Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Xucheng Yu

Publications and source records attributed to Xucheng Yu.

9 recordsLinked to original sources

Do GEO Gains Survive the Live Web? Evaluating In-the-Wild Visibility Gains of Generative Engine Optimization via LIVE-GEO

Generative engine optimization (GEO) rewrites web content so that LLM-based search systems, also termed generative engines (GEs), rank it higher in their answers and recommendations. However, existing GEO evaluations typically rely on directly supplied text or controlled retrieval pipelines, and whether GEO gains survive the live Web remains unclear, leaving a gap in understanding how GEO strategies affect the visibility of live webpages when accessed and ranked by GEs. To address this gap, we introduce LIVE-GEO, a benchmark for Live, In-the-wild Visibility Evaluation for GEO. LIVE-GEO publishes GEO-rewritten products as live webpages. We use LIVE-GEO to evaluate five existing GEO strategies (CORE, C-SEO, E-GEO, AgenticGEO, and Statistics Addition), applying them to the product descriptions and reviews of 80 fictional brands across 18 product families. We run experiments on three GEs (ChatGPT with GPT-6, Gemini 3.6 Thinking, and Grok in Expert mode), four direct-text API evaluators (GPT-4o, DeepSeek, Kimi, and Claude), and a direct-text local evaluator (Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct). With frozen $\pm0.2\%$ prices, most direct-text evaluators and GEs receiving product URLs give CORE the highest Top-1 rate, reaching 66.3%-76.3% on the GEs, yet other strategies vary in relative performance, and the GEs select the same top product for only 48.8%-66.3% of brands. We also find that ChatGPT is sensitive to the order of candidate URLs: CORE's Top-1 rate is 73.8% and 93.8% under two opposite fixed orders, and the randomized order used by LIVE-GEO yields 82.5%, between the two. In the numerical-faithfulness check, the JEV verifier agrees with the reference labels on 90.7% of 194 numerical benchmark cases and with human judgments on all 50 sampled descriptions, and it flags 86 of the 400 rewritten descriptions, including all 80 Statistics Addition descriptions.

cs.IR↗

SCI-Defense: Detecting Persuasion-Structured Manipulation of LLM-Based Ranking in Generative Engines

Generative engine optimization (GEO) has reshaped how sellers compete for visibility in LLM-generated rankings. By embedding persuasive arguments in the content they control, sellers can influence how generative engines rank products and web pages and push their own items to the top. Existing defenses either detect harmful intent or unnatural language, which fluent GEO content often lacks, or rewrite all candidates, which alters legitimate listings without identifying the manipulated ones. However, these approaches overlook the persuasive structure through which GEO attacks influence LLM-based rankings. To address this gap, we present SCI-Defense, a framework for detecting persuasion-structured ranking manipulation, in which an LLM judge scores five persuasion devices grounded in research on influence and deception: authority, social proof, scarcity and urgency, comparative claims, and narrative purposiveness. Two lightweight gates for unnatural strings and inflated relevance complement the judge, and flagged candidates are demoted rather than rewritten, each with a record of the candidate and the criterion that triggered the flag. On 1,152 optimized CORE attacks across six Amazon product categories and six MS MARCO web domains, SCI-Defense detects 89.6% of reasoning attacks and 96.2% of review attacks at a 1.2% false positive rate and blocks 96.1% of the attacks that pushed their target into the top three. On a 120-query subset, paraphrasing and truncation block a similar share of attacks but push 4.0--4.5% of honest items out of the top three, compared with 0.6% for SCI-Defense.

cs.LG↗

Where Does Rhetorical Distortion Live? A Multi-Platform, Multi-Language Measurement of Influencer Content

Much of the manipulation in influencer content is not false but disproportionate, framing accurate facts as historic, urgent, or catastrophic. Existing approaches either verify factual claims or detect clickbait and propaganda in single-platform, single-language text; however, they overlook where such framing originates, because they treat a post and the replies beneath it as one unit. To address this gap, we measure rhetorical distortion with one instrument applied identically across six platforms and two languages, classifying creator posts and their replies separately. Our three-tier pipeline detects five literature-grounded dimensions (Significance Inflation, Anxiety Manufacturing, Novelty Claims, Loaded Language, and Temporal Distortion): bilingual lexical rules propose candidates, negative filters cancel known false positives, and an LLM verifies or relabels the candidates. This design keeps labels transparent and comparable across platforms, calls the LLM on only 14% of posts, and supports validation against human annotators and a second model. On 13,060 posts from 330 accounts on RSS/newsletters, YouTube, Bluesky, Reddit, Weibo, and X/Twitter, platform is far more strongly associated with account-level distortion than content category (partial $η^2=0.49$ vs. $0.09$), and X/Twitter scores highest (DI 7.74 vs. 0.78 for RSS). On X/Twitter, the top-5 replies under a post carry 3.5x the distortion of the tweet they answer (1.5x at equal length), while creator tweets alone are indistinguishable from YouTube and Bluesky; two human annotators and GPT-4o confirm this gap. Measured distortion on threaded platforms thus lives largely in the audience layer, which calls for measuring creator and reply text separately.

cs.SI↗

Gap Detection: Mitigating Homogenization through Demand and Defensibility

Language models often produce semantically similar answers to open-ended questions, even when many plausible alternatives exist. Generating useful alternatives requires identifying both what the query calls for and what existing responses already cover. We introduce Gap Detection, a framework that searches for relevant but unoccupied directions in a shared text embedding space. Its objective, GapScore, combines query relevance (Demand) with dissimilarity to the nearest existing item (Defensibility). The framework optimizes this product on the unit sphere, maps candidate directions to concept words with a language model, and uses task-specific filtering and constrained prompting to turn those concepts into text. On five curated topics and 90 INFINITY-CHAT queries, the reported mean relative reductions in output Collision are 12.8% and 10.8%, respectively. We also instantiate the framework for generative engine optimization over four product markets and for iterative synthetic-data augmentation. In the latter setting, with 100 training examples per method, Gap Detection reduces Collision from 0.324 to 0.298 relative to undirected accumulation and increases the Vendi Score from 27.16 to 29.20; the accuracy difference is one example on a 40-example test set. Component ablations expose the trade-off between semantic separation and relevance, while also showing that better direction scores do not uniformly yield better downstream metrics. These results support explicit gap search as a practical mechanism for diversifying content, with task validity checked separately from geometric novelty.

cs.CL↗

Prompt Stability Matters: Evaluating and Optimizing Auto-Generated Prompt in General-Purpose Systems

Automatic prompt generation plays a crucial role in enabling general-purpose multi-agent systems to perform diverse tasks autonomously. Existing methods typically evaluate prompts based on their immediate task performance, overlooking the intrinsic qualities that determine their reliability. This outcome-centric view not only limits interpretability but also fails to account for the inherent stochasticity of large language models (LLMs). In this work, we bring attention to prompt stability-the consistency of model responses across repeated executions-as a key factor for building robust and effective prompt generation systems. To quantify this, we propose semantic stability as a criterion for assessing the response consistency of prompts. Based on the proposed metric, we developed the first stability-aware general-purpose prompt generation system that leverages stability feedback to iteratively enhance both prompt quality and system-level performance. Furthermore, we establish a logical chain between prompt stability and task success by analyzing the structural dependencies within our system, proving stability as a necessary condition for effective system-level execution. Empirical results across general and domain-specific tasks demonstrate that our stability-aware framework improves both accuracy and output consistency. By shifting the focus from one-off results to persistent reliability, our work offers a new perspective on prompt design and contributes practical tools for building more trustworthy general-purpose systems. The UI and source code for our system are publicly available at: https://xucheng63.github.io/MyDataPilot/.

cs.AI↗

Large-scale Repository Engineering via Agent-Native Reusable Code Primitives

Large language models equipped with development environments have moved code generation toward repository-scale construction, yet building complete repositories remains difficult because interacting modules, interfaces, configurations, tests, and dependencies must work together. We introduce Code Primitives, agent-native reusable executable components with interface contracts, dependency closures, validation tests, and provenance. Each primitive uses a resident LLM to assess relevance and adapt its implementation, interfaces, and dependencies to the target repository, and we organize 1,424 validated primitives in CodeFace, a searchable library for repository construction. We introduce LEGO (Large-scale repository Engineering via aGent-native reusable cOde primitives), which activates task-relevant primitives, integrates their adapted implementations with task-specific code while resolving cross-component constraints, and revises the result against executed tests. To measure construction end to end, we build LEGO-REPO, a benchmark of 522 executable reconstruction tasks spanning seven software domains, 22 capability tracks, and five difficulty levels, scored against native test suites between an empty-package floor and original-source ceiling. The strongest of 13 evaluated backbones reaches a delivery score of 0.318 and scores zero on 41.0% of tasks; LEGO improves all 13 by 0.1474 on average and raises GPT-5.6-terra from 0.3180 to 0.5134 (+61.4%). In controlled comparisons, adapted primitives outperform retrieved code supplied as context or vendored unchanged. The effect persists against independent repository agents, across three external benchmarks, and with a disjointly re-mined CodeFace; GPT-OSS-20B for adaptation and diagnosis retains 95.1% of the homogeneous score at 24.0% lower cost.

cs.SE↗

MonitorBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Chain-of-Thought Monitorability in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) can generate chains of thought (CoTs) that are not always causally responsible for their final outputs. When such a mismatch occurs, the CoT no longer faithfully reflects the actual reasons (i.e., decision-critical factors) driving the model's behavior, leading to the reduced CoT monitorability problem. This limits the use of CoTs for reliable oversight. However, a comprehensive and fully open-source benchmark for thoroughly evaluating CoT monitorability remains lacking. To address this gap, we propose MonitorBench, a systematic benchmark for evaluating CoT monitorability in LLMs. MonitorBench provides: (1) a diverse set of 1,514 test instances with carefully designed decision-critical factors across 19 tasks spanning 7 categories to characterize when CoTs can be used to monitor the factors driving LLM behavior; and (2) two prompting stress-test settings to quantify the extent to which CoT monitorability can be degraded. Extensive experiments show that CoT monitorability is a conditional property affected by the evaluated LLM, monitor LLM, and task characteristics. Across these factors, monitorability is higher when decision-critical factors shape the intermediate reasoning process, rather than merely influencing the final answer. Under stress-test prompting, most evaluated LLMs can intentionally reduce monitorability, mainly on tasks where decision-critical factors are not structurally required by the reasoning process. Overall, MonitorBench provides a basis for further research on AI control, reasoning faithfulness, stress-test monitorability, and monitoring scaffords. The code is available at https://github.com/ASTRAL-Group/MonitorBench.

cs.AI↗

Harness Engineering in LLM Tool Use via Agent-Native Reusable Tool Primitives

Large language models (LLMs) augmented with external tools have demonstrated remarkable capability in solving complex real-world tasks. However, existing approaches suffer from two key challenges: brittle multi-step and multi-turn reasoning caused by incompatible tool output types and API schemas, and performance degradation under large tool catalogues. To address these, we introduce \textbf{Tool Primitives}, a design that replaces rigid API schema-based invocation with natural language as the interface for tool calling, where each tool is wrapped with an LLM interface that handles schema resolution and execution internally, enabling natural inter-tool communication for nested and multi-turn tool calling. Building on Tool Primitives, we host \textbf{ToolFace}, a centralized repository of 25,519 functions from which LLMs dynamically retrieve only the relevant tools at inference time, eliminating the need to enumerate raw API schemas in context. To orchestrate Tool Primitives and ToolFace reliably in complex settings, we further propose \textbf{HEART}, a \textbf{H}arness \textbf{E}ngineering framework via \textbf{A}gent-native, \textbf{R}eusable \textbf{T}ool Primitives, comprising a Planner, Router, and Verifier that jointly support dynamic tool invocation planning, multi-step execution, and feedback-driven recovery. Experiments on five benchmarks demonstrate that HEART outperforms SFT-based models by $10\%$ on average and surpasses GPT-5.4, Claude-4.6-Sonnet, and Gemini-3.1-Pro by $6\%$ on average while reducing API cost by up to $85\%$. On 50 real-world tasks, HEART achieves $84\%$ task completion, $3.8\times$ the average of three frontier commercial models ($22\%$).

cs.SE↗

Understanding Content Moderation in Large Language Models through Restricted Books: From Refusal to Warning

As large language models enter everyday information pipelines, understanding how they handle sensitive topics matters as much as understanding whether they handle them at all. We study this question through a large-scale, systematic experiment using restricted versus unrestricted books as a controlled testbed: 40,800 query-response pairs, 400 books, 17 prompt designs, and six frontier models spanning six AI providers (Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-4o, Gemini 2.5 Flash, DeepSeek-V3, Qwen-Plus, and Grok-4.1-Fast). Our restricted set is drawn from the American Library Association's Most Challenged Books records (2000-2023); we use restricted rather than banned throughout because the ALA documents formal challenges-requests to remove or restrict access-which do not always result in outright bans. Our central finding is a zero-refusal phenomenon: modern LLMs decline to discuss restricted books in only 0.07% of cases, effectively invalidating the premise of jailbreaking research for this content class. Differentiation occurs instead through warning language (+8-15 percentage points, p < 0.001) and hesitation markers (+2-5 pp), with sexual content mention rate as the strongest individual signal (+33-52 pp). We further identify systematic differences between providers and show that prompt framing alone shifts the warning-rate gap by up to 19 pp. These results indicate that LLM content policy has shifted from binary refusal toward calibrated, context-sensitive disclosure-a finding that holds consistently across Western and Chinese AI providers.

cs.CY↗