Humor Style Drives Laughter, Topic Shapes Acceptability: Evaluating Bilingual Personal and Political Robot-Delivered AI Jokes

Humor plays a central role in human social relationships, and recent advances in computational humor create new opportunities for integrating humor into human-robot interaction (HRI). While large language models (LLMs) can generate diverse forms of humor, it remains unclear how humor style, joke content, and language preference shape perceptions of robot-delivered humor in group settings. In this exploratory study, we employed a mixed factorial design in which participants evaluated AI-generated jokes delivered by a robot in a university classroom. We examined the effects of humor type (Affiliative, Self-Enhancing, Aggressive, Self-Defeating) and joke content (person-related vs. political) on perceived funniness and appropriateness, as well as preferred language. Results show that humor type significantly influences funniness, with Aggressive and Affiliative humor rated higher, while joke content primarily affects appropriateness, with person-related jokes preferred over political ones. Language preference was shaped by both joke content and participants' self-reported fluency and humor practices.

Constructing Evaluation Datasets for Procedural Reasoning: Balancing Naturalness, Grounding, and Multi-Hop Coverage

Evaluating procedural reasoning in AI-supported learning systems requires question-answer datasets that are both learner-like and grounded in the instructional knowledge the system is expected to use. We study how TMK-based question generation strategies affect dataset quality for procedural and multi-hop reasoning. We compare three strategies: strict generation from Task-Method-Knowledge (TMK) models, transcript-first generation with post-hoc TMK filtering, and TMK-aware generation that combines transcripts with structured guidance. To evaluate generated items, we introduce a grounding validation framework based on closed-set evidence units extracted from TMK models. The framework measures whether answers are supported by the underlying representation, whether questions are self-contained, and whether they target multi-hop procedural reasoning. Across 23 instructional topics and 690 generated question-answer pairs, strict TMK generation achieves the strongest overall quality, with 96.5% grounded questions and 92.6% usable questions. Transcript-first generation produces more learner-like questions but more context-dependent or weakly grounded items, while TMK-aware generation yields high raw multi-hop coverage but lower grounding. These results show that procedural richness and natural phrasing do not guarantee representational grounding, motivating explicit representation-aware validation for evaluation datasets in AI-supported learning.

Decompose Sparsely Where You Should, Absorb Densely Where You Should No

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are typically trained to reconstruct the \textbf{entire} residual stream through a sparse dictionary, implicitly assuming that all activation content is amenable to sparse, monosemantic decomposition. We question this assumption and hypothesize that activations contain a low-rank, dense component that is computationally important to the model yet inherently unsuitable for sparse representation, which serves as a major source of the persistent dense latents widely observed in trained SAEs. To test this, we add a small rank-$r$ linear bottleneck in parallel with standard SAEs (BatchTopK and Matryoshka), allowing dense structure to be absorbed before sparse reconstruction. On Gemma-2-2B layer 12, a rank-24 bottleneck reduces dense latent count by up to 84\% while improving sparse probing and targeted probe perturbation on both architectures at matched sparsity. The absorbed component is (i) \textbf{structurally identifiable} as the top principal components and outlier dimensions; (ii) \textbf{causally necessary}, with removing it raising next-token cross-entropy by 7.5$\times$, far exceeding the 2.8$\times$ from removing the geometrically near-identical top-24 PCA directions; and (iii) \textbf{redundantly encoded by sparse dictionaries}, with ablating 787 maximally aligned sparse features raising cross-entropy by only 2.9$\times$ and ablating 2,048 topic-aligned features leaving MMLU topic classification virtually unchanged, whereas removing the scaffold drops it from 98.7\% to chance. Together, our findings identify a compact, semantically informative and causally important component of residual stream activations (which we term a \textbf{computational scaffold}) that standard sparse dictionaries represent inefficiently, suggesting that the scope of sparsity-based interpretability methods warrants careful re-examination.

Hey Chat, Can You Teach Me? Structuring Socratic Dialogue for Human Learning in the Wild

Large language models are now widely used for everyday learning, but the underlying interactions are typically unstructured chats rather than following a curriculum. Unlike formal online learning systems, these interactions carry no prior record of the student, so any estimate of what the student already knows must be inferred from the dialogue itself. We show that this gap is not closed by scaling models alone. Frontier and education-tuned LLMs perform poorly when asked to tutor a student over an extended session, because doing so requires three things at once. The tutor must sequence a curriculum, conduct Socratic dialogue, and infer the student's knowledge state from that dialogue. We propose separating these responsibilities. Given a student query, our system constructs a prerequisite knowledge graph in which subtopics are nodes and dependencies are edges, and frames tutoring as deciding which node to teach next and how many dialogue turns to spend on it before moving on. A lightweight PPO policy handles this sequencing decision, while an LLM conducts the Socratic exchange at the chosen node and returns a signal of student progress. Across held-out STEM and non-STEM topics, our PPO-paired tutor outperforms heuristic baselines, frontier general-purpose models, and a model specialised for Socratic dialogue: on both the rate at which students reach full curriculum mastery and the number of turns required. Explicit curriculum structure delivers gains that scaling the underlying model does not.

AudioX-Turbo: A Unified Framework for Efficient Anything-to-Audio Generation

Audio and music generation based on flexible multimodal control signals is a widely applicable topic, with the following key challenges: 1) a unified multimodal modeling framework, 2) large-scale, high-quality training data, and 3) the prohibitive inference cost of multi-step diffusion sampling. As such, we propose AudioX-Turbo, a unified and efficient framework for anything-to-audio generation that integrates varied multimodal conditions (i.e., text, video, and audio signals) in this work. AudioX-Turbo follows a teacher-student paradigm. The teacher AudioX-Base is built on a Multimodal Diffusion Transformer with a Multimodal Adaptive Fusion module that aligns diverse multimodal inputs for high-fidelity synthesis, and is then distilled into the few-step student AudioX-Turbo via Distribution Matching Distillation adapted to flow matching, complemented by a diffusion-based discriminator for high-quality few-step generation. To support the training of AudioX-Turbo, we construct a large-scale, high-quality dataset, IF-caps-Pro, comprising approximately 9.2M samples curated through a two-stage data collection and annotation pipeline. We benchmark AudioX-Turbo across a wide range of tasks, finding that our model achieves superior performance, especially on text-to-audio and text-to-music generation, while operating at only 4 sampling steps and requiring approximately 25x fewer function evaluations (NFE) than multi-step baselines. These results demonstrate that our method is capable of audio generation under flexible multimodal control, showing efficient and powerful instruction-following capabilities. The code and datasets will be available at https://zeyuet.github.io/AudioX-Turbo/.

MA-ProofBench: A Two-Tiered Evaluation of LLMs for Theorem Proving in Mathematical Analysis

Large Language Models (LLMs) have made notable progress in automated theorem proving, yet existing formal benchmarks remain limited in both mathematical coverage and difficulty. Most are concentrated in areas that are easier to formalize, such as algebra and elementary number theory, and provide limited coverage of subfields that require deeper reasoning, including mathematical analysis. To address this gap, we introduce MA-ProofBench, to the best of our knowledge, the first formal theorem-proving benchmark dedicated to Mathematical Analysis. The benchmark contains 200 formalized theorems covering 6 core topics and 27 subcategories, including measure and integration theory, complex analysis, and functional analysis. The problems are divided into two difficulty levels, an undergraduate level (Level I, 100 problems) and a Ph.D. qualifying level (Level II, 100 problems), to evaluate how well LLMs perform formal reasoning at different mathematical depths. Each problem is constructed through a human-led, LLM-assisted formalization pipeline followed by independent expert review, ensuring that the formal statements remain faithful to the original mathematics. We evaluate a range of recent general-purpose reasoning models and formal theorem provers on MA-ProofBench. However, most models perform poorly: even the best-performing model, GPT-5.5, achieves only 16% Pass@8 on Level I and 5% on Level II, while most models stay close to 0% on Level II. Further analysis identifies Mathlib hallucinations and incomplete proofs as the two dominant failure modes, while an evaluation on the natural-language version of the benchmark exposes a clear gap between informal and formal reasoning. MA-ProofBench is intended to serve as a reliable reference for tracking progress in formal mathematical reasoning in advanced domains.

StanceNakba Shared Task: Actor and Topic-Aware Stance Detection in Public Discourse

We present StanceNakba 2026, a shared task on stance detection in polarized social media discourse related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, organized as part of Nakba-NLP 2026 at LREC-COLING 2026. The task introduces two subtasks: Subtask A (Actor-Level Stance Detection), which classifies English social media posts as Pro-Palestine, Pro-Israel, or Neutral; and Subtask B (Cross-Topic Stance Detection), which identifies Favor, Against, or Neither stances in Arabic posts toward two conflict-related topics, normalization with Israel and refugee presence in Jordan. The task is grounded in an annotated dataset of 2,606 social media posts. A total of 7 teams participated in Subtask A and 6 teams in Subtask B. Participating systems primarily fine-tuned Arabic and multilingual transformer-based models, including MARBERT, AraBERT, and DeBERTa-v3 variants, with several teams employing cross-validation, ensemble methods, and topic-conditioned architectures. The best-performing systems achieved a Macro F1 of 0.9620 on Subtask A and 0.8724 on Subtask B, demonstrating that transformer-based approaches are highly effective for conflict-domain stance detection while highlighting persistent challenges in cross-topic generalization and neutral class prediction.

Sycophancy as a Multilingual Alignment Failure: How Safety Degrades Across Languages, Topics, and Models

Safety-aligned large language models often exhibit sycophancy, which is the tendency to affirm users' opinions regardless of factual accuracy. Although well-studied in English, its manifestation in other languages remains largely unexamined, leaving billions of non-English speakers potentially vulnerable to model-validated misinformation. We present the first large-scale, multi-model evaluation of cross-lingual sycophancy, benchmarking \textbf{six instruction-tuned models} across \textbf{1.1 million instances} spanning \textbf{38 languages} and \textbf{33 topic categories}. We identify a consistent resource-tier effect: sycophancy rates spike sharply in low-resource and zero-shot language settings. Critically, this degradation is topic-agnostic, as models fail uniformly across both benign and safety-critical prompts, offering no additional protection where it is most needed. We further identify tokenizer fertility as a structural driver of this alignment collapse. Collectively, our results demonstrate that prevailing alignment methodologies generalize poorly beyond high-resource languages, underscoring the urgent need for equitable multilingual safety techniques.

Selection, Not Salience: The Shape and Limits of Personalization in Social Highlighting

Does personalizing what a reader sees pay off, and where does it stop? Using a social web highlighter and a co-readership identity control (the same document highlighted by many users, which holds document and topic fixed and asks whether a person's own history predicts their marks better than another reader's does), we map the shape and limits of personalization across reading altitudes. At the document altitude we give the clean, leakage-free, identity-controlled measurement that prior next-document evaluations could only upper-bound: a person's history identifies which documents in a co-reading neighborhood are theirs, with an own-versus-other gap of +0.169 against community negatives and +0.119 against topic-matched hard negatives (both highly significant); a content-based arm suggests the signal is not purely title-driven but is largely thematic. This is comparable to the span-level selection signal (+0.14) from our prior work: the selection signal is of comparable magnitude across altitudes (+0.12 to +0.17), most of it stable topic preference. At the sentence altitude, a two-stage personalized auto-highlight (an impersonal model proposes candidates, a personal model re-ranks them) does not improve on its impersonal baseline: two off-the-shelf zero-shot LLMs, including a frontier model, predict highlight locations worse than a lead baseline, and personal re-ranking is beaten by the salience order even on the highest-recall candidate pool, so the null is not merely a Stage-1 ceiling artifact. Measurable personalization appears primarily at the selection layer: modest (~+0.13), topic-dominated, with no reliable gain at the salience layer. We also surface a control-in-negatives bias that inflated our document gap to a spurious +0.227 until audited. Going beyond the shared salience layer may be better approached by aggregating individuals than by personalizing them harder.

Dep-LLM: Training-Free Depression Diagnosis via Evidence-Guided Structured Multi-factor with Reliable LLM Reasoning

Automatic Depression Detection (ADD) from clinical interviews is a pivotal task in computational mental health, yet it remains challenging due to two critical obstacles: 1) difficulty in modeling complex but sparsely distributed depression clues within lengthy, multi-topic clinical interviews, leading to superficial and unreliable reasoning; 2) scarcity of labeled data due to clinical privacy, together with high cost of training and fine-tuning, limiting the deployment of supervised ADD systems. To jointly address these challenges, we propose Dep-LLM, a training-free framework that mirrors the step-by-step reasoning of clinical psychiatrists and operates entirely on frozen off-the-shelf foundation LLMs. Dep-LLM comprises three stages. First, a Chain-of-Thought (CoT) Depression Multi-factor Analysis module structurally decomposes the long dialogue into five clinically aligned themes and produces evidence-grounded rationales, effectively handling long-context dependencies. Second, we introduce Confidence Analysis and Modulation module that quantifies the epistemic reliability from token-level entropy of each rationale and applies an intra-label and inter-theme modulation that amplifies trustworthy signals while suppressing uncertain ones without extra training. Third, a Collaborative Multi-factor Prediction module dynamically integrates multi-factor signals weighted by confidence into the final diagnosis. Extensive experiments on the DAIC-WOZ and E-DAIC datasets demonstrate the effectiveness and generalizability of Dep-LLM: it surpasses zero-shot baseline on nearly all 21 foundation LLMs across 9 metrics such as accuracy, macro F1 and weighted-average F1, and further outperforms state-of-the-art supervised domain-specific LLMs as well as the latest closed-source commercial LLMs, while requiring no extra training.