in both benchmarks. While excluding contaminated topics reduces effectiveness, confidence intervals remain wide, making it difficult to determine whether the LLM effect reflects genuine methodological advances or memorization from pretraining data.

Beyond Paper-to-Paper: Structured Profiling and Rubric Scoring for Paper-Reviewer Matching

As conference submission volumes continue to grow, accurately recommending suitable reviewers has become a challenge. Most existing methods follow a ``Paper-to-Paper'' matching paradigm, implicitly representing a reviewer by their publication history. However, effective reviewer matching requires capturing multi-dimensional expertise, and textual similarity to past papers alone is often insufficient. To address this gap, we propose P2R, a training-free framework that shifts from implicit paper-to-paper matching to explicit profile-based matching. P2R uses general-purpose LLMs to construct structured profiles for both submissions and reviewers, disentangling them into Topics, Methodologies, and Applications. Building on these profiles, P2R adopts a coarse-to-fine pipeline to balance efficiency and depth. It first performs hybrid retrieval that combines semantic and aspect-level signals to form a high-recall candidate pool, and then applies an LLM-based committee to evaluate candidates under strict rubrics, integrating both multi-dimensional expert views and a holistic Area Chair perspective. Experiments on NeurIPS, SIGIR, and SciRepEval show that P2R consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines. Ablation studies further verify the necessity of each component. Overall, P2R highlights the value of explicit, structured expertise modeling and offers practical guidance for applying LLMs to reviewer matching.

Do Language Models Know When They'll Refuse? Probing Introspective Awareness of Safety Boundaries

Large language models are trained to refuse harmful requests, but can they accurately predict when they will refuse before responding? We investigate this question through a systematic study where models first predict their refusal behavior, then respond in a fresh context. Across 3754 datapoints spanning 300 requests, we evaluate four frontier models: Claude Sonnet 4, Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5.2, and Llama 3.1 405B. Using signal detection theory (SDT), we find that all models exhibit high introspective sensitivity (d' = 2.4-3.5), but sensitivity drops substantially at safety boundaries. We observe generational improvement within Claude (Sonnet 4.5: 95.7 percent accuracy vs Sonnet 4: 93.0 percent), while GPT-5.2 shows lower accuracy (88.9 percent) with more variable behavior. Llama 405B achieves high sensitivity but exhibits strong refusal bias and poor calibration, resulting in lower overall accuracy (80.0 percent). Topic-wise analysis reveals weapons-related queries are consistently hardest for introspection. Critically, confidence scores provide actionable signal: restricting to high-confidence predictions yields 98.3 percent accuracy for well-calibrated models, enabling practical confidence-based routing for safety-critical deployments.

Working Notes on Late Interaction Dynamics: Analyzing Targeted Behaviors of Late Interaction Models

While Late Interaction models exhibit strong retrieval performance, many of their underlying dynamics remain understudied, potentially hiding performance bottlenecks. In this work, we focus on two topics in Late Interaction retrieval: a length bias that arises when using multi-vector scoring, and the similarity distribution beyond the best scores pooled by the MaxSim operator. We analyze these behaviors for state-of-the-art models on the NanoBEIR benchmark. Results show that while the theoretical length bias of causal Late Interaction models holds in practice, bi-directional models can also suffer from it in extreme cases. We also note that no significant similarity trend lies beyond the top-1 document token, validating that the MaxSim operator efficiently exploits the token-level similarity scores.

Is the Modality Gap a Bug or a Feature? A Robustness Perspective

Many modern multi-modal models (e.g. CLIP) seek an embedding space in which the two modalities are aligned. Somewhat surprisingly, almost all existing models show a strong modality gap: the distribution of images is well-separated from the distribution of texts in the shared embedding space. Despite a series of recent papers on this topic, it is still not clear why this gap exists nor whether closing the gap in post-processing will lead to better performance on downstream tasks. In this paper we show that under certain conditions, minimizing the contrastive loss yields a representation in which the two modalities are separated by a global gap vector that is orthogonal to their embeddings. We also show that under these conditions the modality gap is monotonically related to robustness: decreasing the gap does not change the clean accuracy of the models but makes it less likely that a model will change its output when the embeddings are perturbed. Our experiments show that for many real-world VLMs we can significantly increase robustness by a simple post-processing step that moves one modality towards the mean of the other modality, without any loss of clean accuracy.