This paper presents Project Riley, a novel multimodal and multi-model conversational AI architecture oriented towards the simulation of reasoning influenced by emotional states. Drawing inspiration from Pixar's Inside Out, the system comprises five distinct emotional agents - Joy, Sadness, Fear, Anger, and Disgust - that engage in structured multi-round dialogues to generate, criticise, and iteratively refine responses. A final reasoning mechanism synthesises the contributions of these agents into a coherent output that either reflects the dominant emotion or integrates multiple perspectives. The architecture incorporates both textual and visual large language models (LLMs), alongside advanced reasoning and self-refinement processes. A functional prototype was deployed locally in an offline environment, optimised for emotional expressiveness and computational efficiency. From this initial prototype, another one emerged, called Armando, which was developed for use in emergency contexts, delivering emotionally calibrated and factually accurate information through the integration of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and cumulative context tracking. The Project Riley prototype was evaluated through user testing, in which participants interacted with the chatbot and completed a structured questionnaire assessing three dimensions: Emotional Appropriateness, Clarity and Utility, and Naturalness and Human-likeness. The results indicate strong performance in structured scenarios, particularly with respect to emotional alignment and communicative clarity.
The conversational capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) suggest that they may be able to perform as automated talk therapists. It is crucial to know if these systems would be effective and adhere to known standards. We present a counsellor chatbot that focuses on motivating tobacco smokers to quit smoking. It uses a state-of-the-art LLM and a widely applied therapeutic approach called Motivational Interviewing (MI), and was evolved in collaboration with clinician-scientists with expertise in MI. We also describe and validate an automated assessment of both the chatbot's adherence to MI and client responses. The chatbot was tested on 106 participants, and their confidence that they could succeed in quitting smoking was measured before the conversation and one week later. Participants' confidence increased by an average of 1.7 on a 0-10 scale. The automated assessment of the chatbot showed adherence to MI standards in 98% of utterances, higher than human counsellors. The chatbot scored well on a participant-reported metric of perceived empathy but lower than typical human counsellors. Furthermore, participants' language indicated a good level of motivation to change, a key goal in MI. These results suggest that the automation of talk therapy with a modern LLM has promise.
AI agents, empowered by Large Language Models (LLMs) and communication protocols such as MCP and A2A, have rapidly evolved from simple chatbots to autonomous entities capable of executing complex, multi-step tasks, demonstrating great potential. However, the LLMs' inherent uncertainty and heavy computational resource requirements pose four significant challenges to the development of safe and efficient agents: reliability, privacy, cost and performance. Existing approaches, like model alignment, workflow constraints and on-device model deployment, can partially alleviate some issues but often with limitations, failing to fundamentally resolve these challenges. This paper proposes a new paradigm called AgentRR (Agent Record & Replay), which introduces the classical record-and-replay mechanism into AI agent frameworks. The core idea is to: 1. Record an agent's interaction trace with its environment and internal decision process during task execution, 2. Summarize this trace into a structured "experience" encapsulating the workflow and constraints, and 3. Replay these experiences in subsequent similar tasks to guide the agent's behavior. We detail a multi-level experience abstraction method and a check function mechanism in AgentRR: the former balances experience specificity and generality, while the latter serves as a trust anchor to ensure completeness and safety during replay. In addition, we explore multiple application modes of AgentRR, including user-recorded task demonstration, large-small model collaboration and privacy-aware agent execution, and envision an experience repository for sharing and reusing knowledge to further reduce deployment cost.
This study analyzes the performance of eight generative artificial intelligence chatbots -- ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, DeepSeek, Gemini, Grok, Le Chat, and Perplexity -- in their free versions, in the task of generating academic bibliographic references within the university context. A total of 400 references were evaluated across the five major areas of knowledge (Health, Engineering, Experimental Sciences, Social Sciences, and Humanities), based on a standardized prompt. Each reference was assessed according to five key components (authorship, year, title, source, and location), along with document type, publication age, and error count. The results show that only 26.5% of the references were fully correct, 33.8% partially correct, and 39.8% were either erroneous or entirely fabricated. Grok and DeepSeek stood out as the only chatbots that did not generate false references, while Copilot, Perplexity, and Claude exhibited the highest hallucination rates. Furthermore, the chatbots showed a greater tendency to generate book references over journal articles, although the latter had a significantly higher fabrication rate. A high degree of overlap was also detected among the sources provided by several models, particularly between DeepSeek, Grok, Gemini, and ChatGPT. These findings reveal structural limitations in current AI models, highlight the risks of uncritical use by students, and underscore the need to strengthen information and critical literacy regarding the use of AI tools in higher education.
Small large language models (sLLMs) offer the advantage of being lightweight and efficient, which makes them suitable for resource-constrained environments. However, sLLMs often struggle to maintain topic consistency in task-oriented dialogue systems, which is critical for scenarios such as service chatbots. Specifically, it is important to ensure that the model denies off-topic or malicious inputs and adheres to its intended functionality so as to prevent potential misuse and uphold reliability. Towards this, existing activation engineering approaches have been proposed to manipulate internal activations during inference. While these methods are effective in certain scenarios, our preliminary experiments reveal their limitations in ensuring topic adherence. Therefore, to address this, we propose a novel approach termed Entropy-scaled Steering vectors for Topic Maintenance (EnSToM). EnSToM dynamically adjusts the steering intensity based on input uncertainty, which allows the model to handle off-topic distractors effectively while preserving on-topic accuracy. Our experiments demonstrate that EnSToM achieves significant performance gain with a relatively small data size compared to fine-tuning approaches. By improving topic adherence without compromising efficiency, our approach provides a robust solution for enhancing sLLM-based dialogue systems.
The introduction of Large Language Models (LLMs) has significantly transformed Natural Language Processing (NLP) applications by enabling more advanced analysis of customer personas. At Volvo Construction Equipment (VCE), customer personas have traditionally been developed through qualitative methods, which are time-consuming and lack scalability. The main objective of this paper is to generate synthetic customer personas and integrate them into a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) chatbot to support decision-making in business processes. To this end, we first focus on developing a persona-based RAG chatbot integrated with verified personas. Next, synthetic personas are generated using Few-Shot and Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting techniques and evaluated based on completeness, relevance, and consistency using McNemar's test. In the final step, the chatbot's knowledge base is augmented with synthetic personas and additional segment information to assess improvements in response accuracy and practical utility. Key findings indicate that Few-Shot prompting outperformed CoT in generating more complete personas, while CoT demonstrated greater efficiency in terms of response time and token usage. After augmenting the knowledge base, the average accuracy rating of the chatbot increased from 5.88 to 6.42 on a 10-point scale, and 81.82% of participants found the updated system useful in business contexts.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong capability in diverse software engineering tasks, e.g. code completion, bug fixing, and document generation. However, feature-driven development (FDD), a highly prevalent real-world task that involves developing new functionalities for large, existing codebases, remains underexplored. We therefore introduce SWE-Dev, the first large-scale dataset (with 14,000 training and 500 test samples) designed to evaluate and train autonomous coding systems on real-world feature development tasks. To ensure verifiable and diverse training, SWE-Dev uniquely provides all instances with a runnable environment and its developer-authored executable unit tests. This collection not only provides high-quality data for Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), but also enables Reinforcement Learning (RL) by delivering accurate reward signals from executable unit tests. Our extensive evaluations on SWE-Dev, covering 17 chatbot LLMs, 10 reasoning models, and 10 Multi-Agent Systems (MAS), reveal that FDD is a profoundly challenging frontier for current AI (e.g., Claude-3.7-Sonnet achieves only 22.45\% Pass@3 on the hard test split). Crucially, we demonstrate that SWE-Dev serves as an effective platform for model improvement: fine-tuning on training set enabled a 7B model comparable to GPT-4o on \textit{hard} split, underscoring the value of its high-quality training data. Code is available here \href{https://github.com/justLittleWhite/SWE-Dev}{https://github.com/justLittleWhite/SWE-Dev}.




LLM-based multi-agent systems (MAS) extend the capabilities of single LLMs by enabling cooperation among multiple specialized agents. However, most existing MAS frameworks rely on a single LLM to drive all agents, constraining the system's intelligence to the limit of that model. This paper explores the paradigm of heterogeneous LLM-driven MAS (X-MAS), where agents are powered by diverse LLMs, elevating the system's potential to the collective intelligence of diverse LLMs. We introduce X-MAS-Bench, a comprehensive testbed designed to evaluate the performance of various LLMs across different domains and MAS-related functions. As an extensive empirical study, we assess 27 LLMs across 5 domains (encompassing 21 test sets) and 5 functions, conducting over 1.7 million evaluations to identify optimal model selections for each domain-function combination. Building on these findings, we demonstrate that transitioning from homogeneous to heterogeneous LLM-driven MAS can significantly enhance system performance without requiring structural redesign. Specifically, in a chatbot-only MAS scenario, the heterogeneous configuration yields up to 8.4\% performance improvement on the MATH dataset. In a mixed chatbot-reasoner scenario, the heterogeneous MAS could achieve a remarkable 47\% performance boost on the AIME dataset. Our results underscore the transformative potential of heterogeneous LLMs in MAS, highlighting a promising avenue for advancing scalable, collaborative AI systems.




Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly deployed in real-world applications ranging from chatbots to agentic systems. Alignment is one of the main approaches used to defend against attacks such as prompt injection and jailbreaks. Recent defenses report near-zero Attack Success Rates (ASR) even against Greedy Coordinate Gradient (GCG), a white-box attack that generates adversarial suffixes to induce attacker-desired outputs. However, this search space over discrete tokens is extremely large, making the task of finding successful attacks difficult. GCG has, for instance, been shown to converge to local minima, making it sensitive to initialization choices. In this paper, we assess the future-proof robustness of these defenses using a more informed threat model: attackers who have access to some information about the alignment process. Specifically, we propose an informed white-box attack leveraging the intermediate model checkpoints to initialize GCG, with each checkpoint acting as a stepping stone for the next one. We show this approach to be highly effective across state-of-the-art (SOTA) defenses and models. We further show our informed initialization to outperform other initialization methods and show a gradient-informed checkpoint selection strategy to greatly improve attack performance and efficiency. Importantly, we also show our method to successfully find universal adversarial suffixes -- single suffixes effective across diverse inputs. Our results show that, contrary to previous beliefs, effective adversarial suffixes do exist against SOTA alignment-based defenses, that these can be found by existing attack methods when adversaries exploit alignment knowledge, and that even universal suffixes exist. Taken together, our results highlight the brittleness of current alignment-based methods and the need to consider stronger threat models when testing the safety of LLMs.
As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes settings, their ability to refuse ethically sensitive prompts-such as those involving hate speech or illegal activities-has become central to content moderation and responsible AI practices. While refusal responses can be viewed as evidence of ethical alignment and safety-conscious behavior, recent research suggests that users may perceive them negatively. At the same time, automated assessments of model outputs are playing a growing role in both evaluation and training. In particular, LLM-as-a-Judge frameworks-in which one model is used to evaluate the output of another-are now widely adopted to guide benchmarking and fine-tuning. This paper examines whether such model-based evaluators assess refusal responses differently than human users. Drawing on data from Chatbot Arena and judgments from two AI judges (GPT-4o and Llama 3 70B), we compare how different types of refusals are rated. We distinguish ethical refusals, which explicitly cite safety or normative concerns (e.g., "I can't help with that because it may be harmful"), and technical refusals, which reflect system limitations (e.g., "I can't answer because I lack real-time data"). We find that LLM-as-a-Judge systems evaluate ethical refusals significantly more favorably than human users, a divergence not observed for technical refusals. We refer to this divergence as a moderation bias-a systematic tendency for model-based evaluators to reward refusal behaviors more than human users do. This raises broader questions about transparency, value alignment, and the normative assumptions embedded in automated evaluation systems.