Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Weihao Xuan

Publications and source records attributed to Weihao Xuan.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Before You Continue: Evaluating Time-Sensitive Safety Awareness in Conversational Assistants

Large language model (LLM) assistants increasingly help users with everyday activities that involve time-dependent constraints. However, users may not mention these constraints in later requests, requiring assistants to recognize and adjust their advice accordingly. To evaluate such capability, we introduce TASC (Temporal Action Safety in Conversation), a benchmark that evaluates whether LLMs apply time-dependent constraints when responding to conversational requests. TASC consists of 3,418 inputs derived from 128 templates, along with a separate set of 33 scenarios designed to compare models' ability to calculate elapsed time with their ability to apply that information. Across 13 models, assistants account for time-dependent constraints in only 30.5% of cases where the proposed action violates a rule, while rarely warning users unnecessarily. More importantly, models fail to apply these constraints in 62.1% of cases despite correctly calculating the elapsed time. Explicitly providing the timing resolves only about half of these failures, revealing a gap between temporal reasoning and its application in conversational advice.

cs.CL↗

Toward Global Large Language Models in Medicine

Despite continuous advances in medical technology, the global distribution of health care resources remains uneven. The development of large language models (LLMs) has transformed the landscape of medicine and holds promise for improving health care quality and expanding access to medical information globally. However, existing LLMs are primarily trained on high-resource languages, limiting their applicability in global medical scenarios. To address this gap, we constructed GlobMed, a large multilingual medical dataset containing more than 800,000 entries spanning 20 languages, including seven low-resource languages. Building on this, we established GlobMed-Bench, which systematically assesses 56 state-of-the-art proprietary and open-weight LLMs across 12 of the 20 languages represented in GlobMed, comprising over 20,000 independent experiments and more than 32 million model responses. This large-scale evaluation revealed significant performance disparities across languages, particularly for low-resource languages. Additionally, we introduced GlobMed-LLMs, a suite of multilingual medical LLMs trained across the 12 benchmark languages, with parameters ranging from 1.7B to 8B. GlobMed-LLMs achieved an average performance improvement of nearly 40% relative to baseline LLMs, with a maximum performance improvement of more than threefold in low-resource languages. These resources provide an important foundation for advancing the equitable development and application of LLMs globally, enabling broader language communities to benefit from technological advances.

cs.CL↗

On the Behavioral Traits of LLM Agents

Users increasingly describe different AI agents as distinct colleagues to work with. AI personality research aims to quantify such impressions by attributing human- like "traits" to agents. However, existing measures fall short: models' self-reports (S-data) diverge from their actual behavior, while informant ratings from LLM judges (I-data) are costly to scale and cover few everyday scenarios. In this paper, we propose A-B-D to infer traits bottom-up from behavioral data (B-data), namely how agents act on their environment and communicate with users, as recorded in existing trajectories. From 345,667 real-world trajectories spanning 80 models, 12 tasks, and 50 harnesses, we extract 318 candidate features that capture both the actions an agent takes at each step (functional) and the language accompanying them (linguistic). We retain only features that show instance-level stability, cross-task consistency, and model discriminability. Factor analysis of the remaining 79 features uncovers six stable, model-attributable factors, two functional and four linguistic. For example, Claude-Sonnet-4.6 and Kimi-K3 exhibit the most planfulness, whereas GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6 are the least energetic. Moreover, we quantify the "knowledge-action gap" in the wild: these factors correlate only weakly with self-reported Big Five scores, even for conceptually matched pairs such as extraversion and energetic (r = 0.07, p = 0.58). Our work offers a new lens for understanding AI personality, with implications for users, developers, and researchers from both computer science and social science.

cs.CL↗

Can LLM Agents Respond to Disasters? Benchmarking Heterogeneous Geospatial Reasoning in Emergency Operations

Operational disaster response goes beyond damage assessment, requiring responders to integrate multi-sensor signals, reason over road networks, populations and key facilities, plan evacuations, and produce actionable reports. However, prior work largely isolates remote-sensing perception or evaluates generic tool use, leaving the end-to-end workflows of emergency operations underexplored. In this paper, we introduce Disaster Operational Response Agent benchmark (DORA), the first agentic benchmark for end-to-end disaster response: 515 expert-authored tasks across 45 real-world disaster events spanning 10 types, paired with expert-verified, replayable gold trajectories totaling 3,500 tool-call steps. Tasks span five dimensions that cover the operational disaster-response pipeline: disaster perception, spatial relational analysis, rescue and evacuation planning, temporal evolution reasoning, and multi-modal report synthesis. Agents compose calls from a 108-tool MCP library over heterogeneous geospatial data: optical, SAR, and multi-spectral imagery across single-, bi-, and multi-temporal sequences (0.015-10m GSD), complemented by elevation and social vector layers. We comprehensively evaluate 13 frontier LLMs on our benchmark, revealing three persistent challenges: 1) disaster-domain grounding exposes unique failure modes (damage-semantic grounding, sensor-modality mismatch, and disaster-pipeline composition); 2) agents are doubly bottlenecked by tool selection and argument grounding, where gold tool-order hints improve accuracy by only 1.08-4.40%, and alternative scaffolds yield at most a 3.24% gain; 3) compositional fragility scales with trajectory length, the agent-to-gold gap widening from 7% to 56% on long pipelines. DORA establishes a rigorous testbed for operationally reliable disaster-response agents. Code and data are available at https://github.com/Junjue-Wang/DORA.

cs.AI↗

Is LLM's Moral Decision Compositional?

Moral evaluations of language models typically infer a model's values from its choices between single acts, yet in everyday life a person is judged on their history of good and bad acts. Such evaluations cannot capture how a model combines one person's acts. We test whether a model's moral judgment is compositional, that is, whether its judgment of a person follows from its judgments of each act. We introduce Moral Composition Arena, which asks which of two people is morally better to give Elo ratings to 229 human-validated acts across five Moral Foundations Theory foundations (act Elo) and to 160 controlled composite profiles, each a person described by two acts (composite Elo). Across ten frontier models and 29,134 choices, summed act Elo explains 73% of the variance in composite Elo, but the composition rule is not additive. With nearly equal mean summed act Elo, one extreme virtue with a minor wrong outranks two minor virtues in every model (mean +35.0 Elo), an extremity premium that survives a nonlinear baseline and human relabeling of act intensities. Single-act evaluations thus predict most of how these models judge people described by two acts, but miss a systematic premium on extreme acts.

cs.CL↗

The Chameleon's Limit: Investigating Persona Collapse and Homogenization in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) have powered multi-agent simulations such as survey respondents or application users. However, LLMs lack the population-level diversity required by these simulations---responses from LLMs with detailed human profiles cluster into classes, unlike human responses that uniformly fill the entire space. In this paper, we formalize this as Persona Collapse and quantify its population-level structure with three diagnostic metrics: Coverage (how much of the persona space is occupied), Uniformity (how evenly agents spread across it), and Complexity (how rich the resulting behaviors are). Across eight LLMs on personality (BFI-44), moral reasoning, and self-introduction, persona collapse is universal but task-dependent: CoSER-Llama-8B collapses the most in personality while being the most diverse in moral reasoning. Moreover, sampling more personas cannot mitigate the collapse. We further show a fidelity--diversity tradeoff: the models with the highest per-persona fidelity produce the most polarized populations. Finally, persona-targeted fine-tuning further narrows the population instead of diversifying it.

cs.CL↗

The Last Remote Sensing Model Built by Humans? Casting Any Earth Observation Task as Recursive Self-Improvement

Earth observation (EO) models are still built by hand. For each new task, experts design a training recipe and tune it against a benchmark. We show that this loop can be handed to an agent. Any verifiable task can be cast as a harness and a verifier, where the harness defines what the agent may use and the verifier defines what counts as success. Every EO task can be made verifiable, through labeled benchmarks, independent sensors, physical models or the repeated observation of the same place. Given only these two components, a general-purpose coding agent builds the EO model and improves it recursively on its own outputs. Settings long treated as separate research problems, from learning with a handful of labels to adapting across domains, become choices of harness and verifier. On six EO benchmarks spanning optical, SAR and multispectral time-series imagery, with outputs that range from land-cover maps and ship instances to canopy heights and answers about large images, agent-built models surpass the state of the art on every one, and on land-cover mapping, they do so from 11% of the training labels. This establishes a new paradigm for EO, in which people design harnesses and verifiers and agents build the models, so EO models improve as agents do.

cs.CV↗

The Invisible Leash: Why RLVR May or May Not Escape Its Origin

Recent advances highlight Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) as a promising approach to enhancing LLM capabilities. However, it remains unclear whether the current practice of RLVR truly expands models' reasoning boundary or mainly amplifies high-reward outputs that base models already know. We introduce empirical support dynamics, a framework that quantifies how RLVR preserves, expands, and shrinks access to verified solutions. Applied across models, reasoning tasks, and training checkpoints, it matches verified successes question by question to reveal changes that aggregate accuracy can conceal. Across the evaluated model-level benchmark aggregates, \textit{the shrinkage of observed support outweighs its expansion}: more questions lose a verified success than gain one at the stated sampling budgets. These losses occur alongside gains in \texttt{pass@1}. Some RLVR models increase average token-level entropy while reducing final-answer entropy: their token choices become more uncertain on average even as their final answers become more concentrated. Together, these findings reveal an ``invisible leash'' in current RLVR practice: it can make existing successes more reliable while losing access to other verified solutions. Empirical support dynamics make this imbalance measurable and motivate exploration strategies that reach underrepresented solutions while retaining prior successes.

cs.LG↗

DenMark: Robust Semantic Watermarking for Diffusion Language Models

Semantic text watermarks encode signals in meaning rather than surface token choices, offering robustness to paraphrasing and other semantic-preserving edits. Existing semantic watermarking methods are primarily designed for autoregressive language models (ARLMs), where completed candidate units can be generated and scored before generation proceeds. This paradigm does not naturally extend to diffusion language models (DLMs), where semantic units remain incomplete during intermediate denoising steps and tokens may be updated in flexible orders. We propose DenMark, a semantic watermarking framework that injects key-dependent signals directly into the DLM denoising process. DenMark partitions the output into fixed token regions and uses temporary rollouts as semantic lookahead: conditional completions estimate the eventual semantics of an incomplete region, enabling DenMark to select local updates with higher estimated semantic watermark scores. Repeating this procedure across denoising steps progressively accumulates watermark evidence in the final output. For detection, DenMark uses calibrated scanning over candidate unit sizes to remain robust to boundary shifts introduced by semantic attacks. Across four DLMs, three datasets, and four semantic attacks, DenMark gives the strongest overall robustness and achieves the best TPR at each reported operating point in 46 of the 48 backbone-dataset-attack combinations. Overall, DenMark provides an effective semantic watermark for DLMs. Code is available at https://github.com/TianhaoMa5/DenoMark.

cs.CL↗

IdeaScientist: Orchestrating Agents for Grounded Scientific Ideation

Despite rapid progress in automating scientific research, generating promising and well grounded research solutions remains a central challenge. We isolate research ideation as a standalone task and build our solution on the intuition that a challenge in one field can often be addressed by a mechanism that solved an analogous challenge in another. Accordingly, we introduce IdeaScientist, which decomposes ideation into gap finding, innovation, and report writing, and trains each role with reinforcement learning. These roles identify limitations in related work, draw solution intuitions from analogous problem settings, and develop those intuitions into complete research proposals. To facilitate discovery of insights across domains, we construct the Svalbard Idea Vault, a corpus of 2.77M decomposed research ideas for retrieval, training, and temporally controlled evaluation. Our evaluation restricts access to literature available before a cutoff date and assesses how closely proposed directions align with those later explored in 15K papers authored by human researchers. On Qwen3.6-27B, IdeaScientist outperforms the strongest open-source autoresearch baseline by 14.0%, driven mainly by gains in novelty. On this 27B open backbone, IdeaScientist even outperforms Claude Code SDK with Claude-4.8-Opus and Codex SDK with GPT-5.4, by up to 5.9%.

cs.CL↗

OSWorld-Science: A Benchmark of Computer Use Agents for Learning and Using Scientific Software

Scientific software presents a demanding test for computer-using agents based on visual language models (VLMs): completing a research workflow requires interpreting specialized interfaces, manipulating scientific objects, and producing verifiable results. We thus introduce OSWorld-Science, a benchmark and evaluation environment that combines scientifically meaningful tasks, artifact-based evaluation, and an efficient agent harness for studying computer use in the scientific domain. The benchmark contains 12 VLMs and 146 high-quality tasks across several scientific domains and software configurations, covering workflows such as molecular drawing and retrosynthesis, pathology image analysis, statistical computing, and physical simulation. Tasks are developed through expert proposals and iterative human--AI co-design, with selection guided by scientific value and difficulty. Task-specific execution-based evaluators inspect application states and generated artifacts, including molecular structures, segmentation masks, plots, and numerical results, and award partial credit for incomplete outcomes. Our special harness integrates model adapters, interaction-loop control, and trajectory logging to support comparisons of models and interaction strategies. Our results show that current state-of-the-art VLMs with a strong harness still face challenges in addressing key questions in the scientific domains. We also analyze the benchmarking results across multi-linguistics, reasoning efforts, context length and other factors and derive several important conclusions and directions to assist future development. Overall, we provide an integrated framework connecting expert-defined scientific goals to verifiable software outcomes, enabling systematic evaluation of both agent capabilities and harness design in scientific workflows.

cs.AI↗

Harbor Adapters and Harbor-Index: Infrastructure and a Curated Meta-Dataset for Large-Scale Agentic Evaluation

Evaluating agents on the growing number of agentic benchmarks is challenging because they often require complex environments and agent integrations. We introduce Harbor Adapters, a unified evaluation infrastructure for agentic benchmarks. Our work makes three contributions. First, we develop benchmark adapters that port more than 80 benchmarks to evaluate arbitrary agents, and validate them through rigorous code review and parity experiments. Second, we conduct a large-scale evaluation of 8 models spanning capability tiers across 54 benchmarks; every model is run with Terminus-2 and with one of 3 native harnesses. This enables a broader analysis of agent capabilities and failure modes than was previously possible. Third, we introduce Harbor-Index, a curated set of 82 difficult, diverse, and high-quality tasks spanning 29 benchmarks, refined from the adapted suite through difficulty filtering, AI and human audit, and an audit-and-fix loop. Harbor-Index preserves the challenge and breadth of large-scale agentic evaluations while being affordable to run; no evaluated model-harness configuration exceeds 30% pass rate, and the strongest (GPT-5.5 with Codex) reaches 28.0%. We release the adapters, evaluation results, in-depth analysis, and Harbor-Index as open-source artifacts to support more reliable and comprehensive evaluation of language-model agents.

cs.AI↗

Group Alignment-Induced Sycophancy: A Two-Sided Evaluation of Steerable Pluralistic Alignment

Group alignment adapts a language model to a demographic group to produce responses that reflect the group's opinions, values, and preferences. Sycophancy, a well-documented by-product of alignment, causes the model to over-agree with the user regardless of factual and objective information. However, existing group alignment methods and evaluations focus only on how closely the model matches the group's opinions, overlooking the induced change in sycophantic behaviour. To bridge this gap, we introduce \textbf{G}roup \textbf{A}lignment-induced \textbf{S}ycophancy (GAS) and systematically evaluate alignment across 3 methods, 4 models and 13 demographic groups, on both the intended gain in opinion alignment and the unintended shift in sycophancy. We find that gain and shift are non-uniform across groups: under an identical budget, some groups receive larger gains in opinion alignment than others, and the induced sycophancy shift forms a group-specific profile rather than a single-dimensional change. These results suggest that group alignment should be reported as a two-sided, multi-dimensional profile rather than a single fit score that accounts for per-group differences when adapting LLMs to diverse populations.

cs.CL↗

Multiplayer Nash Preference Optimization

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has emerged as the standard paradigm for aligning large language models with human preferences. However, reward-based methods grounded in the Bradley-Terry assumption struggle to capture the nontransitivity and heterogeneity of real-world preferences. To address this, recent studies have reframed alignment as a two-player Nash game, giving rise to Nash learning from human feedback (NLHF). While this perspective has inspired algorithms such as INPO, ONPO, and EGPO that offer strong theoretical and empirical guarantees, they remain fundamentally restricted to two-player interactions, introducing a single-opponent bias that fails to capture the full complexity of realistic preference structures. This work introduces Multiplayer Nash Preference Optimization (MNPO), a novel framework that generalizes NLHF to the multiplayer regime. It formulates alignment as an n-player game, where each policy competes against a population of opponents while being regularized toward a reference model. We demonstrate that MNPO inherits the equilibrium guarantees of two-player methods while enabling richer competitive dynamics and improved coverage of diverse preference structures. Comprehensive empirical evaluation shows that MNPO consistently outperforms existing NLHF baselines on instruction-following benchmarks, achieving superior alignment quality under heterogeneous annotator conditions and mixed-policy evaluation scenarios. Together, these results establish MNPO as a principled and scalable framework for aligning LLMs with complex, non-transitive human preferences. Code is available at: https://github.com/smiles724/MNPO

cs.AI↗

Proteo-R1: Reasoning Foundation Models for De Novo Protein Design

Deep learning in de novo protein design has achieved atomic-level fidelity. However, existing models remain largely non-deliberative: they directly synthesize molecular geometries without explicitly reasoning about which residues or interactions are functionally essential. As a result, design decisions are entangled with continuous sampling dynamics, limiting interpretability, controllability, and systematic reuse of biochemical knowledge. We introduce Proteo-R1, a reasoning-guided protein design framework that explicitly decouples molecular understanding from geometric generation. Proteo-R1 adopts a dual-expert architecture in which a multimodal large language model (MLLM) serves as an understanding expert, analyzing protein sequences, structures, and textual context to identify key functional residues that govern binding and specificity. These residue-level decisions are then passed as hard constraints to a separate diffusion-based generation expert, which performs conditional co-design while respecting the fixed interaction anchors. This factorization mirrors how human experts approach molecular engineering: first, reasoning about critical interactions, then optimizing geometry subject to those constraints. By operationalizing reasoning as explicit residue-level commitments rather than latent textual guidance, Proteo-R1 achieves stable, interpretable, and modular integration of LLM reasoning with state-of-the-art geometric generative models. Code, data, and demos are available at https://smiles724.github.io/r1/.

cs.LG↗

Evaluating Multi-Turn Multimodal Diagnostic Reasoning on Challenging Real-World Clinical Cases

Clinical diagnostic evaluation should not only assess whether models can provide correct diagnoses, but also reflect the realities of clinical practice, including progressive disclosure of multimodal information, dynamic updating of diagnostic hypotheses, and continuous refinement of clinical reasoning. However, existing evaluations of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) typically rely on single-turn or isolated tasks, making it difficult to fully capture the complexity of real-world clinical diagnosis. To bridge this gap, we developed ClinMM-Bench, the largest multi-turn multimodal clinical diagnostic evaluation benchmark to date. ClinMM-Bench contains 1,089 challenging real-world clinical cases and 3,760 medical images across eight specialties. We systematically evaluated 15 representative MLLMs using a two-level evaluation framework that assessed both diagnostic accuracy and diagnostic reasoning quality. Results showed that proprietary models achieved the highest overall diagnostic accuracy, but the proportion of completely correct diagnoses remained limited across all models. In terms of diagnostic reasoning quality, current models can identify plausible diagnostic directions but still have considerable limitations in generating reliable diagnostic reasoning. Error analysis further identified five representative failure modes: information synthesis failure, knowledge mapping error, perception error, premature closure, and visual hallucination.

cs.CL↗

Advancing All-Weather Building Damage Mapping to the Instance Level: Outcomes and Insights from the 2026 Bright Challenge

Rapid post-disaster response requires timely, building-level information on whether structures remain intact, are damaged, or are destroyed. Post-event optical imagery, however, may be unavailable because of cloud, smoke, or darkness. The Bright Challenge evaluated all-weather building damage mapping from a submeter-resolution pre-event optical image and a post-event SAR image. Participants were required to detect and delineate each building and assign exactly one of three mutually exclusive damage labels. The challenge extended the globally distributed \textsc{Bright} dataset with instance-level annotations for about 291,000 buildings across 16 disaster events spanning seven disaster types. The final phase was evaluated exclusively on two 2025 events absent from training: a wildfire event in California and a hurricane in Jamaica. A total of 157 participants made 1,289 submissions, and 46 teams entered the final phase. The two winning solutions achieved test mAPs of 0.182 and 0.181, approximately 8.7 times the public baseline of 0.021, but remained far below the best in-domain holdout score of 0.513. Across teams ranked in both phases, performance declined sharply and the rank order changed substantially. The two leading solutions independently favored modality-specific encoding, staged or late optical--SAR fusion, and an optical-dominant separation of building localization from damage recognition. The winning method additionally used scene-aware threshold adjustment and pseudo-label adaptation. These results identify cross-event generalization and stable severity discrimination as the principal remaining challenges. All data, annotations, baseline code, and winning solutions are publicly available at https://github.com/ChenHongruixuan/BRIGHT.

cs.CV↗

ExpressionCueLens: A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Human-AI Companion Conversations on Social Media

LLM-based AI companion agents are increasingly being perceived not only as tools but also as social companions. On social media, people recount conversations where these agents comfort, negotiate and assert boundaries, reflecting a growing attribution of human-like qualities. To profile how agency is perceived in human-AI (HAI) interactions, we introduce the ExpressionCueLens framework, which organizes linguistic, cognitive, behavioral and perceptual cues into ten categories of anthropomorphism expressions. We apply this framework to $\sim$3500 Reddit and XiaoHongShu posts that discuss HAI companionship. Through iterative expert annotation and LLM-assisted labeling, our cross-platform analysis indicates patterns consistent with the hypothesis that XiaoHongShu users use significantly more expressions of vulnerability and emotions, and more non-perceptual cues. Reddit users employ more perceptual cues with temporality and embodiment expressions. These findings suggest that cultural and platform norms shape the way that companion agents are treated as active, agentic partners, and provides design implications for culturally sensitive HAI companion agents.

cs.HC↗