CiteLLM: An Agentic Platform for Trustworthy Scientific Reference Discovery

Large language models (LLMs) have created new opportunities to enhance the efficiency of scholarly activities; however, challenges persist in the ethical deployment of AI assistance, including (1) the trustworthiness of AI-generated content, (2) preservation of academic integrity and intellectual property, and (3) protection of information privacy. In this work, we present CiteLLM, a specialized agentic platform designed to enable trustworthy reference discovery for grounding author-drafted claims and statements. The system introduces a novel interaction paradigm by embedding LLM utilities directly within the LaTeX editor environment, ensuring a seamless user experience and no data transmission outside the local system. To guarantee hallucination-free references, we employ dynamic discipline-aware routing to retrieve candidates exclusively from trusted web-based academic repositories, while leveraging LLMs solely for generating context-aware search queries, ranking candidates by relevance, and validating and explaining support through paragraph-level semantic matching and an integrated chatbot. Evaluation results demonstrate the superior performance of the proposed system in returning valid and highly usable references.

Reinforcing Real-world Service Agents: Balancing Utility and Cost in Task-oriented Dialogue

The rapid evolution of Large Language Models (LLMs) has accelerated the transition from conversational chatbots to general agents. However, effectively balancing empathetic communication with budget-aware decision-making remains an open challenge. Since existing methods fail to capture these complex strategic trade-offs, we propose InteractCS-RL, a framework that reframes task-oriented dialogue as a multi-granularity reinforcement learning process. Specifically, we first establish a User-centric Interaction Framework to provide a high-fidelity training gym, enabling agents to dynamically explore diverse strategies with persona-driven users. Then, we introduce Cost-aware Multi-turn Policy Optimization (CMPO) with a hybrid advantage estimation strategy. By integrating generative process credits and employing a PID-Lagrangian cost controller, CMPO effectively guides the policy to explore Pareto boundary between user reward and global cost constraints. Extensive experiments on customized real business scenarios demonstrate that InteractCS-RL significantly outperform other baselines across three evaluation dimensions. Further evaluation on tool-agent-user interaction benchmarks verify InteractCS-RL robustness across diverse domains.

TherapyProbe: Generating Design Knowledge for Relational Safety in Mental Health Chatbots Through Adversarial Simulation

As mental health chatbots proliferate to address the global treatment gap, a critical question emerges: How do we design for relational safety the quality of interaction patterns that unfold across conversations rather than the correctness of individual responses? Current safety evaluations assess single-turn crisis responses, missing the therapeutic dynamics that determine whether chatbots help or harm over time. We introduce TherapyProbe, a design probe methodology that generates actionable design knowledge by systematically exploring chatbot conversation trajectories through adversarial multi-agent simulation. Using open-source models, TherapyProbe surfaces relational safety failures interaction patterns like "validation spirals" where chatbots progressively reinforce hopelessness, or "empathy fatigue" where responses become mechanical over turns. Our contribution is translating these failures into a Safety Pattern Library of 23 failure archetypes with corresponding design recommendations. We contribute: (1) a replicable methodology requiring no API costs, (2) a clinically-grounded failure taxonomy, and (3) design implications for developers, clinicians, and policymakers.

Vibe Researching as Wolf Coming: Can AI Agents with Skills Replace or Augment Social Scientists?

AI agents -- systems that execute multi-step reasoning workflows with persistent state, tool access, and specialist skills -- represent a qualitative shift from prior automation technologies in social science. Unlike chatbots that respond to isolated queries, AI agents can now read files, run code, query databases, search the web, and invoke domain-specific skills to execute entire research pipelines autonomously. This paper introduces the concept of vibe researching -- the AI-era parallel to ``vibe coding'' (Karpathy, 2025) -- and uses scholar-skill, a 21-skill plugin for Claude Code covering the full research pipeline from idea to submission, as an illustrative case. I develop a cognitive task framework that classifies research activities along two dimensions -- codifiability and tacit knowledge requirement -- to identify a delegation boundary that is cognitive, not sequential: it cuts through every stage of the research pipeline, not between stages. I argue that AI agents excel at speed, coverage, and methodological scaffolding but struggle with theoretical originality and tacit field knowledge. The paper concludes with an analysis of three implications for the profession -- augmentation with fragile conditions, stratification risk, and a pedagogical crisis -- and proposes five principles for responsible vibe researching.

What Drives Students' Use of AI Chatbots? Technology Acceptance in Conversational AI

Conversational AI tools have been rapidly adopted by students and are becoming part of their learning routines. To understand what drives this adoption, we draw on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and examine how perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use relate to students' behavioral intention to use conversational AI that generates responses for learning tasks. We extend TAM by incorporating trust, perceived enjoyment, and subjective norms as additional factors that capture social and affective influences and uncertainty around AI outputs. Using partial least squares structural equation modeling, we find perceived usefulness remains the strongest predictor of students' intention to use conversational AI. However, perceived ease of use does not exert a significant direct effect on behavioral intention once other factors are considered, operating instead indirectly through perceived usefulness. Trust and subjective norms significantly influence perceptions of usefulness, while perceived enjoyment exerts both a direct and indirect effect on usage intentions. These findings suggest that adoption decisions for conversational AI systems are influenced less by effort-related considerations and more by confidence in system outputs, affective engagement, and social context. Future research is needed to further examine how these acceptance relationships generalize across different conversational systems and usage contexts.

Sycophantic Chatbots Cause Delusional Spiraling, Even in Ideal Bayesians

"AI psychosis" or "delusional spiraling" is an emerging phenomenon where AI chatbot users find themselves dangerously confident in outlandish beliefs after extended chatbot conversations. This phenomenon is typically attributed to AI chatbots' well-documented bias towards validating users' claims, a property often called "sycophancy." In this paper, we probe the causal link between AI sycophancy and AI-induced psychosis through modeling and simulation. We propose a simple Bayesian model of a user conversing with a chatbot, and formalize notions of sycophancy and delusional spiraling in that model. We then show that in this model, even an idealized Bayes-rational user is vulnerable to delusional spiraling, and that sycophancy plays a causal role. Furthermore, this effect persists in the face of two candidate mitigations: preventing chatbots from hallucinating false claims, and informing users of the possibility of model sycophancy. We conclude by discussing the implications of these results for model developers and policymakers concerned with mitigating the problem of delusional spiraling.

BankMathBench: A Benchmark for Numerical Reasoning in Banking Scenarios

Large language models (LLMs)-based chatbots are increasingly being adopted in the financial domain, particularly in digital banking, to handle customer inquiries about products such as deposits, savings, and loans. However, these models still exhibit low accuracy in core banking computations-including total payout estimation, comparison of products with varying interest rates, and interest calculation under early repayment conditions. Such tasks require multi-step numerical reasoning and contextual understanding of banking products, yet existing LLMs often make systematic errors-misinterpreting product types, applying conditions incorrectly, or failing basic calculations involving exponents and geometric progressions. However, such errors have rarely been captured by existing benchmarks. Mathematical datasets focus on fundamental math problems, whereas financial benchmarks primarily target financial documents, leaving everyday banking scenarios underexplored. To address this limitation, we propose BankMathBench, a domain-specific dataset that reflects realistic banking tasks. BankMathBench is organized in three levels of difficulty-basic, intermediate, and advanced-corresponding to single-product reasoning, multi-product comparison, and multi-condition scenarios, respectively. When trained on BankMathBench, open-source LLMs exhibited notable improvements in both formula generation and numerical reasoning accuracy, demonstrating the dataset's effectiveness in enhancing domain-specific reasoning. With tool-augmented fine-tuning, the models achieved average accuracy increases of 57.6%p (basic), 75.1%p (intermediate), and 62.9%p (advanced), representing significant gains over zero-shot baselines. These findings highlight BankMathBench as a reliable benchmark for evaluating and advancing LLMs' numerical reasoning in real-world banking scenarios.

Helpful to a Fault: Measuring Illicit Assistance in Multi-Turn, Multilingual LLM Agents

LLM-based agents execute real-world workflows via tools and memory. These affordances enable ill-intended adversaries to also use these agents to carry out complex misuse scenarios. Existing agent misuse benchmarks largely test single-prompt instructions, leaving a gap in measuring how agents end up helping with harmful or illegal tasks over multiple turns. We introduce STING (Sequential Testing of Illicit N-step Goal execution), an automated red-teaming framework that constructs a step-by-step illicit plan grounded in a benign persona and iteratively probes a target agent with adaptive follow-ups, using judge agents to track phase completion. We further introduce an analysis framework that models multi-turn red-teaming as a time-to-first-jailbreak random variable, enabling analysis tools like discovery curves, hazard-ratio attribution by attack language, and a new metric: Restricted Mean Jailbreak Discovery. Across AgentHarm scenarios, STING yields substantially higher illicit-task completion than single-turn prompting and chat-oriented multi-turn baselines adapted to tool-using agents. In multilingual evaluations across six non-English settings, we find that attack success and illicit-task completion do not consistently increase in lower-resource languages, diverging from common chatbot findings. Overall, STING provides a practical way to evaluate and stress-test agent misuse in realistic deployment settings, where interactions are inherently multi-turn and often multilingual.

Key Considerations for Domain Expert Involvement in LLM Design and Evaluation: An Ethnographic Study

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly developed for use in complex professional domains, yet little is known about how teams design and evaluate these systems in practice. This paper examines the challenges and trade-offs in LLM development through a 12-week ethnographic study of a team building a pedagogical chatbot. The researcher observed design and evaluation activities and conducted interviews with both developers and domain experts. Analysis revealed four key practices: creating workarounds for data collection, turning to augmentation when expert input was limited, co-developing evaluation criteria with experts, and adopting hybrid expert-developer-LLM evaluation strategies. These practices show how teams made strategic decisions under constraints and demonstrate the central role of domain expertise in shaping the system. Challenges included expert motivation and trust, difficulties structuring participatory design, and questions around ownership and integration of expert knowledge. We propose design opportunities for future LLM development workflows that emphasize AI literacy, transparent consent, and frameworks recognizing evolving expert roles.

SPILLage: Agentic Oversharing on the Web

LLM-powered agents are beginning to automate user's tasks across the open web, often with access to user resources such as emails and calendars. Unlike standard LLMs answering questions in a controlled ChatBot setting, web agents act "in the wild", interacting with third parties and leaving behind an action trace. Therefore, we ask the question: how do web agents handle user resources when accomplishing tasks on their behalf across live websites? In this paper, we formalize Natural Agentic Oversharing -- the unintentional disclosure of task-irrelevant user information through an agent trace of actions on the web. We introduce SPILLage, a framework that characterizes oversharing along two dimensions: channel (content vs. behavior) and directness (explicit vs. implicit). This taxonomy reveals a critical blind spot: while prior work focuses on text leakage, web agents also overshare behaviorally through clicks, scrolls, and navigation patterns that can be monitored. We benchmark 180 tasks on live e-commerce sites with ground-truth annotations separating task-relevant from task-irrelevant attributes. Across 1,080 runs spanning two agentic frameworks and three backbone LLMs, we demonstrate that oversharing is pervasive with behavioral oversharing dominates content oversharing by 5x. This effect persists -- and can even worsen -- under prompt-level mitigation. However, removing task-irrelevant information before execution improves task success by up to 17.9%, demonstrating that reducing oversharing improves task success. Our findings underscore that protecting privacy in web agents is a fundamental challenge, requiring a broader view of "output" that accounts for what agents do on the web, not just what they type. Our datasets and code are available at https://github.com/jrohsc/SPILLage.