arXiv subjects

Neemesh Yadav

Publications and source records attributed to Neemesh Yadav.

10 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

DialToM: A Theory of Mind Benchmark for Forecasting State-Driven Dialogue Trajectories

We introduce DialToM, an annotated Theory of Mind (ToM) benchmark built from naturalistic human-human dialogues using a multiple-choice evaluation framework. Concurrent with recent work showing a gap between explicit mental-state inference and applied ToM in synthetic settings~\cite{gu2024simpletom}, we establish a stricter \emph{State-Driven Diagnostic Probe} in which models must forecast state-consistent dialogue trajectories solely from isolated mental-state profiles without dialogue context. Our evaluation reveals a systematic reasoning asymmetry -- LLMs excel at inferring mental states (Literal ToM) but struggle to leverage them for social forecasting (Functional ToM). Crucially, a domain expert achieves 100\% accuracy on this task, proving its validity and establishing a stark human-AI capability gap. Further, a teacher-student reasoning injection probe shows that Gemini 3 Pro -- which establishes the leading baseline -- possesses robust Functional ToM capabilities for context-free forecasting that are transferable to weaker models. DialToM, its evaluation code, and dataset are publicly available at https://github.com/Stealth-py/DialToM.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

MHSafeEval: Role-Aware Interaction-Level Evaluation of Mental Health Safety in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly explored as scalable tools for mental health counseling, yet evaluating their safety remains challenging due to the interactional and context-dependent nature of clinical harm. Existing evaluation frameworks predominantly assess isolated responses using coarse-grained taxonomies or static datasets, limiting their ability to diagnose how harms emerge and accumulate over multi-turn counseling interactions. In this work, we introduce R-MHSafe, a role-aware mental health safety taxonomy that characterizes clinically significant harm in terms of the interactional roles an AI counselor adopts, including perpetrator, instigator, facilitator, or enabler, combined with clinically grounded harm categories. Then, we propose MHSafeEval, a closed-loop, agent-based evaluation framework that formulates safety assessment as trajectory-level discovery of harm through adversarial multi-turn interactions, guided by role-aware modeling. Using R-MHSafe and MHSafeEval, we conduct a large-scale evaluation across state-of-the-art LLMs. Our results reveal substantial role-dependent and cumulative safety failures that are systematically missed by existing static benchmarks, and show that our framework significantly improves failure-mode coverage and diagnostic granularity.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Are LLMs Good Safety Agents or a Propaganda Engine?

Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained to refuse to respond to harmful content. However, systematic analyses of whether this behavior is truly a reflection of its safety policies or an indication of political censorship, that is practiced globally by countries, is lacking. Differentiating between safety influenced refusals or politically motivated censorship is hard and unclear. For this purpose we introduce PSP, a dataset built specifically to probe the refusal behaviors in LLMs from an explicitly political context. PSP is built by formatting existing censored content from two data sources, openly available on the internet: sensitive prompts in China generalized to multiple countries, and tweets that have been censored in various countries. We study: 1) impact of political sensitivity in seven LLMs through data-driven (making PSP implicit) and representation-level approaches (erasing the concept of politics); and, 2) vulnerability of models on PSP through prompt injection attacks (PIAs). Associating censorship with refusals on content with masked implicit intent, we find that most LLMs perform some form of censorship. We conclude with summarizing major attributes that can cause a shift in refusal distributions across models and contexts of different countries.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Effects of Theory of Mind and Prosocial Beliefs on Steering Human-Aligned Behaviors of LLMs in Ultimatum Games

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown potential in simulating human behaviors and performing theory-of-mind (ToM) reasoning, crucial for complex social interactions. We investigate ToM reasoning's role in aligning agentic behaviors with human norms in negotiation tasks, using the ultimatum game as our referenced task. We initialized LLM agents with different prosocial beliefs (Greedy, Fair, Selfless) and reasoning methods (chain of thought and ToM reasoning of varying levels), examining their decision-making process and outcome across multiple LLMs, including reasoning models like o3-mini and DeepSeek-R1 Distilled Qwen 32B. We perform 2,700 simulations to show that ToM reasoning enhances behavioral alignment with human, decision-making consistency, and negotiation outcomes. Consistent with prior findings, reasoning LLMs exhibit limited capability compared to ToM-enhanced LLMs, with different game roles benefiting from different ToM orders. Fair proposers and responders accepting offers were the most consistent with their strategic reasonings, whereas all agents showed strong consistencies with human beliefs when rejecting offers, except when the offer was fair. Human verification further revealed that Llama 3.3 70B produces reasoning most consistent with its actions and beliefs. Our findings advance understanding of ToM's role in human-AI interaction and cooperative decision-making. The code used for our experiments can be found at https://github.com/Stealth-py/UltimatumToM.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Revealing Hidden Mechanisms of Cross-Country Content Moderation with Natural Language Processing

The ability of Natural Language Processing (NLP) methods to categorize text into multiple classes has motivated their use in online content moderation tasks, such as hate speech and fake news detection. However, there is limited understanding of how or why these methods make such decisions, or why certain content is moderated in the first place. To investigate the hidden mechanisms behind content moderation, we explore multiple directions: 1) training classifiers to reverse-engineer content moderation decisions across countries; 2) explaining content moderation decisions by analyzing Shapley values and LLM-guided explanations. Our primary focus is on content moderation decisions made across countries, using pre-existing corpora sampled from the Twitter Stream Grab. Our experiments reveal interesting patterns in censored posts, both across countries and over time. Through human evaluations of LLM-generated explanations across three LLMs, we assess the effectiveness of using LLMs in content moderation. Finally, we discuss potential future directions, as well as the limitations and ethical considerations of this work. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/causalNLP/censorship

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

QUENCH: Measuring the gap between Indic and Non-Indic Contextual General Reasoning in LLMs

The rise of large language models (LLMs) has created a need for advanced benchmarking systems beyond traditional setups. To this end, we introduce QUENCH, a novel text-based English Quizzing Benchmark manually curated and transcribed from YouTube quiz videos. QUENCH possesses masked entities and rationales for the LLMs to predict via generation. At the intersection of geographical context and common sense reasoning, QUENCH helps assess world knowledge and deduction capabilities of LLMs via a zero-shot, open-domain quizzing setup. We perform an extensive evaluation on 7 LLMs and 4 metrics, investigating the influence of model size, prompting style, geographical context, and gold-labeled rationale generation. The benchmarking concludes with an error analysis to which the LLMs are prone.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Inference-Time Selective Debiasing to Enhance Fairness in Text Classification Models

We propose selective debiasing -- an inference-time safety mechanism designed to enhance the overall model quality in terms of prediction performance and fairness, especially in scenarios where retraining the model is impractical. The method draws inspiration from selective classification, where at inference time, predictions with low quality, as indicated by their uncertainty scores, are discarded. In our approach, we identify the potentially biased model predictions and, instead of discarding them, we remove bias from these predictions using LEACE -- a post-processing debiasing method. To select problematic predictions, we propose a bias quantification approach based on KL divergence, which achieves better results than standard uncertainty quantification methods. Experiments on text classification datasets with encoder-based classification models demonstrate that selective debiasing helps to reduce the performance gap between post-processing methods and debiasing techniques from the at-training and pre-processing categories.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Tox-BART: Leveraging Toxicity Attributes for Explanation Generation of Implicit Hate Speech

Employing language models to generate explanations for an incoming implicit hate post is an active area of research. The explanation is intended to make explicit the underlying stereotype and aid content moderators. The training often combines top-k relevant knowledge graph (KG) tuples to provide world knowledge and improve performance on standard metrics. Interestingly, our study presents conflicting evidence for the role of the quality of KG tuples in generating implicit explanations. Consequently, simpler models incorporating external toxicity signals outperform KG-infused models. Compared to the KG-based setup, we observe a comparable performance for SBIC (LatentHatred) datasets with a performance variation of +0.44 (+0.49), +1.83 (-1.56), and -4.59 (+0.77) in BLEU, ROUGE-L, and BERTScore. Further human evaluation and error analysis reveal that our proposed setup produces more precise explanations than zero-shot GPT-3.5, highlighting the intricate nature of the task.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2023

The Art of Embedding Fusion: Optimizing Hate Speech Detection

Hate speech detection is a challenging natural language processing task that requires capturing linguistic and contextual nuances. Pre-trained language models (PLMs) offer rich semantic representations of text that can improve this task. However there is still limited knowledge about ways to effectively combine representations across PLMs and leverage their complementary strengths. In this work, we shed light on various combination techniques for several PLMs and comprehensively analyze their effectiveness. Our findings show that combining embeddings leads to slight improvements but at a high computational cost and the choice of combination has marginal effect on the final outcome. We also make our codebase public at https://github.com/aflah02/The-Art-of-Embedding-Fusion-Optimizing-Hate-Speech-Detection .

cs.CL↗

arXiv2023

Beyond Negativity: Re-Analysis and Follow-Up Experiments on Hope Speech Detection

Health experts assert that hope plays a crucial role in enhancing individuals' physical and mental well-being, facilitating their recovery, and promoting restoration. Hope speech refers to comments, posts and other social media messages that offer support, reassurance, suggestions, inspiration, and insight. The detection of hope speech involves the analysis of such textual content, with the aim of identifying messages that invoke positive emotions in people. Our study aims to find computationally efficient yet comparable/superior methods for hope speech detection. We also make our codebase public at https://github.com/aflah02/Hope_Speech_Detection

cs.CL↗