Beyond Length: Context-Aware Expansion and Independence as Developmentally Sensitive Evaluation in Child Utterances

Evaluating the quality of children's utterances in adult-child dialogue remains challenging due to insufficient context-sensitive metrics. Common proxies such as Mean Length of Utterance (MLU), lexical diversity (vocd-D), and readability indices (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Gunning Fog Index) are dominated by length and ignore conversational context, missing aspects of response quality such as reasoning depth, topic maintenance, and discourse planning. We introduce an LLM-as-a-judge framework that first classifies the Previous Adult Utterance Type and then scores the child's response along two axes: Expansion (contextual elaboration and inferential depth) and Independence (the child's contribution to advancing the discourse). These axes reflect fundamental dimensions in child language development, where Expansion captures elaboration, clause combining, and causal and contrastive connectives. Independence captures initiative, topic control, decreasing reliance on adult scaffolding through growing self-regulation, and audience design. We establish developmental validity by showing age-related patterns and demonstrate predictive value by improving age estimation over common baselines. We further confirm semantic sensitivity by detecting differences tied to discourse relations. Our metrics align with human judgments, enabling large-scale evaluation. This shifts child utterance assessment from simply measuring length to evaluating how meaningfully the child's speech contributes to and advances the conversation within its context.

Price of universality in vector quantization is at most 0.11 bit

Fast computation of a matrix product $W^\top X$ is a workhorse of modern LLMs. To make their deployment more efficient, a popular approach is that of using a low-precision approximation $\widehat W$ in place of true $W$ ("weight-only quantization''). Information theory demonstrates that an optimal algorithm for reducing precision of $W$ depends on the (second order) statistics of $X$ and requires a careful alignment of vector quantization codebook with PCA directions of $X$ (a process known as "waterfilling allocation''). Dependence of the codebook on statistics of $X$, however, is highly impractical. This paper proves that there exist a universal codebook that is simultaneously near-optimal for all possible statistics of $X$, in the sense of being at least as good as an $X$-adapted waterfilling codebook with rate reduced by 0.11 bit per dimension. Such universal codebook would be an ideal candidate for the low-precision storage format, a topic of active modern research, but alas the existence proof is non-constructive. Equivalently, our result shows existence of a net in $\mathbb{R}^n$ that is a nearly-optimal covering of a sphere simultaneously with respect to all Hilbert norms.

NeuCLIRTech: Chinese Monolingual and Cross-Language Information Retrieval Evaluation in a Challenging Domain

Measuring advances in retrieval requires test collections with relevance judgments that can faithfully distinguish systems. This paper presents NeuCLIRTech, an evaluation collection for cross-language retrieval over technical information. The collection consists of technical documents written natively in Chinese and those same documents machine translated into English. It includes 110 queries with relevance judgments. The collection supports two retrieval scenarios: monolingual retrieval in Chinese, and cross-language retrieval with English as the query language. NeuCLIRTech combines the TREC NeuCLIR track topics of 2023 and 2024. The 110 queries with 35,962 document judgments provide strong statistical discriminatory power when trying to distinguish retrieval approaches. A fusion baseline of strong neural retrieval systems is included so that developers of reranking algorithms are not reliant on BM25 as their first stage retriever. The dataset and artifacts are released on Huggingface Datasets

Can One-sided Arguments Lead to Response Change in Large Language Models?

Polemic questions need more than one viewpoint to express a balanced answer. Large Language Models (LLMs) can provide a balanced answer, but also take a single aligned viewpoint or refuse to answer. In this paper, we study if such initial responses can be steered to a specific viewpoint in a simple and intuitive way: by only providing one-sided arguments supporting the viewpoint. Our systematic study has three dimensions: (i) which stance is induced in the LLM response, (ii) how the polemic question is formulated, (iii) how the arguments are shown. We construct a small dataset and remarkably find that opinion steering occurs across (i)-(iii) for diverse models, number of arguments, and topics. Switching to other arguments consistently decreases opinion steering.

Exploiting contextual information to improve stance detection in informal political discourse with LLMs

This study investigates the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) for political stance detection in informal online discourse, where language is often sarcastic, ambiguous, and context-dependent. We explore whether providing contextual information, specifically user profile summaries derived from historical posts, can improve classification accuracy. Using a real-world political forum dataset, we generate structured profiles that summarize users' ideological leaning, recurring topics, and linguistic patterns. We evaluate seven state-of-the-art LLMs across baseline and context-enriched setups through a comprehensive cross-model evaluation. Our findings show that contextual prompts significantly boost accuracy, with improvements ranging from +17.5\% to +38.5\%, achieving up to 74\% accuracy that surpasses previous approaches. We also analyze how profile size and post selection strategies affect performance, showing that strategically chosen political content yields better results than larger, randomly selected contexts. These findings underscore the value of incorporating user-level context to enhance LLM performance in nuanced political classification tasks.

Inference-Time Reasoning Selectively Reduces Implicit Social Bias in Large Language Models

Drawing on constructs from psychology, prior work has identified a distinction between explicit and implicit bias in large language models (LLMs). While many LLMs undergo post-training alignment and safety procedures to avoid expressions of explicit social bias, they still exhibit significant implicit biases on indirect tasks resembling the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Recent work has further shown that inference-time reasoning can impair LLM performance on tasks that rely on implicit statistical learning. Motivated by a theoretical link between implicit associations and statistical learning in human cognition, we examine how reasoning-enabled inference affects implicit bias in LLMs. We find that enabling reasoning significantly reduces measured implicit bias on an IAT-style evaluation for some model classes across fifteen stereotype topics. This effect appears specific to social bias domains, as we observe no corresponding reduction for non-social implicit associations. As reasoning is increasingly enabled by default in deployed LLMs, these findings suggest that it can meaningfully alter fairness evaluation outcomes in some systems, while also raising questions about how alignment procedures interact with inference-time reasoning to drive variation in bias reduction across model types. More broadly, this work highlights how theory from cognitive science and psychology can complement AI evaluation research by providing methodological and interpretive frameworks that reveal new insights into model behavior.

Seg-ReSearch: Segmentation with Interleaved Reasoning and External Search

Segmentation based on language has been a popular topic in computer vision. While recent advances in multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have endowed segmentation systems with reasoning capabilities, these efforts remain confined by the frozen internal knowledge of MLLMs, which limits their potential for real-world scenarios that involve up-to-date information or domain-specific concepts. In this work, we propose \textbf{Seg-ReSearch}, a novel segmentation paradigm that overcomes the knowledge bottleneck of existing approaches. By enabling interleaved reasoning and external search, Seg-ReSearch empowers segmentation systems to handle dynamic, open-world queries that extend beyond the frozen knowledge of MLLMs. To effectively train this capability, we introduce a hierarchical reward design that harmonizes initial guidance with progressive incentives, mitigating the dilemma between sparse outcome signals and rigid step-wise supervision. For evaluation, we construct OK-VOS, a challenging benchmark that explicitly requires outside knowledge for video object segmentation. Experiments on OK-VOS and two existing reasoning segmentation benchmarks demonstrate that our Seg-ReSearch improves state-of-the-art approaches by a substantial margin. Code and data will be released at https://github.com/iSEE-Laboratory/Seg-ReSearch.

Rethinking Benign Relearning: Syntax as the Hidden Driver of Unlearning Failures

Machine unlearning aims to remove specific content from trained models while preserving overall performance. However, the phenomenon of benign relearning, in which forgotten information reemerges even from benign fine-tuning data, reveals that existing unlearning methods remain fundamentally fragile. A common explanation attributes this effect to topical relevance, but we find this account insufficient. Through systematic analysis, we demonstrate that syntactic similarity, rather than topicality, is the primary driver: across benchmarks, syntactically similar data consistently trigger recovery even without topical overlap, due to their alignment in representations and gradients with the forgotten content. Motivated by this insight, we introduce syntactic diversification, which paraphrases the original forget queries into heterogeneous structures prior to unlearning. This approach effectively suppresses benign relearning, accelerates forgetting, and substantially alleviates the trade-off between unlearning efficacy and model utility.

Contrastive Concept-Tree Search for LLM-Assisted Algorithm Discovery

Large language Model (LLM)-assisted algorithm discovery is an iterative, black-box optimization process over programs to approximatively solve a target task, where an LLM proposes candidate programs and an external evaluator provides task feedback. Despite intense recent research on the topic and promising results, how can the LLM internal representation of the space of possible programs be maximally exploited to improve performance is an open question. Here, we introduce Contrastive Concept-Tree Search (CCTS), which extracts a hierarchical concept representation from the generated programs and learns a contrastive concept model that guides parent selection. By reweighting parents using a likelihood-ratio score between high- and low-performing solutions, CCTS biases search toward useful concept combinations and away from misleading ones, providing guidance through an explicit concept hierarchy rather than the algorithm lineage constructed by the LLM. We show that CCTS improves search efficiency over fitness-based baselines and produces interpretable, task-specific concept trees across a benchmark of open Erdős-type combinatorics problems. Our analysis indicates that the gains are driven largely by learning which concepts to avoid. We further validate these findings in a controlled synthetic algorithm-discovery environment, which reproduces qualitatively the search dynamics observed with the LLMs.

WildGraphBench: Benchmarking GraphRAG with Wild-Source Corpora

Graph-based Retrieval-Augmented Generation (GraphRAG) organizes external knowledge as a hierarchical graph, enabling efficient retrieval and aggregation of scattered evidence across multiple documents. However, many existing benchmarks for GraphRAG rely on short, curated passages as external knowledge, failing to adequately evaluate systems in realistic settings involving long contexts and large-scale heterogeneous documents. To bridge this gap, we introduce WildGraphBench, a benchmark designed to assess GraphRAG performance in the wild. We leverage Wikipedia's unique structure, where cohesive narratives are grounded in long and heterogeneous external reference documents, to construct a benchmark reflecting real-word scenarios. Specifically, we sample articles across 12 top-level topics, using their external references as the retrieval corpus and citation-linked statements as ground truth, resulting in 1,100 questions spanning three levels of complexity: single-fact QA, multi-fact QA, and section-level summarization. Experiments across multiple baselines reveal that current GraphRAG pipelines help on multi-fact aggregation when evidence comes from a moderate number of sources, but this aggregation paradigm may overemphasize high-level statements at the expense of fine-grained details, leading to weaker performance on summarization tasks. Project page:https://github.com/BstWPY/WildGraphBench.