De-conflating Preference and Qualification: Constrained Dual-Perspective Reasoning for Job Recommendation with Large Language Models

Professional job recommendation involves a complex bipartite matching process that must reconcile a candidate's subjective preference with an employer's objective qualification. While Large Language Models (LLMs) are well-suited for modeling the rich semantics of resumes and job descriptions, existing paradigms often collapse these two decision dimensions into a single interaction signal, yielding confounded supervision under recruitment-funnel censoring and limiting policy controllability. To address these challenges, We propose JobRec, a generative job recommendation framework for de-conflating preference and qualification via constrained dual-perspective reasoning. JobRec introduces a Unified Semantic Alignment Schema that aligns candidate and job attributes into structured semantic layers, and a Two-Stage Cooperative Training Strategy that learns decoupled experts to separately infer preference and qualification. Building on these experts, a Lagrangian-based Policy Alignment module optimizes recommendations under explicit eligibility requirements, enabling controllable trade-offs. To mitigate data scarcity, we construct a synthetic dataset refined by experts. Experiments show that JobRec consistently outperforms strong baselines and provides improved controllability for strategy-aware professional matching.

ALPBench: A Benchmark for Attribution-level Long-term Personal Behavior Understanding

Recent advances in large language models have highlighted their potential for personalized recommendation, where accurately capturing user preferences remains a key challenge. Leveraging their strong reasoning and generalization capabilities, LLMs offer new opportunities for modeling long-term user behavior. To systematically evaluate this, we introduce ALPBench, a Benchmark for Attribution-level Long-term Personal Behavior Understanding. Unlike item-focused benchmarks, ALPBench predicts user-interested attribute combinations, enabling ground-truth evaluation even for newly introduced items. It models preferences from long-term historical behaviors rather than users' explicitly expressed requests, better reflecting enduring interests. User histories are represented as natural language sequences, allowing interpretable, reasoning-based personalization. ALPBench enables fine-grained evaluation of personalization by focusing on the prediction of attribute combinations task that remains highly challenging for current LLMs due to the need to capture complex interactions among multiple attributes and reason over long-term user behavior sequences.

Multimodal Generative Recommendation for Fusing Semantic and Collaborative Signals

Sequential recommender systems rank relevant items by modeling a user's interaction history and computing the inner product between the resulting user representation and stored item embeddings. To avoid the significant memory overhead of storing large item sets, the generative recommendation paradigm instead models each item as a series of discrete semantic codes. Here, the next item is predicted by an autoregressive model that generates the code sequence corresponding to the predicted item. However, despite promising ranking capabilities on small datasets, these methods have yet to surpass traditional sequential recommenders on large item sets, limiting their adoption in the very scenarios they were designed to address. To resolve this, we propose MSCGRec, a Multimodal Semantic and Collaborative Generative Recommender. MSCGRec incorporates multiple semantic modalities and introduces a novel self-supervised quantization learning approach for images based on the DINO framework. Additionally, MSCGRec fuses collaborative and semantic signals by extracting collaborative features from sequential recommenders and treating them as a separate modality. Finally, we propose constrained sequence learning that restricts the large output space during training to the set of permissible tokens. We empirically demonstrate on three large real-world datasets that MSCGRec outperforms both sequential and generative recommendation baselines and provide an extensive ablation study to validate the impact of each component.

AesRec: A Dataset for Aesthetics-Aligned Clothing Outfit Recommendation

Clothing recommendation extends beyond merely generating personalized outfits; it serves as a crucial medium for aesthetic guidance. However, existing methods predominantly rely on user-item-outfit interaction behaviors while overlooking explicit representations of clothing aesthetics. To bridge this gap, we present the AesRec benchmark dataset featuring systematic quantitative aesthetic annotations, thereby enabling the development of aesthetics-aligned recommendation systems. Grounded in professional apparel quality standards and fashion aesthetic principles, we define a multidimensional set of indicators. At the item level, six dimensions are independently assessed: silhouette, chromaticity, materiality, craftsmanship, wearability, and item-level impression. Transitioning to the outfit level, the evaluation retains the first five core attributes while introducing stylistic synergy, visual harmony, and outfit-level impression as distinct metrics to capture the collective aesthetic impact. Given the increasing human-like proficiency of Vision-Language Models in multimodal understanding and interaction, we leverage them for large-scale aesthetic scoring. We conduct rigorous human-machine consistency validation on a fashion dataset, confirming the reliability of the generated ratings. Experimental results based on AesRec further demonstrate that integrating quantified aesthetic information into clothing recommendation models can provide aesthetic guidance for users while fulfilling their personalized requirements.

BASS: Benchmarking Audio LMs for Musical Structure and Semantic Reasoning

Music understanding is a complex task that often requires reasoning over both structural and semantic elements of audio. We introduce BASS, designed to evaluate music understanding and reasoning in audio language models across four broad categories: structural segmentation, lyric transcription, musicological analysis, and artist collaboration. BASS comprises 2658 questions spanning 12 tasks, 1993 unique songs and covering over 138 hours of music from a wide range of genres and tracks, crafted to assess musicological knowledge and reasoning in real-world scenarios. We evaluate 14 open-source and frontier multimodal LMs, finding that even state-of-the-art models struggle on higher-level reasoning tasks such as structural segmentation and artist collaboration, while performing best on lyric transcription. Our analysis reveals that current models leverage linguistic priors effectively but remain limited in reasoning over musical structure, vocal, and musicological attributes. BASS provides an evaluation framework with widespread applications in music recommendation and search and has the potential to guide the development of audio LMs.

When AI Persuades: Adversarial Explanation Attacks on Human Trust in AI-Assisted Decision Making

Most adversarial threats in artificial intelligence target the computational behavior of models rather than the humans who rely on them. Yet modern AI systems increasingly operate within human decision loops, where users interpret and act on model recommendations. Large Language Models generate fluent natural-language explanations that shape how users perceive and trust AI outputs, revealing a new attack surface at the cognitive layer: the communication channel between AI and its users. We introduce adversarial explanation attacks (AEAs), where an attacker manipulates the framing of LLM-generated explanations to modulate human trust in incorrect outputs. We formalize this behavioral threat through the trust miscalibration gap, a metric that captures the difference in human trust between correct and incorrect outputs under adversarial explanations. By incorporating this gap, AEAs explore the daunting threats in which persuasive explanations reinforce users' trust in incorrect predictions. To characterize this threat, we conducted a controlled experiment (n = 205), systematically varying four dimensions of explanation framing: reasoning mode, evidence type, communication style, and presentation format. Our findings show that users report nearly identical trust for adversarial and benign explanations, with adversarial explanations preserving the vast majority of benign trust despite being incorrect. The most vulnerable cases arise when AEAs closely resemble expert communication, combining authoritative evidence, neutral tone, and domain-appropriate reasoning. Vulnerability is highest on hard tasks, in fact-driven domains, and among participants who are less formally educated, younger, or highly trusting of AI. This is the first systematic security study that treats explanations as an adversarial cognitive channel and quantifies their impact on human trust in AI-assisted decision making.

A Hitchhiker's Guide to Poisson Gradient Estimation

Poisson-distributed latent variable models are widely used in computational neuroscience, but differentiating through discrete stochastic samples remains challenging. Two approaches address this: Exponential Arrival Time (EAT) simulation and Gumbel-SoftMax (GSM) relaxation. We provide the first systematic comparison of these methods, along with practical guidance for practitioners. Our main technical contribution is a modification to the EAT method that theoretically guarantees an unbiased first moment (exactly matching the firing rate), and reduces second-moment bias. We evaluate these methods on their distributional fidelity, gradient quality, and performance on two tasks: (1) variational autoencoders with Poisson latents, and (2) partially observable generalized linear models, where latent neural connectivity must be inferred from observed spike trains. Across all metrics, our modified EAT method exhibits better overall performance (often comparable to exact gradients), and substantially higher robustness to hyperparameter choices. Together, our results clarify the trade-offs between these methods and offer concrete recommendations for practitioners working with Poisson latent variable models.

Vision Transformers for Zero-Shot Clustering of Animal Images: A Comparative Benchmarking Study

Manual labeling of animal images remains a significant bottleneck in ecological research, limiting the scale and efficiency of biodiversity monitoring efforts. This study investigates whether state-of-the-art Vision Transformer (ViT) foundation models can reduce thousands of unlabeled animal images directly to species-level clusters. We present a comprehensive benchmarking framework evaluating five ViT models combined with five dimensionality reduction techniques and four clustering algorithms, two supervised and two unsupervised, across 60 species (30 mammals and 30 birds), with each test using a random subset of 200 validated images per species. We investigate when clustering succeeds at species-level, where it fails, and whether clustering within the species-level reveals ecologically meaningful patterns such as sex, age, or phenotypic variation. Our results demonstrate near-perfect species-level clustering (V-measure: 0.958) using DINOv3 embeddings with t-SNE and supervised hierarchical clustering methods. Unsupervised approaches achieve competitive performance (0.943) while requiring no prior species knowledge, rejecting only 1.14% of images as outliers requiring expert review. We further demonstrate robustness to realistic long-tailed distributions of species and show that intentional over-clustering can reliably extract intra-specific variation including age classes, sexual dimorphism, and pelage differences. We introduce an open-source benchmarking toolkit and provide recommendations for ecologists to select appropriate methods for sorting their specific taxonomic groups and data.

Audit After Segmentation: Reference-Free Mask Quality Assessment for Language-Referred Audio-Visual Segmentation

Language-referred audio-visual segmentation (Ref-AVS) aims to segment target objects described by natural language by jointly reasoning over video, audio, and text. Beyond generating segmentation masks, providing rich and interpretable diagnoses of mask quality remains largely underexplored. In this work, we introduce Mask Quality Assessment in the Ref-AVS context (MQA-RefAVS), a new task that evaluates the quality of candidate segmentation masks without relying on ground-truth annotations as references at inference time. Given audio-visual-language inputs and each provided segmentation mask, the task requires estimating its IoU with the unobserved ground truth, identifying the corresponding error type, and recommending an actionable quality-control decision. To support this task, we construct MQ-RAVSBench, a benchmark featuring diverse and representative mask error modes that span both geometric and semantic issues. We further propose MQ-Auditor, a multimodal large language model (MLLM)-based auditor that explicitly reasons over multimodal cues and mask information to produce quantitative and qualitative mask quality assessments. Extensive experiments demonstrate that MQ-Auditor outperforms strong open-source and commercial MLLMs and can be integrated with existing Ref-AVS systems to detect segmentation failures and support downstream segmentation improvement. Data and codes will be released at https://github.com/jasongief/MQA-RefAVS.

On the Credibility of Evaluating LLMs using Survey Questions

Recent studies evaluate the value orientation of large language models (LLMs) using adapted social surveys, typically by prompting models with survey questions and comparing their responses to average human responses. This paper identifies limitations in this methodology that, depending on the exact setup, can lead to both underestimating and overestimating the similarity of value orientation. Using the World Value Survey in three languages across five countries, we demonstrate that prompting methods (direct vs. chain-of-thought) and decoding strategies (greedy vs. sampling) significantly affect results. To assess the interaction between answers, we introduce a novel metric, self-correlation distance. This metric measures whether LLMs maintain consistent relationships between answers across different questions, as humans do. This indicates that even a high average agreement with human data, when considering LLM responses independently, does not guarantee structural alignment in responses. Additionally, we reveal a weak correlation between two common evaluation metrics, mean-squared distance and KL divergence, which assume that survey answers are independent of each other. For future research, we recommend CoT prompting, sampling-based decoding with dozens of samples, and robust analysis using multiple metrics, including self-correlation distance.