Topic modeling is a type of statistical modeling for discovering the abstract topics that occur in a collection of documents.
Everyday photographs taken with ordinary cameras are already widely used in telemedicine and other online health conversations, yet no comprehensive benchmark evaluates whether vision-language models can interpret their medical content. Analyzing these images requires both fine-grained natural image understanding and domain-specific medical reasoning, a combination that challenges both general-purpose and specialized models. We introduce ReXInTheWild, a benchmark of 955 clinician-verified multiple-choice questions spanning seven clinical topics across 484 photographs sourced from the biomedical literature. When evaluated on ReXInTheWild, leading multimodal large language models show substantial performance variation: Gemini-3 achieves 78% accuracy, followed by Claude Opus 4.5 (72%) and GPT-5 (68%), while the medical specialist model MedGemma reaches only 37%. A systematic error analysis also reveals four categories of common errors, ranging from low-level geometric errors to high-level reasoning failures and requiring different mitigation strategies. ReXInTheWild provides a challenging, clinically grounded benchmark at the intersection of natural image understanding and medical reasoning. The dataset is available on HuggingFace.
Large language models (LLMs) are largely motivated by their performance on popular topics and benchmarks at the time of their release. However, over time, contamination occurs due to significant exposure of benchmark data during training. This poses a risk of model performance inflation if testing is not carefully executed. To address this challenge, we present GRAFITE, a continuous LLM evaluation platform through a comprehensive system for maintaining and evaluating model issues. Our approach enables building a repository of model problems based on user feedback over time and offers a pipeline for assessing LLMs against these issues through quality assurance (QA) tests using LLM-as-a-judge. The platform enables side-by-side comparison of multiple models, facilitating regression detection across different releases. The platform is available at https://github.com/IBM/grafite. The demo video is available at www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFZyoleN56k.
Embedding models group text by semantic content, what text is about. We show that temporal co-occurrence within texts discovers a different kind of structure: recurrent transition-structure concepts or what text does. We train a 29.4M-parameter contrastive model on 373 million co-occurrence pairs from 9,766 Project Gutenberg texts (24.96 million passages), mapping pre-trained embeddings into an association space where passages with similar transition structure cluster together. Under capacity constraint (42.75% accuracy), the model must compress across recurring patterns rather than memorise individual co-occurrences. Clustering at six granularities (k=50 to k=2,000) produces a multi-resolution concept map; from broad modes like "direct confrontation" and "lyrical meditation" to precise registers and scene templates like "sailor dialect" and "courtroom cross-examination." At k=100, clusters average 4,508 books each (of 9,766), confirming corpus-wide patterns. Direct comparison with embedding-similarity clustering shows that raw embeddings group by topic while association-space clusters group by function, register, and literary tradition. Unseen novels are assigned to existing clusters without retraining; the association model concentrates each novel into a selective subset of coherent clusters, while raw embedding assignment saturates nearly all clusters. Validation controls address positional, length, and book-concentration confounds. The method extends Predictive Associative Memory (PAM, arXiv:2602.11322) from episodic recall to concept formation: where PAM recalls specific associations, multi-epoch contrastive training under compression extracts structural patterns that transfer to unseen texts, the same framework producing qualitatively different behaviour in a different regime.
Large language models (LLMs) based AI systems increasingly mediate what billions of people see, choose and buy. This creates an urgent need to quantify the systemic risks of LLM-driven market intermediation, including its implications for market fairness, competition, and the diversity of information exposure. This paper introduces ChoiceEval, a reproducible framework for auditing preferences for brands and cultures in large language models (LLMs) under realistic usage conditions. ChoiceEval addresses two core technical challenges: (i) generating realistic, persona-diverse evaluation queries and (ii) converting free-form outputs into comparable choice sets and quantitative preference metrics. For a given topic (e.g. running shoes, hotel chains, travel destinations), the framework segments users into psychographic profiles (e.g., budget-conscious, wellness-focused, convenience), and then derives diverse prompts that reflect real-world advice-seeking and decision-making behaviour. LLM responses are converted into normalised top-k choice sets. Preference and geographic bias are then quantified using comparable metrics across topics and personas. Thus, ChoiceEval provides a scalable audit pipeline for researchers, platforms, and regulators, linking model behaviour to real-world economic outcomes. Applied to Gemini, GPT, and DeepSeek across 10 topics spanning commerce and culture and more than 2,000 questions, ChoiceEval reveals consistent preferences: U.S.-developed models Gemini and GPT show marked favouritism toward American entities, while China-developed DeepSeek exhibits more balanced yet still detectable geographic preferences. These patterns persist across user personas, suggesting systematic rather than incidental effects.
Language Models (LMs) may acquire harmful knowledge, and yet feign ignorance of these topics when under audit. Inspired by the recent discovery of deception-related behaviour patterns in LMs, we aim to train classifiers that detect when a LM is actively concealing knowledge. Initial findings on smaller models show that classifiers can detect concealment more reliably than human evaluators, with gradient-based concealment proving easier to identify than prompt-based methods. However, contrary to prior work, we find that the classifiers do not reliably generalize to unseen model architectures and topics of hidden knowledge. Most concerningly, the identifiable traces associated with concealment become fainter as the models increase in scale, with the classifiers achieving no better than random performance on any model exceeding 70 billion parameters. Our results expose a key limitation in black-box-only auditing of LMs and highlight the need to develop robust methods to detect models that are actively hiding the knowledge they contain.
Extracting hypotheses and their supporting statistical evidence from full-text scientific articles is central to the synthesis of empirical findings, but remains difficult due to document length and the distribution of scientific arguments across sections of the paper. The work studies a sequential full-text extraction setting, where the statement of a primary finding in an article's abstract is linked to (i) a corresponding hypothesis statement in the paper body and (ii) the statistical evidence that supports or refutes that hypothesis. This formulation induces a challenging within-document retrieval setting in which many candidate paragraphs are topically related to the finding but differ in rhetorical role, creating hard negatives for retrieval and extraction. Using a two-stage retrieve-and-extract framework, we conduct a controlled study of retrieval design choices, varying context quantity, context quality (standard Retrieval Augmented Generation, reranking, and a fine-tuned retriever paired with reranking), as well as an oracle paragraph setting to separate retrieval failures from extraction limits across four Large Language Model extractors. We find that targeted context selection consistently improves hypothesis extraction relative to full-text prompting, with gains concentrated in configurations that optimize retrieval quality and context cleanliness. In contrast, statistical evidence extraction remains substantially harder. Even with oracle paragraphs, performance remains moderate, indicating persistent extractor limitations in handling hybrid numeric-textual statements rather than retrieval failures alone.
Agentic AI has been a topic of great interest recently. A Large Language Model (LLM) agent involves one or more LLMs in the back-end. In the front end, it conducts autonomous decision-making by combining the LLM outputs with results obtained by invoking several external tools. The autonomous interactions with the external environment introduce critical security risks. In this paper, we present a grey-box approach to explore diverse behaviors and uncover security risks in LLM agents. Our approach VeriGrey uses the sequence of tools invoked as a feedback function to drive the testing process. This helps uncover infrequent but dangerous tool invocations that cause unexpected agent behavior. As mutation operators in the testing process, we mutate prompts to design pernicious injection prompts. This is carefully accomplished by linking the task of the agent to an injection task, so that the injection task becomes a necessary step of completing the agent functionality. Comparing our approach with a black-box baseline on the well-known AgentDojo benchmark, VeriGrey achieves 33% additional efficacy in finding indirect prompt injection vulnerabilities with a GPT-4.1 back-end. We also conduct real-world case studies with the widely used coding agent Gemini CLI, and the well-known OpenClaw personal assistant. VeriGrey finds prompts inducing several attack scenarios that could not be identified by black-box approaches. In OpenClaw, by constructing a conversation agent which employs mutational fuzz testing as needed, VeriGrey is able to discover malicious skill variants from 10 malicious skills (with 10/10= 100% success rate on the Kimi-K2.5 LLM backend, and 9/10= 90% success rate on Opus 4.6 LLM backend). This demonstrates the value of a dynamic approach like VeriGrey to test agents, and to eventually lead to an agent assurance framework.
The topic of Multivariate Time Series Anomaly Detection (MTSAD) has grown rapidly over the past years, with a steady rise in publications and Deep Learning (DL) models becoming the dominant paradigm. To address the lack of systematization in the field, this study introduces a novel and unified taxonomy with eleven dimensions over three parts (Input, Output and Model) for the categorization of DL-based MTSAD methods. The dimensions were established in a two-fold approach. First, they derived from a comprehensive analysis of methodological studies. Second, insights from review papers were incorporated. Furthermore, the proposed taxonomy was validated using an additional set of recent publications, providing a clear overview of methodological trends in MTSAD. Results reveal a convergence toward Transformer-based and reconstruction and prediction models, setting the foundation for emerging adaptive and generative trends. Building on and complementing existing surveys, this unified taxonomy is designed to accommodate future developments, allowing for new categories or dimensions to be added as the field progresses. This work thus consolidates fragmented knowledge in the field and provides a reference point for future research in MTSAD.
While context embeddings produced by LLMs can be used to estimate conceptual change, these representations are often not interpretable nor time-aware. Moreover, bias augmentation in historical data poses a non-trivial risk to researchers in the Digital Humanities. Hence, to model reliable concept trajectories in evolving scholarship, in this work we develop a framework that represents prototypical concepts through complex networks based on topics. Utilizing the Royal Society Corpus, we analyzed two competing theories from the Chemical Revolution (phlogiston vs. oxygen) as a case study to show that onomasiological change is linked to higher entropy and topological density, indicating increased diversity of ideas and connectivity effort.
Agentic repository-level code understanding is essential for automating complex software engineering tasks, yet the field lacks reliable benchmarks. Existing evaluations often overlook the long tail topics and rely on popular repositories where Large Language Models (LLMs) can cheat via memorized knowledge. To address this, we introduce SWE-QA-Pro, a benchmark constructed from diverse, long-tail repositories with executable environments. We enforce topical balance via issue-driven clustering to cover under-represented task types and apply a rigorous difficulty calibration process: questions solvable by direct-answer baselines are filtered out. This results in a dataset where agentic workflows significantly outperform direct answering (e.g., a ~13-point gap for Claude Sonnet 4.5), confirming the necessity of agentic codebase exploration. Furthermore, to tackle the scarcity of training data for such complex behaviors, we propose a scalable synthetic data pipeline that powers a two-stage training recipe: Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) followed by Reinforcement Learning from AI Feedback (RLAIF). This approach allows small open models to learn efficient tool usage and reasoning. Empirically, a Qwen3-8B model trained with our recipe surpasses GPT-4o by 2.3 points on SWE-QA-Pro and substantially narrows the gap to state-of-the-art proprietary models, demonstrating both the validity of our evaluation and the effectiveness of our agentic training workflow.