arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv subjects

Carolin Lawrence

Publications and source records attributed to Carolin Lawrence.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

On the limits and opportunities of AI reviewers: Reviewing the reviews of Nature-family papers with 45 expert scientists

With the advancement of AI capabilities, AI reviewers are beginning to be deployed in scientific peer review, yet their capability and credibility remain in question: many scientists simply view them as probabilistic systems without the expertise to evaluate research, while other researchers are more optimistic about their readiness without concrete evidence. Understanding what AI reviewers do well, where they fall short, and what challenges remain is essential. However, existing evaluations of AI reviewers have focused on whether their verdicts match human verdicts (e.g., score alignment, acceptance prediction), which is insufficient to characterize their capabilities and limits. In this paper, we close this gap through a large-scale expert annotation study, in which 45 domain scientists in Physical, Biological, and Health Sciences spent 469 hours rating 2,960 individual criticisms (each targeting one specific aspect of a paper) from human-written and AI-generated reviews of 82 Nature-family papers on correctness, significance, and sufficiency of evidence. On a composite of all three dimensions, a reviewing agent powered by GPT-5.2 scores above each paper's top-rated human reviewer (60.0% vs. 48.2%, p = 0.009), while all three AI reviewers (including Gemini 3.0 Pro and Claude Opus 4.5) exceed the lowest-rated human across every dimension. AI reviewers' accurate criticisms are also more often rated significant and well-evidenced, and surface a distinct 26% of issues no human raises. However, AI reviewers overlap far more than humans do (21% vs. 3% for cross-reviewer pairs), and exhibit 16 recurring weaknesses humans do not share, such as limited subfield knowledge, lack of long context management over multiple files, and overly critical stance on minor issues. Overall, our results position current AI reviewers as complements to, not substitutes for, human reviewers.

cs.CL

Oblivion: Self-Adaptive Agentic Memory Control through Decay-Driven Activation

Human memory adapts through selective forgetting: experiences become less accessible over time but can be reactivated by reinforcement or contextual cues. In contrast, memory-augmented LLM agents rely on "always-on" retrieval and "flat" memory storage, causing high interference and latency as histories grow. We introduce Oblivion, a memory control framework that casts forgetting as decay-driven reductions in accessibility -- not explicit deletion. Oblivion decouples memory control into read and write paths. The read path decides when to consult memory, based on agent uncertainty and memory buffer utility, avoiding redundant always-on access. The write path decides what to strengthen, by reinforcing memories contributing to forming the response. Together, this enables hierarchical memory organization that maintains persistent high-level strategies while dynamically loading details as needed. We evaluate on both static and dynamic long-horizon interaction benchmarks. Oblivion outperforms both direct and memory-augmented baselines, while reducing token cost by up to 73% at 120K interaction spans. These results show that treating memory as a control problem -- deciding when to retrieve and what to reinforce -- is essential for sustaining long-horizon agent performance.

cs.CL

Compositional Steering of Large Language Models with Steering Tokens

Deploying LLMs in real-world applications requires controllable output that satisfies multiple desiderata at the same time. While existing work extensively addresses LLM steering for a single behavior, \textit{compositional steering} -- i.e., steering LLMs simultaneously towards multiple behaviors -- remains an underexplored problem. In this work, we propose \emph{compositional steering tokens} for multi-behavior steering. We first embed individual behaviors, expressed as natural language instructions, into dedicated tokens via self-distillation. Contrary to most prior work, which operates in the activation space, our behavior steers live in the space of input tokens, enabling more effective zero-shot composition. We then train a dedicated \textit{composition token} on pairs of behaviors and show that it successfully captures the notion of composition: it generalizes well to \textit{unseen} compositions, including those with unseen behaviors as well as those with an unseen \textit{number} of behaviors. Our experiments across different LLM architectures show that steering tokens lead to superior multi-behavior steering of verifiable constraints (e.g., length, format, structure, language) compared to competing approaches (instructions, activation steering, and LoRA merging). Moreover, we show that steering tokens complement natural language instructions, with their combination resulting in further gains.

cs.CL

Scaling Evaluation-time Compute with Reasoning Models as Evaluators

As language model (LM) outputs get more and more natural, it is becoming more difficult than ever to evaluate their quality. Simultaneously, increasing LMs' "thinking" time through scaling test-time compute has proven an effective technique to solve challenging problems in domains such as math and code. This raises a natural question: can an LM's evaluation capability also be improved by spending more test-time compute? To answer this, we investigate employing reasoning models-LMs that natively generate long chain-of-thought reasoning-as evaluators. Specifically, we examine methods to leverage more test-time compute by (1) using reasoning models, and (2) prompting these models to evaluate not only the response as a whole (i.e., outcome evaluation) but also assess each step in the response separately (i.e., process evaluation). In experiments, we observe that the evaluator's performance improves monotonically when generating more reasoning tokens, similar to the trends observed in LM-based generation. Furthermore, we use these more accurate evaluators to rerank multiple generations, and demonstrate that spending more compute at evaluation time can be as effective as using more compute at generation time in improving an LM's problem-solving capability.

cs.CL

Not-Just-Scaling Laws: Towards a Better Understanding of the Downstream Impact of Language Model Design Decisions

Improvements in language model capabilities are often attributed to increasing model size or training data, but in some cases smaller models trained on curated data or with different architectural decisions can outperform larger ones trained on more tokens. What accounts for this? To quantify the impact of these design choices, we meta-analyze 92 open-source pretrained models across a wide array of scales, including state-of-the-art open-weights models as well as less performant models and those with less conventional design decisions. We find that by incorporating features besides model size and number of training tokens, we can achieve a relative 3-28% increase in ability to predict downstream performance compared with using scale alone. Analysis of model design decisions reveal insights into data composition, such as the trade-off between language and code tasks at 15-25\% code, as well as the better performance of some architectural decisions such as choosing rotary over learned embeddings. Broadly, our framework lays a foundation for more systematic investigation of how model development choices shape final capabilities.

cs.CL

MEDDxAgent: A Unified Modular Agent Framework for Explainable Automatic Differential Diagnosis

Differential Diagnosis (DDx) is a fundamental yet complex aspect of clinical decision-making, in which physicians iteratively refine a ranked list of possible diseases based on symptoms, antecedents, and medical knowledge. While recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in supporting DDx, existing approaches face key limitations, including single-dataset evaluations, isolated optimization of components, unrealistic assumptions about complete patient profiles, and single-attempt diagnosis. We introduce a Modular Explainable DDx Agent (MEDDxAgent) framework designed for interactive DDx, where diagnostic reasoning evolves through iterative learning, rather than assuming a complete patient profile is accessible. MEDDxAgent integrates three modular components: (1) an orchestrator (DDxDriver), (2) a history taking simulator, and (3) two specialized agents for knowledge retrieval and diagnosis strategy. To ensure robust evaluation, we introduce a comprehensive DDx benchmark covering respiratory, skin, and rare diseases. We analyze single-turn diagnostic approaches and demonstrate the importance of iterative refinement when patient profiles are not available at the outset. Our broad evaluation demonstrates that MEDDxAgent achieves over 10% accuracy improvements in interactive DDx across both large and small LLMs, while offering critical explainability into its diagnostic reasoning process.

cs.CL

On Synthesizing Data for Context Attribution in Question Answering

Question Answering (QA) accounts for a significant portion of LLM usage "in the wild". However, LLMs sometimes produce false or misleading responses, also known as "hallucinations". Therefore, grounding the generated answers in contextually provided information -- i.e., providing evidence for the generated text -- is paramount for LLMs' trustworthiness. Providing this information is the task of context attribution. In this paper, we systematically study LLM-based approaches for this task, namely we investigate (i) zero-shot inference, (ii) LLM ensembling, and (iii) fine-tuning of small LMs on synthetic data generated by larger LLMs. Our key contribution is SynQA: a novel generative strategy for synthesizing context attribution data. Given selected context sentences, an LLM generates QA pairs that are supported by these sentences. This leverages LLMs' natural strengths in text generation while ensuring clear attribution paths in the synthetic training data. We show that the attribution data synthesized via SynQA is highly effective for fine-tuning small LMs for context attribution in different QA tasks and domains. Finally, with a user study, we validate the usefulness of small LMs (fine-tuned on synthetic data from SynQA) in context attribution for QA.

cs.IR

Evaluating Language Models as Synthetic Data Generators

Given the increasing use of synthetic data in language model (LM) post-training, an LM's ability to generate high-quality data has become nearly as crucial as its ability to solve problems directly. While prior works have focused on developing effective data generation methods, they lack systematic comparison of different LMs as data generators in a unified setting. To address this gap, we propose AgoraBench, a benchmark that provides standardized settings and metrics to evaluate LMs' data generation abilities. Through synthesizing 1.26 million training instances using 6 LMs and training 99 student models, we uncover key insights about LMs' data generation capabilities. First, we observe that LMs exhibit distinct strengths. For instance, GPT-4o excels at generating new problems, while Claude-3.5-Sonnet performs better at enhancing existing ones. Furthermore, our analysis reveals that an LM's data generation ability doesn't necessarily correlate with its problem-solving ability. Instead, multiple intrinsic features of data quality-including response quality, perplexity, and instruction difficulty-collectively serve as better indicators. Finally, we demonstrate that strategic choices in output format and cost-conscious model selection significantly impact data generation effectiveness.

cs.CL

AgentQuest: A Modular Benchmark Framework to Measure Progress and Improve LLM Agents

The advances made by Large Language Models (LLMs) have led to the pursuit of LLM agents that can solve intricate, multi-step reasoning tasks. As with any research pursuit, benchmarking and evaluation are key corner stones to efficient and reliable progress. However, existing benchmarks are often narrow and simply compute overall task success. To face these issues, we propose AgentQuest -- a framework where (i) both benchmarks and metrics are modular and easily extensible through well documented and easy-to-use APIs; (ii) we offer two new evaluation metrics that can reliably track LLM agent progress while solving a task. We exemplify the utility of the metrics on two use cases wherein we identify common failure points and refine the agent architecture to obtain a significant performance increase. Together with the research community, we hope to extend AgentQuest further and therefore we make it available under https://github.com/nec-research/agentquest.

cs.AI

Walking a Tightrope -- Evaluating Large Language Models in High-Risk Domains

High-risk domains pose unique challenges that require language models to provide accurate and safe responses. Despite the great success of large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT and its variants, their performance in high-risk domains remains unclear. Our study delves into an in-depth analysis of the performance of instruction-tuned LLMs, focusing on factual accuracy and safety adherence. To comprehensively assess the capabilities of LLMs, we conduct experiments on six NLP datasets including question answering and summarization tasks within two high-risk domains: legal and medical. Further qualitative analysis highlights the existing limitations inherent in current LLMs when evaluating in high-risk domains. This underscores the essential nature of not only improving LLM capabilities but also prioritizing the refinement of domain-specific metrics, and embracing a more human-centric approach to enhance safety and factual reliability. Our findings advance the field toward the concerns of properly evaluating LLMs in high-risk domains, aiming to steer the adaptability of LLMs in fulfilling societal obligations and aligning with forthcoming regulations, such as the EU AI Act.

cs.CL

Linking Surface Facts to Large-Scale Knowledge Graphs

Open Information Extraction (OIE) methods extract facts from natural language text in the form of ("subject"; "relation"; "object") triples. These facts are, however, merely surface forms, the ambiguity of which impedes their downstream usage; e.g., the surface phrase "Michael Jordan" may refer to either the former basketball player or the university professor. Knowledge Graphs (KGs), on the other hand, contain facts in a canonical (i.e., unambiguous) form, but their coverage is limited by a static schema (i.e., a fixed set of entities and predicates). To bridge this gap, we need the best of both worlds: (i) high coverage of free-text OIEs, and (ii) semantic precision (i.e., monosemy) of KGs. In order to achieve this goal, we propose a new benchmark with novel evaluation protocols that can, for example, measure fact linking performance on a granular triple slot level, while also measuring if a system has the ability to recognize that a surface form has no match in the existing KG. Our extensive evaluation of several baselines show that detection of out-of-KG entities and predicates is more difficult than accurate linking to existing ones, thus calling for more research efforts on this difficult task. We publicly release all resources (data, benchmark and code) on https://github.com/nec-research/fact-linking.

cs.CL

Large Language Models Enable Few-Shot Clustering

Unlike traditional unsupervised clustering, semi-supervised clustering allows users to provide meaningful structure to the data, which helps the clustering algorithm to match the user's intent. Existing approaches to semi-supervised clustering require a significant amount of feedback from an expert to improve the clusters. In this paper, we ask whether a large language model can amplify an expert's guidance to enable query-efficient, few-shot semi-supervised text clustering. We show that LLMs are surprisingly effective at improving clustering. We explore three stages where LLMs can be incorporated into clustering: before clustering (improving input features), during clustering (by providing constraints to the clusterer), and after clustering (using LLMs post-correction). We find incorporating LLMs in the first two stages can routinely provide significant improvements in cluster quality, and that LLMs enable a user to make trade-offs between cost and accuracy to produce desired clusters. We release our code and LLM prompts for the public to use.

cs.CL

Uncertainty Propagation in Node Classification

Quantifying predictive uncertainty of neural networks has recently attracted increasing attention. In this work, we focus on measuring uncertainty of graph neural networks (GNNs) for the task of node classification. Most existing GNNs model message passing among nodes. The messages are often deterministic. Questions naturally arise: Does there exist uncertainty in the messages? How could we propagate such uncertainty over a graph together with messages? To address these issues, we propose a Bayesian uncertainty propagation (BUP) method, which embeds GNNs in a Bayesian modeling framework, and models predictive uncertainty of node classification with Bayesian confidence of predictive probability and uncertainty of messages. Our method proposes a novel uncertainty propagation mechanism inspired by Gaussian models. Moreover, we present an uncertainty oriented loss for node classification that allows the GNNs to clearly integrate predictive uncertainty in learning procedure. Consequently, the training examples with large predictive uncertainty will be penalized. We demonstrate the BUP with respect to prediction reliability and out-of-distribution (OOD) predictions. The learned uncertainty is also analyzed in depth. The relations between uncertainty and graph topology, as well as predictive uncertainty in the OOD cases are investigated with extensive experiments. The empirical results with popular benchmark datasets demonstrate the superior performance of the proposed method.

cs.LG

State-Regularized Recurrent Neural Networks to Extract Automata and Explain Predictions

Recurrent neural networks are a widely used class of neural architectures. They have, however, two shortcomings. First, they are often treated as black-box models and as such it is difficult to understand what exactly they learn as well as how they arrive at a particular prediction. Second, they tend to work poorly on sequences requiring long-term memorization, despite having this capacity in principle. We aim to address both shortcomings with a class of recurrent networks that use a stochastic state transition mechanism between cell applications. This mechanism, which we term state-regularization, makes RNNs transition between a finite set of learnable states. We evaluate state-regularized RNNs on (1) regular languages for the purpose of automata extraction; (2) non-regular languages such as balanced parentheses and palindromes where external memory is required; and (3) real-word sequence learning tasks for sentiment analysis, visual object recognition and text categorisation. We show that state-regularization (a) simplifies the extraction of finite state automata that display an RNN's state transition dynamic; (b) forces RNNs to operate more like automata with external memory and less like finite state machines, which potentiality leads to a more structural memory; (c) leads to better interpretability and explainability of RNNs by leveraging the probabilistic finite state transition mechanism over time steps.

cs.LG

Multi-Source Survival Domain Adaptation

Survival analysis is the branch of statistics that studies the relation between the characteristics of living entities and their respective survival times, taking into account the partial information held by censored cases. A good analysis can, for example, determine whether one medical treatment for a group of patients is better than another. With the rise of machine learning, survival analysis can be modeled as learning a function that maps studied patients to their survival times. To succeed with that, there are three crucial issues to be tackled. First, some patient data is censored: we do not know the true survival times for all patients. Second, data is scarce, which led past research to treat different illness types as domains in a multi-task setup. Third, there is the need for adaptation to new or extremely rare illness types, where little or no labels are available. In contrast to previous multi-task setups, we want to investigate how to efficiently adapt to a new survival target domain from multiple survival source domains. For this, we introduce a new survival metric and the corresponding discrepancy measure between survival distributions. These allow us to define domain adaptation for survival analysis while incorporating censored data, which would otherwise have to be dropped. Our experiments on two cancer data sets reveal a superb performance on target domains, a better treatment recommendation, and a weight matrix with a plausible explanation.

cs.LG

KGxBoard: Explainable and Interactive Leaderboard for Evaluation of Knowledge Graph Completion Models

Knowledge Graphs (KGs) store information in the form of (head, predicate, tail)-triples. To augment KGs with new knowledge, researchers proposed models for KG Completion (KGC) tasks such as link prediction; i.e., answering (h; p; ?) or (?; p; t) queries. Such models are usually evaluated with averaged metrics on a held-out test set. While useful for tracking progress, averaged single-score metrics cannot reveal what exactly a model has learned -- or failed to learn. To address this issue, we propose KGxBoard: an interactive framework for performing fine-grained evaluation on meaningful subsets of the data, each of which tests individual and interpretable capabilities of a KGC model. In our experiments, we highlight the findings that we discovered with the use of KGxBoard, which would have been impossible to detect with standard averaged single-score metrics.

cs.AI

Human-Centric Research for NLP: Towards a Definition and Guiding Questions

With Human-Centric Research (HCR) we can steer research activities so that the research outcome is beneficial for human stakeholders, such as end users. But what exactly makes research human-centric? We address this question by providing a working definition and define how a research pipeline can be split into different stages in which human-centric components can be added. Additionally, we discuss existing NLP with HCR components and define a series of guiding questions, which can serve as starting points for researchers interested in exploring human-centric research approaches. We hope that this work would inspire researchers to refine the proposed definition and to pose other questions that might be meaningful for achieving HCR.

cs.CL

A Human-Centric Assessment Framework for AI

With the rise of AI systems in real-world applications comes the need for reliable and trustworthy AI. An essential aspect of this are explainable AI systems. However, there is no agreed standard on how explainable AI systems should be assessed. Inspired by the Turing test, we introduce a human-centric assessment framework where a leading domain expert accepts or rejects the solutions of an AI system and another domain expert. By comparing the acceptance rates of provided solutions, we can assess how the AI system performs compared to the domain expert, and whether the AI system's explanations (if provided) are human-understandable. This setup -- comparable to the Turing test -- can serve as a framework for a wide range of human-centric AI system assessments. We demonstrate this by presenting two instantiations: (1) an assessment that measures the classification accuracy of a system with the option to incorporate label uncertainties; (2) an assessment where the usefulness of provided explanations is determined in a human-centric manner.

cs.AI