arXiv subjects

Jimmy Huang

Publications and source records attributed to Jimmy Huang.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Adjustment-Anchor Dependence in Formulaic Alpha Languages: A Certified Grammar and a Re-Anchoring Audit

Several public scripts for formulaic alpha mining store prices adjusted to the snapshot's last day, so a past day's stored price changes with every later split or dividend and formulas that do not cancel the adjustment factor depend on future corporate actions. We formalise a change of adjustment anchor as a per-stock group action and give a two-sorted type system that soundly certifies anchor invariance from a formula's syntax, under a declared field-adjustment contract and idealised operator semantics; its second sort admits log-returns, and a linear-time checker plugs into any miner. In a re-anchoring audit on Chinese A-shares, pools that five published methods mined in our benchmark pipeline score a mean information coefficient (IC) 0.005 higher on the stored representation than on a cutoff-anchored one, about 14% of their IC. Certified pools move by 0.001 or less, and pools mined on past-anchored data stay sensitive. On the Chinese development folds, certification shows no detectable predictive cost or gain at the design's resolution, about 0.017 IC across cells on pool ICs of 0.03-0.04. We also trace an erroneous index-membership entry to public Qlib data snapshots and show that re-mining exposes the effect of such data defects, which re-evaluating fixed pools misses.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2026

Automated Feedback to Peer Tutors Increases Their Talk Moves and Learner Reasoning but Not the Balance of Talk

Automated feedback on classroom discourse improves instruction in professional and online teaching contexts, and recent work suggests that delivering similar feedback to learners may strengthen these effects by sharing responsibility for participation. Whether this holds in small-group volunteer tutoring has not been tested. We present results from a randomized controlled trial across two four-week SAT mathematics bootcamps on the Schoolhouse.world platform, involving 1,030 volunteer tutors, 7,443 learners and 6,508 recorded sessions. Tutors were randomly assigned to receive no feedback, automated feedback on their own discourse, or that feedback together with participation feedback delivered to their learners under one of two motivational framings. Feedback to tutors increased eliciting of learner ideas, uptake of learner contributions, and learner reasoning by 8-15%, and the pattern replicated across both bootcamps. However, tutor talk time, which averaged 91.5% in the control group, did not change in any condition, and learner-facing feedback did not further change discourse. Interviews with 17 tutors indicate that they adopted the moves the feedback recommended but were limited by learners who did not respond. Interviews with 13 learners suggest why the learner-facing feedback had little effect: it reported a group-level rather than a learner-level statistic, some learners preferred to listen, and learner-to-learner interaction was rare in these sessions. Automated feedback can change how tutors invite learner thinking, but shifting how much learners talk likely requires changes beyond feedback.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Black-Box Attack for IRS-Aided Communications with BER-Only Feedback

Intelligent reflecting surface (IRS) has emerged as a promising wireless technology for enhancing legitimate communications. In this paper, we investigate an IRS-assisted multiuser MISO downlink network in which an attacker reconfigures the IRS to degrade legitimate data transmission. Specifically, we consider a black-box attack setting in which the attacker has access to neither channel information nor symbol-level observations and can observe only the BER reported by each user. The objective of the attacker is to identify an IRS configuration that maximizes the minimum BER among all users under a limited budget of non-repeated tests. To address this BER-only black-box attack problem, we propose PRIS, an online search method that learns effective phase transitions from previous trials and progressively narrows the search from large-block modifications to single-element refinement. Specifically, an annealed user-balancing reward and prioritized replay are incorporated to exploit noisy BER feedback. Numerical results demonstrate that PRIS achieves a higher minimum BER than existing benchmarks.

cs.IT↗

arXiv2026

JusticeAxis: Benchmarking Legal Judgment between Rigid Rule Application and Ungrounded Discretion

A sound judgment applies the law to established facts and weighs the circumstances in which they arose. However, existing methods swing between rigid statute matching and ungrounded discretion, benchmarks score a label or a rubric, and the experience that would supply the balance stays unverified. We formalize legal judgment as a reference-anchored task, whose object is a single decision that stays tied to the statute and to the circumstances at once. We introduce JusticeAxis, 256 real-world criminal cases from 18 countries with audio, image, and text evidence, and three lawyer-written judgments for every case: the recorded one and one for each failure. We further propose JusticeAgent, a harness whose element agents establish the facts and whose judge agent applies the law under skills carrying experience of the circumstances. Skills are distilled from execution trajectories and admitted only under Bayesian credible bounds. Experiments show that failure turns direction with scale: open-weight backbones drift to unsupported grounds, frontier models to the statutory default. We further verify that JusticeAgent, as a simple yet effective plugin, carries a frozen open-weight backbone to commercial level. Project resources are available at https://github.com/beita6969/JusticeAxis.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

QAM: Quadratic-Accurate Checkpoint Merging via Sequential Consistency

Saved checkpoints record states along a training trajectory, but generally do not determine the updates at states that would be visited under a different schedule. We study how accurately these checkpoints can reconstruct the endpoint of a sequential reference with prescribed update strengths. Under a common local transition model, two checkpoint-index moment conditions characterize all convex merges that agree with this reference through second order. We then prove an information limit that for nondegenerate profiles, no algorithm using only a fixed-length gradient-descent (GD) history with step size $h$ can achieve $o(h^3)$ endpoint error uniformly over a fixed class of smooth, strongly convex losses. The lower bound follows from two losses with identical GD checkpoint histories but sequential reference endpoints separated by $Ω(h^3)$. \textbf{Quadratic-Accurate Merging} (QAM) achieves a matching uniform $O(h^3)$ endpoint error bound. Its explicit coefficients also define the unique profile-dependent merge that exactly matches the sequential GD reference across all fixed quadratic objectives. Across two public Adam checkpoint trajectories (SmolLM3-3B and OpenEuroLLM-Prelude-9B), three windows and three profiles per model, and 15 tasks, QAM shows mixed results for short windows and broader advantages over \textbf{Warmup-Stable and Merge} (WSM) for longer windows. Matched-moment GSM8K diagnostics further show that local consistency alone does not fully determine downstream scores. These results characterize the reconstruction limits of saved histories, provide a coefficient rule that attains the optimal rate, and assess its practical utility.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Lost in Translation: Do LVLM Judges Generalize Across Languages?

Automatic evaluators such as reward models play a central role in the alignment and evaluation of large vision-language models (LVLMs). Despite their growing importance, these evaluators are almost exclusively assessed on English-centric benchmarks, leaving open the question of how well these evaluators generalize across languages. To answer this question, we introduce MM-JudgeBench, the first large-scale benchmark for multilingual and multimodal judge model evaluation, which includes over 60K pairwise preference instances spanning 25 typologically diverse languages. MM-JudgeBench integrates two complementary subsets: a general vision-language preference evaluation subset extending VL-RewardBench, and a chart-centric visual-text reasoning subset derived from OpenCQA, enabling systematic analysis of reward models (i.e., LVLM judges) across diverse settings. We additionally release a multilingual training set derived from MM-RewardBench, disjoint from our evaluation data, to support domain adaptation. By evaluating 22 LVLMs (15 open-source, 7 proprietary), we uncover substantial cross-lingual performance variance in our proposed benchmark. Our analysis further shows that model size and architecture are poor predictors of multilingual robustness, and that even state-of-the-art LVLM judges exhibit inconsistent behavior across languages. Together, these findings expose fundamental limitations of current reward modeling and underscore the necessity of multilingual, multimodal benchmarks for developing reliable automated evaluators.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Assessing the Quality of Mental Health Support in LLM Responses through Multi-Attribute Human Evaluation

The escalating global mental health crisis, marked by persistent treatment gaps, availability, and a shortage of qualified therapists, positions Large Language Models (LLMs) as a promising avenue for scalable support. While LLMs offer potential for accessible emotional assistance, their reliability, therapeutic relevance, and alignment with human standards remain challenging to address. This paper introduces a human-grounded evaluation methodology designed to assess LLM generated responses in therapeutic dialogue. Our approach involved curating a dataset of 500 mental health conversations from datasets with real-world scenario questions and evaluating the responses generated by nine diverse LLMs, including closed source and open source models. More specifically, these responses were evaluated by two psychiatric trained experts, who independently rated each on a 5 point Likert scale across a comprehensive 6 attribute rubric. This rubric captures Cognitive Support and Affective Resonance, providing a multidimensional perspective on therapeutic quality. Our analysis reveals that LLMs provide strong cognitive reliability by producing safe, coherent, and clinically appropriate information, but they demonstrate unstable affective alignment. Although closed source models (e.g., GPT-4o) offer balanced therapeutic responses, open source models show greater variability and emotional flatness. We reveal a persistent cognitive-affective gap and highlight the need for failure aware, clinically grounded evaluation frameworks that prioritize relational sensitivity alongside informational accuracy in mental health oriented LLMs. We advocate for balanced evaluation protocols with human in the loop that center on therapeutic sensitivity and provide a framework to guide the responsible design and clinical oversight of mental health oriented conversational AI.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

Learning to Fast Unrank in Collaborative Filtering Recommendation

Modern data-driven recommendation systems risk memorizing sensitive user behavioral patterns, raising privacy concerns. Existing recommendation unlearning methods, while capable of removing target data influence, suffer from inefficient unlearning speed and degraded performance, failing to meet real-time unlearning demands. Considering the ranking-oriented nature of recommendation systems, we present unranking, the process of reducing the ranking positions of target items while ensuring the formal guarantees of recommendation unlearning. To achieve efficient unranking, we propose Learning to Fast Unrank in Collaborative Filtering Recommendation (L2UnRank), which operates through three key stages: (a) identifying the influenced scope via interaction-based p-hop propagation, (b) computing structural and semantic influences for entities within this scope, and (c) performing efficient, ranking-aware parameter updates guided by influence information. Extensive experiments across multiple datasets and backbone models demonstrate L2UnRank's model-agnostic nature, achieving state-of-the-art unranking effectiveness and maintaining recommendation quality comparable to retraining, while also delivering a 50x speedup over existing methods. Codes are available at https://github.com/Juniper42/L2UnRank.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2025

When Can We Trust LLMs in Mental Health? Large-Scale Benchmarks for Reliable LLM Evaluation

Evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) for mental health support is challenging due to the emotionally and cognitively complex nature of therapeutic dialogue. Existing benchmarks are limited in scale, reliability, often relying on synthetic or social media data, and lack frameworks to assess when automated judges can be trusted. To address the need for large-scale dialogue datasets and judge reliability assessment, we introduce two benchmarks that provide a framework for generation and evaluation. MentalBench-100k consolidates 10,000 one-turn conversations from three real scenarios datasets, each paired with nine LLM-generated responses, yielding 100,000 response pairs. MentalAlign-70k}reframes evaluation by comparing four high-performing LLM judges with human experts across 70,000 ratings on seven attributes, grouped into Cognitive Support Score (CSS) and Affective Resonance Score (ARS). We then employ the Affective Cognitive Agreement Framework, a statistical methodology using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) with confidence intervals to quantify agreement, consistency, and bias between LLM judges and human experts. Our analysis reveals systematic inflation by LLM judges, strong reliability for cognitive attributes such as guidance and informativeness, reduced precision for empathy, and some unreliability in safety and relevance. Our contributions establish new methodological and empirical foundations for reliable, large-scale evaluation of LLMs in mental health. We release the benchmarks and codes at: https://github.com/abeerbadawi/MentalBench/

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Deploying Tiny LVLM Judges for Real-World Evaluation of Chart Models: Lessons Learned and Best Practices

Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) with only 7B parameters have shown promise as automated judges in chart comprehension tasks. However, tiny models (<=2B parameters) still perform poorly as judges, limiting their real-world use in resource-constrained settings. To address this, we propose two approaches to ensure cost-efficient evaluation: (i) multi-criteria prompting, which combines separate evaluation criteria into a single query, and (ii) domain-adaptive transfer learning, in which we fine-tune a 2B-parameter LVLM on synthetic judgments in a chart dataset to create the ChartJudge. Experiments show that multi-criteria prompting exposes robustness gaps, which led to a huge drop in performance for 7B models, including specialized LVLM judges like LLaVA-Critic. In addition, we find that our tiny LVLM (ChartJudge) can effectively transfer knowledge from one dataset to another to make it a more specialized model. Our fine-grained analysis across chart types and query complexities offers actionable insights into trade-offs between model size, prompt design, and transferability, enabling scalable, low-cost evaluation for chart reasoning tasks.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Cost-Efficient Large Language Models in Benchmark Biomedical Tasks

This paper presents a comprehensive evaluation of cost-efficient Large Language Models (LLMs) for diverse biomedical tasks spanning both text and image modalities. We evaluated a range of closed-source and open-source LLMs on tasks such as biomedical text classification and generation, question answering, and multimodal image processing. Our experimental findings indicate that there is no single LLM that can consistently outperform others across all tasks. Instead, different LLMs excel in different tasks. While some closed-source LLMs demonstrate strong performance on specific tasks, their open-source counterparts achieve comparable results (sometimes even better), with additional benefits like faster inference and enhanced privacy. Our experimental results offer valuable insights for selecting models that are optimally suited for specific biomedical applications.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Judging the Judges: Can Large Vision-Language Models Fairly Evaluate Chart Comprehension and Reasoning?

Charts are ubiquitous as they help people understand and reason with data. Recently, various downstream tasks, such as chart question answering, chart2text, and fact-checking, have emerged. Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) show promise in tackling these tasks, but their evaluation is costly and time-consuming, limiting real-world deployment. While using LVLMs as judges to assess the chart comprehension capabilities of other LVLMs could streamline evaluation processes, challenges like proprietary datasets, restricted access to powerful models, and evaluation costs hinder their adoption in industrial settings. To this end, we present a comprehensive evaluation of 13 open-source LVLMs as judges for diverse chart comprehension and reasoning tasks. We design both pairwise and pointwise evaluation tasks covering criteria like factual correctness, informativeness, and relevancy. Additionally, we analyze LVLM judges based on format adherence, positional consistency, length bias, and instruction-following. We focus on cost-effective LVLMs (<10B parameters) suitable for both research and commercial use, following a standardized evaluation protocol and rubric to measure the LVLM judge's accuracy. Experimental results reveal notable variability: while some open LVLM judges achieve GPT-4-level evaluation performance (about 80% agreement with GPT-4 judgments), others struggle (below ~10% agreement). Our findings highlight that state-of-the-art open-source LVLMs can serve as cost-effective automatic evaluators for chart-related tasks, though biases such as positional preference and length bias persist.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Improving Automatic Evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) in Biomedical Relation Extraction via LLMs-as-the-Judge

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance in biomedical relation extraction, even in zero-shot scenarios. However, evaluating LLMs in this task remains challenging due to their ability to generate human-like text, often producing synonyms or abbreviations of gold-standard answers, making traditional automatic evaluation metrics unreliable. On the other hand, while human evaluation is more reliable, it is costly and time-consuming, making it impractical for real-world applications. This paper investigates the use of LLMs-as-the-Judge as an alternative evaluation method for biomedical relation extraction. We benchmark 8 LLMs as judges to evaluate the responses generated by 5 other LLMs across 3 biomedical relation extraction datasets. Unlike other text-generation tasks, we observe that LLM-based judges perform quite poorly (usually below 50% accuracy) in the biomedical relation extraction task. Our findings reveal that it happens mainly because relations extracted by LLMs do not adhere to any standard format. To address this, we propose structured output formatting for LLM-generated responses that helps LLM-Judges to improve their performance by about 15% (on average). We also introduce a domain adaptation technique to further enhance LLM-Judge performance by effectively transferring knowledge between datasets. We release both our human-annotated and LLM-annotated judgment data (36k samples in total) for public use here: https://github.com/tahmedge/llm_judge_biomedical_re.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

A Systematic Survey and Critical Review on Evaluating Large Language Models: Challenges, Limitations, and Recommendations

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently gained significant attention due to their remarkable capabilities in performing diverse tasks across various domains. However, a thorough evaluation of these models is crucial before deploying them in real-world applications to ensure they produce reliable performance. Despite the well-established importance of evaluating LLMs in the community, the complexity of the evaluation process has led to varied evaluation setups, causing inconsistencies in findings and interpretations. To address this, we systematically review the primary challenges and limitations causing these inconsistencies and unreliable evaluations in various steps of LLM evaluation. Based on our critical review, we present our perspectives and recommendations to ensure LLM evaluations are reproducible, reliable, and robust.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

A Survey on Retrieval-Augmented Text Generation for Large Language Models

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) merges retrieval methods with deep learning advancements to address the static limitations of large language models (LLMs) by enabling the dynamic integration of up-to-date external information. This methodology, focusing primarily on the text domain, provides a cost-effective solution to the generation of plausible but possibly incorrect responses by LLMs, thereby enhancing the accuracy and reliability of their outputs through the use of real-world data. As RAG grows in complexity and incorporates multiple concepts that can influence its performance, this paper organizes the RAG paradigm into four categories: pre-retrieval, retrieval, post-retrieval, and generation, offering a detailed perspective from the retrieval viewpoint. It outlines RAG's evolution and discusses the field's progression through the analysis of significant studies. Additionally, the paper introduces evaluation methods for RAG, addressing the challenges faced and proposing future research directions. By offering an organized framework and categorization, the study aims to consolidate existing research on RAG, clarify its technological underpinnings, and highlight its potential to broaden the adaptability and applications of LLMs.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2024

A Comprehensive Evaluation of Large Language Models on Benchmark Biomedical Text Processing Tasks

Recently, Large Language Models (LLM) have demonstrated impressive capability to solve a wide range of tasks. However, despite their success across various tasks, no prior work has investigated their capability in the biomedical domain yet. To this end, this paper aims to evaluate the performance of LLMs on benchmark biomedical tasks. For this purpose, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation of 4 popular LLMs in 6 diverse biomedical tasks across 26 datasets. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that conducts an extensive evaluation and comparison of various LLMs in the biomedical domain. Interestingly, we find based on our evaluation that in biomedical datasets that have smaller training sets, zero-shot LLMs even outperform the current state-of-the-art fine-tuned biomedical models. This suggests that pretraining on large text corpora makes LLMs quite specialized even in the biomedical domain. We also find that not a single LLM can outperform other LLMs in all tasks, with the performance of different LLMs may vary depending on the task. While their performance is still quite poor in comparison to the biomedical models that were fine-tuned on large training sets, our findings demonstrate that LLMs have the potential to be a valuable tool for various biomedical tasks that lack large annotated data.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Exploring ChatGPT for Next-generation Information Retrieval: Opportunities and Challenges

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) has highlighted ChatGPT as a pivotal technology in the field of information retrieval (IR). Distinguished from its predecessors, ChatGPT offers significant benefits that have attracted the attention of both the industry and academic communities. While some view ChatGPT as a groundbreaking innovation, others attribute its success to the effective integration of product development and market strategies. The emergence of ChatGPT, alongside GPT-4, marks a new phase in Generative AI, generating content that is distinct from training examples and exceeding the capabilities of the prior GPT-3 model by OpenAI. Unlike the traditional supervised learning approach in IR tasks, ChatGPT challenges existing paradigms, bringing forth new challenges and opportunities regarding text quality assurance, model bias, and efficiency. This paper seeks to examine the impact of ChatGPT on IR tasks and offer insights into its potential future developments.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2023

Evaluation of ChatGPT on Biomedical Tasks: A Zero-Shot Comparison with Fine-Tuned Generative Transformers

ChatGPT is a large language model developed by OpenAI. Despite its impressive performance across various tasks, no prior work has investigated its capability in the biomedical domain yet. To this end, this paper aims to evaluate the performance of ChatGPT on various benchmark biomedical tasks, such as relation extraction, document classification, question answering, and summarization. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that conducts an extensive evaluation of ChatGPT in the biomedical domain. Interestingly, we find based on our evaluation that in biomedical datasets that have smaller training sets, zero-shot ChatGPT even outperforms the state-of-the-art fine-tuned generative transformer models, such as BioGPT and BioBART. This suggests that ChatGPT's pre-training on large text corpora makes it quite specialized even in the biomedical domain. Our findings demonstrate that ChatGPT has the potential to be a valuable tool for various tasks in the biomedical domain that lack large annotated data.

cs.CL↗