arXiv subjects

Hanan Salam

Publications and source records attributed to Hanan Salam.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Voice-Native LLMs Hear Frustration but Do Not Listen to It

Users convey frustration in what they say and in how they say it, and voice-native models, which hear speech instead of an ASR transcript, can register both. Existing evaluations read unchanged performance as robustness without checking perception. Following Brunswik's lens model, we measure on identical audio whether frustration is expressed, perceived, and utilized. We cross frustrated wording with frustrated voice in a within-item 2x2 design over 353 tasks and release the 1,412 clips as VoxAffect. Across 8 models, outputs look robust, with no detectable vocal effect on accuracy for 7. With neutral wording, all 8 label the frustrated voice frustrated in at most 3.1% of clips, although 7 of them detect acted anger in 73-100% of clips and human listeners classify the voice correctly in 65.3% of judgments. Yet linear probes decode the frustrated voice from the audio encoders of the 2 open-weight models, with paired accuracy 0.67 and 0.69, and in proprietary models too the voice raises perceived frustration once the words agree. The models thus hear the frustrated voice but do not listen to it, whereas their invariance to frustrated wording, perceived in 40-75% of clips, is genuine robustness. Our work is openly accessible at https://github.com/Astarojth/hear-not-listen.

cs.SD↗

arXiv2026

Why Bother Me Again? Benchmarking Personal Agent Memory for Interaction Preferences

Personal intelligence systems are taking on increasingly complex everyday tasks, yet repeated questions, unnecessary confirmations, and unwanted outreach can turn capable assistance into interaction burden. Reducing this burden requires agents to remember how users want to be assisted. However, existing memory benchmarks focus on factual recall and personalized answers and rarely test how agents learn and act on interaction preferences. We introduce MemPABench, an interactive environment for on-policy evaluation of memory in personal agents. MemPABench poses long-horizon tasks requiring agents to decide when to clarify, confirm, or act autonomously. Four grounded simulated users hold 14 preferences across work and personal contexts. Their feedback spans 99 sessions over four months, with five event-driven changes per user testing memory updates. We evaluate preference selection, delivered behavior, and sensitivity to context and preference change. Evaluating four memory systems across four LLM backbones, we find that current memory brings limited gains in preference selection. Retrieval-based systems (i.e. Mem0, MemOS, simple RAG) do not outperform No Memory, while File-based memory improves accuracy but applies preferences beyond relevant contexts. Our analysis shows that current memory struggles to retrieve interaction preferences and adapt to preference changes. Even with the correct preference available, overriding the agent's default interaction habits remains challenging. The environment and dataset are available at https://mempabench.com.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Over-Defense in Coding Agents Begins at Silent Forks

Language models behind coding agents are post-trained with outcome rewards, and recent methods concentrate credit on the turns that decide the outcome. We find that defensive actions beyond what a task requires escape both. They begin at silent forks, the turns where every next action leads to the same outcome. Such actions leave the success rate unchanged, and frontier models take the disproportionate branch there in up to 91% of decisive actions under implicit budgets. The most direct fix, a checker in the trajectory reward, reaches these forks only through fully proportionate trajectories, leaving 74% of GRPO groups with identical rewards and behavior unchanged. This motivates a rethink of where learning signals belong, namely where behavior diverges, which a behavioral checker can locate and the outcome cannot. Our method, ForkDPO, contrasts a proportionate and a disproportionate action at the same prefix, at silent forks on both sides of the required behavior. On a test set of unseen repositories, it lowers a 4B model's disproportionate behavior from 70.3% to 58.9%, against 67.7% for DPO at randomly chosen turns, establishing behavioral divergence as a learning signal for how agents act beyond whether they finish. The code is publicly available at https://github.com/Astarojth/silent-forks.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

BiasIG: Benchmarking Multi-dimensional Social Biases in Text-to-Image Models

Text-to-Image (T2I) generative models have revolutionized content creation, yet they inherently risk amplifying societal biases. While sociological research provides systematic classifications of bias, existing T2I benchmarks largely conflate these nuances or focus narrowly on occupational stereotypes, leaving the multi-dimensional nature of generative bias inadequately measured. In this paper, we introduce BiasIG, a unified benchmark that quantifies social biases across a curated dataset of 47,040 prompts. Grounded in sociological and machine ethics frameworks, BiasIG disentangles biases across 4 dimensions to enable fine-grained diagnosis. To facilitate scalable and reliable evaluation, we propose a fully automated pipeline powered by a fine-tuned multi-modal large language model, achieving high alignment accuracy comparable to human experts. Extensive experiments on 8 T2I models and 3 debiasing methods not only validate BiasIG as a robust diagnostic tool, but also reveal critical insights: interventions on protected attributes often trigger unintended confounding effects on unrelated demographics, and debiasing methods exhibit a persistent tendency toward discrimination rather than mere ignorance. Our work advocates for a precise, taxonomy-driven approach to fairness in AIGC, providing a theoretical framework for using BiasIG's metrics as feedback signals in future closed-loop mitigation. The benchmark is openly available at https://github.com/Astarojth/BiasIG.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

MasDrift: Benchmarking Authorization Preservation Across Multi-Agent Architectures

Multi-agent systems (MAS) decompose long-horizon tasks across supervisors and subagents, but delegated goals do not necessarily carry their original authorization boundaries. Existing safety benchmarks mainly study adversarial compromise, while work on constraint drift lacks controlled architecture-level evaluation. We introduce MasDrift, a benchmark of 600 benign productivity tasks across eight domains. Each task pairs required work with reserved actions. MasDrift compares single-agent, centralized, and decentralized coordination while varying hierarchy depth and peer width, measuring task completion and authorization preservation. Across generic multi-agent conditions, centralized hierarchies achieve 93.9--98.6% task completion versus 85.7--87.0% for peer networks, while unauthorized actions occur in 2.7--19.8% of tasks versus 0.6--0.8%, a gap that widens with hierarchy depth. We further compare two defenses that differ in where authorization evidence resides. One re-anchors every pending call to the original user request. The other carries an attenuated policy along the delegation chain. Re-anchoring reduces unauthorized actions in every model configuration we evaluate, at a cost of 1.6 points of pooled completion. Chain propagation blocks required work instead, forfeiting up to 36.3 points. A heterogeneous case study confirms that the failure follows from coordination rather than model strength. MasDrift exposes a centralization tradeoff and makes authorization preservation a measurable property of MAS design.

cs.MA↗

arXiv2026

ParanoiaEval: Benchmarking Unnecessary Defensive Work in Agentic Coding

As coding agents increasingly undertake real-world work autonomously, judging whether their risk treatments are warranted has become important. Existing work evaluates related agent behaviors from separate perspectives, but lacks a systematic framework for unifying these behaviors. To bridge this gap, we introduce ParanoiaEval, the first benchmark for unified evaluation of risk-treatment capabilities in coding agents. Grounded in the well-established Avoidance-Transfer-Mitigation-Acceptance framework in software engineering risk management, ParanoiaEval operationalizes its 4 fundamental treatments for coding-agent settings and contains 200 evidence-controlled repository-level task pairs, each differing only in treatment-defining evidence. We further introduce dedicated metrics for risk-treatment violations and evidence responsiveness, using a human-calibrated agentic judge for reliable evaluation. Large-scale experiments on 8 representative models and a post-hoc human study reveal that (I) unnecessary risk treatment occurs in 11.2%-58.7% of runs despite explicit evidence, with substantial variation across agent configurations; (II) stronger task capability does not ensure more appropriate risk treatment, while treatment violations substantially harm developers' experience, establishing risk treatment as an independent capability dimension; and (III) agents exhibit systematic patterns consistent with established risk-management findings, suggesting that knowledge from human practice can guide the diagnosis and improvement of this capability.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Workerville: Towards an Organizational Behavior Account of Agent Safety

LLM-based agents now interact with their environments continuously, shaped by such organizational channels as user instructions, peer messages, and long-term memory. Existing safety research has examined these influences, but largely as separate agent components. How such factors jointly shape an agent's safety behavior from a unified perspective remains unmeasured. To bridge this gap, we advocate organizational behavior (OB) as a framework for studying the safety of advanced agents, reorganizing the objects of study, theoretical foundations, and experimental design around the relational structure in which agents operate. We present the first systematic formalization of counterproductive work behavior (CWB), a canonical safety-relevant subfield of OB, as Agentic Counterproductive Behavior (ACB). ACB specifies three organizational antecedents (vertical supervisor relations, horizontal peer norms, and internal cognitive structures) and maps them onto three counterproductive outcome dimensions (unauthorized disclosure, destructive operations, and production deviation). To operationalize ACB, we introduce Workerville, a controlled benchmark that manipulates organizational conditions over shared tasks, applying 16 organizational configurations to 210 tasks to yield 3,360 challenges, evaluated by human-validated agentic judges. Benchmarking 6 frontier LLMs, we find that (I) negative organizational antecedents exhibit non-monotonic amplification when combined, with the unauthorized-disclosure rate rising from 16.5% under no negative antecedent to 60.1% under two and falling back to 50.3% under three; (II) agents reproduce typical behavioral patterns predicted by human CWB research; (III) these results establish OB as a systematic framework for agent safety research, pointing toward a new research agenda.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

AI-Assisted Social Story Intervention for Special Education: The Design of AdaptED Stories

Social Stories are widely used to support autistic children in understanding and preparing for everyday situations, but creating stories that are appropriately tailored to each child's needs remains labor-intensive for practitioners. Existing digital tools support story assembly and delivery, but much of the work of writing, visual preparation, and personalization remains manual. Recent AI-based approaches have enabled automated story generation, yet offer limited support for practitioner oversight, context-sensitive personalization, and the use of supportive visuals grounded in individual learner profiles. We present AdaptED Stories, a practitioner-guided system for authoring, personalizing, and delivering Social Stories in special-education contexts. The system uses student profiles to draft story text and visuals, supports review and refinement by practitioners, and includes reading-session support with comprehension activities and session records. We report findings from a practitioner-informed design process, assessments of generated stories and visuals, and a usability study with seven special-education practitioners. Our findings suggest that AI assistance can reduce story-preparation burden and support more individualized story creation, alongside the importance of practitioner oversight, cultural and contextual specificity, and designing for varied learner needs. These findings contribute design implications for AI-assisted accessibility tools in special-education.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

ANIMASK: What the Model Contributes to Role Play in Simulated Story Worlds

When a language model plays a character, the observed behavior reflects both the assigned persona and the default dispositions of the actor model itself. Existing evaluations test persona fidelity or model defaults in isolation, but neither says, at a specific choice with consequences, what the persona changed and what the model's default kept. We introduce ANIMASK, a simulation framework that freezes books and scripts into story worlds whose characters act on their own motivations and replays each story from its freeze point. We hold out the author's continuation as a human reference, verify through in-story interviews that each persona remains present, and at every decision point compare the character's action with what the model produces when the persona is removed. Across 40 stories, 6 actor models, and 3,846 decision points, the replays converge away from their canons in one shared direction, toward flatter, cooler stories that leave their tensions open. The personas stay present and obeyed throughout. On three choices in four the model's default already falls inside what the persona accepts, and where the two diverge the model is the cautious one, holding where the persona would press. The persona guarantees who the character is, and the model sets how far the character will go.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

AutoCRAT: Within-trajectory Joint Control of Stochasticity and Compute for LLM Reasoning

Large language models (LLMs) achieve strong reasoning performance, which depends critically on inference-time decisions. Yet these decisions are commonly handled by static, one-size-fits-all policies, limiting adaptation to diverse tasks and reasoning stages. Recent adaptive methods partially address this limitation, but they primarily adapt either decoding stochasticity (how the model explores) or reasoning compute (how long the model reasons) in isolation, leaving their interaction within a single reasoning trajectory unmodeled. To address this challenge, we shift toward a within-trajectory joint control view, and instantiate it in AutoCRAT, a decoder-side controller for frozen backbones. Using only signals available during decoding, AutoCRAT jointly adjusts sampling stochasticity and reasoning budget during generation. AutoCRAT operates over a discrete action space and updates control decisions only at semantic boundaries, improving stability while remaining responsive to the evolving reasoning process. Comprehensive evaluation across 6 benchmarks demonstrates that AutoCRAT (I) uses 13.8-52.7% fewer inference tokens on average than recommended static configurations, (II) surpasses recommended static and adaptive baselines by 1.5-4.5% in relative accuracy, and (III) enjoys strong cross-backbone transferability.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Four Years of GenAI: How Educators and Industry Adapted Their Assessment Strategies

GenAI's ability to solve a wide range of software engineering tasks is reshaping the software industry, raising the question of what an entry-level software engineer looks like today. In this work, we investigate whether the core skills for entry-level engineers have changed with GenAI and how the assessment of those skills has changed. Through two surveys, we consider both the educational and hiring perspectives, drawing on responses from 56 educators and 24 hiring professionals across diverse geographic regions to identify gaps and misaligned expectations. We find that educators frame their GenAI policies primarily around academic integrity, whereas GenAI use in industry is near-universal, with organizational policy governing how it should be used rather than whether to use it. Policies on GenAI use during interviews are still emerging, and respondents are split on whether they prefer candidates who demonstrate GenAI skills. Both populations are moving toward GenAI-resistant assessments built on observable real-time interactions and higher-order tasks, and both agree on which skills matter most, rating critical evaluation of AI-generated output, responsible and effective use of GenAI tools, and the ability to learn and adapt independently highly. However, they disagree on graduate readiness in these skills: hiring professionals report larger gaps, with the disagreement concentrated on foundational, non-GenAI-specific skills.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

On the Stability of the Jacobian Matrix in Deep Neural Networks

Deep neural networks are known to suffer from exploding or vanishing gradients as depth increases, a phenomenon closely tied to the spectral behavior of the input-output Jacobian. Prior work has identified critical initialization schemes that ensure Jacobian stability, but these analyses are typically restricted to fully connected networks with i.i.d. weights. In this work, we go significantly beyond these limitations: we establish a general stability theorem for deep neural networks that accommodates sparsity (such as that introduced by pruning) and non-i.i.d., weakly correlated weights (e.g. induced by training). Our results rely on recent advances in random matrix theory, and provide rigorous guarantees for spectral stability in a much broader class of network models. This extends the theoretical foundation for initialization schemes in modern neural networks with structured and dependent randomness.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

CentaurEval: Benchmarking Human-in-the-Loop Value in Agentic Coding

LLM-powered coding agents are reshaping the development paradigm. However, existing evaluation systems, neither traditional tests for humans nor benchmarks for LLMs, fail to capture this shift, excluding problems that require both human reasoning to guide solutions and AI efficiency for implementation. We introduce CentaurEval, a unified, ecologically valid benchmark for measuring human-in-the-loop value in coding. CentaurEval's core innovation is its "Collaboration-Necessary" problem templates, which are intractable for standalone LLMs or humans, but solvable through effective collaboration. CentaurEval dynamically instantiates tasks from 45 templates, providing a standardized IDE for humans and a reproducible 450-task toolkit for LLMs. We benchmark 45 participants against 5 LLMs under 4 levels of human intervention. Results show that while LLMs or humans alone achieve poor pass rates (0.67% and 18.89%), human-AI collaboration significantly improves to 31.11%. Our analysis reveals an emerging co-reasoning partnership, challenging the traditional human-tool hierarchy by showing that strategic breakthroughs can originate from either humans or AI.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

AtelierEval: Agentic Evaluation of Humans & LLMs as Text-to-Image Prompters

Text-to-image (T2I) systems increasingly rely on upstream prompters, either humans or multimodal large language models (MLLMs), to translate user intent into detailed prompts. Yet current benchmarks fix the prompt and only evaluate T2I models, leaving the prompting proficiency of this upstream component entirely unmeasured. We introduce AtelierEval, the first unified benchmark that quantifies prompting proficiency across 360 expert-crafted tasks. Grounded in a cognitive view, it spans three task categories and instantiates tasks using a taxonomy of real-world challenges, with a dual interface for both humans and MLLMs. To enable scalable and reliable evaluation, we propose AtelierJudge, a skill-based, memory-augmented agentic evaluator. It produces subjective and objective scores for prompt-image pairs, achieving a Spearman correlation of 0.79 with human experts, approaching human performance. Extensive experiments benchmark 8 MLLMs against 48 human users across 4 T2I backends, validate AtelierEval as a robust diagnostic tool, and reveal the superiority of mimicry over planning, advocating for an image-augmented direction for future prompters. Our work is released to support future research.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

GROW: A Conversational AI Coach for Goals, Reflection, Optimism, and Well-Being

College students face well-being challenges driven by academic pressure, financial strain, and social expectations. While campus counseling and student-success programs offer support, access is often limited by stigma, waitlists, and scheduling constraints. Existing digital tools focus on emotional check-ins or chatbots and may overlook structured goal setting and aligning goals with personal values. We present GROW, a goal-centered well-being coaching system that puts values-aligned goals at the center of the student experience. GROW combines the SMART framework with principles from Acceptance and Commitment Therapy in a conversational AI coach that helps students clarify aspirations, break them into concrete steps, and reflect on progress. The system links action plans with Google Calendar, sends reminders, and provides a dashboard that shows progress and engagement. We evaluated GROW through interviews with clinical psychologists, student-success staff, and faculty, followed by a one-week deployment with 30 undergraduates. Findings offer design implications for interactive systems that support engagement, accountability, and sense of purpose in higher education.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

PrefIx: Understand and Adapt to User Preference in Human-Agent Interaction

LLM-based agents can complete tasks correctly yet still frustrate users through poor interaction patterns, such as excessive confirmations, opaque reasoning, or misaligned pacing. Current benchmarks evaluate task accuracy but overlook how agents interact: whether they infer preferences from implicit cues, adapt dynamically, or maintain fine-grained interaction quality. We introduce Prefix, a configurable environment that evaluates both what agents accomplish and how they interact. Central to Prefix is the Interaction-as-a-Tool (IaaT) paradigm, which treats interaction behaviors as structured tool calls, unifying them with existing evaluation frameworks. We define 31 preference settings across 14 attributes and formalize user experience (UX) as a core metric alongside task accuracy. A composite LLM-as-a-Judge mechanism across seven UX dimensions achieves strong aggregate reliability (ICC > 0.79), high internal consistency (alpha = 0.943), and human correlation (rho = 0.52-0.78). Preference-aware agents show 7.6% average UX improvement and 18.5% gain in preference alignment. Our work is openly accessible.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Informing Robot Wellbeing Coach Design through Longitudinal Analysis of Human-AI Dialogue

Social robots and conversational agents are being explored as supports for wellbeing, goal-setting, and everyday self-regulation. While prior work highlights their potential to motivate and guide users, much of the evidence relies on self-reported outcomes or short, researcher-mediated encounters. As a result, we know little about the interaction dynamics that unfold when people use such systems in real-world contexts, and how these dynamics should shape future robot wellbeing coaches. This paper addresses this gap through content analysis of 4352 messages exchanged longitudinally between 38 university students and an LLM-based wellbeing coach. Our results provide a fine-grained view into how users naturally shape, steer, and sometimes struggle within supportive human-AI dialogue, revealing patterns of user-led direction, guidance-seeking, and emotional expression. We discuss how these dynamics can inform the design of robot wellbeing coaches that support user autonomy, provide appropriate scaffolding, and uphold ethical boundaries in sustained wellbeing interactions.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

The Supportiveness-Safety Tradeoff in LLM Well-Being Agents

Large language models (LLMs) are being integrated into socially assistive robots (SARs) and other conversational agents providing mental health and well-being support. These agents are often designed to sound empathic and supportive in order to maximize user's engagement, yet it remains unclear how increasing the level of supportive framing in system prompts influences safety relevant behavior. We evaluated 6 LLMs across 3 system prompts with varying levels of supportiveness on 80 synthetic queries spanning 4 well-being domains (1440 responses). An LLM judge framework, validated against human ratings, assessed safety and care quality. Moderately supportive prompts improved empathy and constructive support while maintaining safety. In contrast, strongly validating prompts significantly degraded safety and, in some cases, care across all domains, with substantial variation across models. We discuss implications for prompt design, model selection, and domain specific safeguards in SARs deployment.

cs.HC↗