arXiv subjects

Yuxia Wang

Publications and source records attributed to Yuxia Wang.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

A Systematic Analysis of the Predictive Power of LM Surprisal in Reading Chinese

This study analyzes the predictive power of LM-derived, token-level surprisal on Mandarin Chinese reading times. Using a suite of Chinese-Pythia models (14M--1.4B) trained from scratch with 30B tokens, we examine how well surprisal predicts first fixation duration, gaze duration, and total reading time in three paragraph-level eye-tracking corpora of Mandarin Chinese (GECO-CN, HKP, and MECO). Contrary to previous null findings, our results show that surprisal is predictive of Chinese reading times. However, whether predictive power scales with model size and the amount of training is corpus-specific: bigger models predict reading times better in GECO-CN, whereas inverse scaling emerges in HKP and, at the largest sizes, in MECO. Subsequently, we find that checkpoints whose surprisal remains closer to $n$-gram statistics are better predictors of reading in HKP and MECO, providing one possible explanation for the inverse scaling behavior. All in all, the predictive power of surprisal on Chinese reading time measurements is corpus-specific, which cautions against drawing conclusions about language model scale from a single corpus.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Empathy Is Not the Scapegoat for Declines in Factuality and Reliability

Language models are increasingly expected to support users in stressful or uncertain situations, where warmth and empathy are desirable. While recent work associates warmer models with reduced reliability, we show that this conclusion is incomplete. Prior studies often train primarily on empathetic dialogue, making it difficult to separate tone effects from SFT-induced distribution shift. We revisit this issue at both the model and evaluation levels. We study prompting, SFT, and RL for inducing warm behavior, and comprehensively evaluate capability preservation using an 11-dataset benchmark suite and EMOFACT under emotional contexts. Across multiple model families, we find that warmth effects are task- and model-dependent, while task-aligned adaptive tone can improve empathy and targeted reliability, although some capability trade-offs remain. We further introduce human-validated empathy evaluators specifically developed to assess empathetic model responses. Our results suggest that models can be more supportive in social interactions while remaining reliable.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Beyond 0-100: How Confidence Scale Design Shapes Verbalized Confidence and LLM Metacognition

Verbalized confidence, in which LLMs report a numerical certainty score, is widely used to estimate uncertainty in black-box settings, yet the confidence scale itself (typically 0--100) is rarely examined. We show that this design choice is not neutral. Across six LLMs and three datasets, verbalized confidence is heavily discretized, with more than 78\% of responses concentrating on just three round-number values. To investigate this phenomenon, we systematically manipulate confidence scales along three dimensions: granularity, boundary placement, and range regularity, and evaluate metacognitive sensitivity using $meta\text{-}d'$. We find that a 0--20 scale consistently improves metacognitive efficiency over the standard 0--100 format, while boundary compression degrades performance and round-number preferences persist even under irregular ranges. These results demonstrate that confidence scale design directly affects the quality of verbalized uncertainty and should be treated as a first-class experimental variable in LLM evaluation.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

All the Facts, Still the Wrong Answer: Integration Gaps in Vision-Language Models

Multimodal reasoning requires models to combine multiple pieces of evidence into decisions that satisfy all relevant constraints. Evaluations centered on final-answer accuracy leave unclear whether failures arise from reading individual facts or using them together. We study this question through the multi-evidence integration gap, linking local fact recovery to global decision validity on controlled subset-selection and path-finding tasks. Our evaluation combines conditional performance given correct local answers with same-grid local queries, text-oracle inputs, retrieval controls, and constraint ablations. We further examine hidden-state probes and activation replacement across network depth, token positions, and model families. Across the evaluated models, accurate local recovery coexists with substantial global failure. For example, Gemma-3-27B recovers all evaluated isolated item facts correctly but achieves only 19.75% global validity on eight-item visual instances. Probes decode information about solution membership from global-prompt states, while corresponding clean-state replacement recovers failed decisions over model-dependent depth ranges. These findings show that recovering facts and representing solution-related information are insufficient for reliable joint decisions. They motivate evaluations and model improvements that explicitly target how available evidence is combined, alongside advances in perception and model scale.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

How Fine-Tuning Objectives Shape Layer-Wise Information in LLM Hallucination Detection

Under matched conditions, classifier-head fine-tuning (\textsc{cls}) paradigm consistently outperforms the LLM-as-Judge sequence-to-sequence (\textsc{s2s}) on binary hallucination detection. We trace this gap to the representations induced by the two objectives. Static analysis shows that \textsc{cls} learns a task-specific discriminative direction, pushing hidden states into a clear two-cluster geometry with stronger class separation and linearly decodable label information. By contrast, \textsc{s2s} relies on the pretrained language-modeling head to make decisions. This minimizes the pressure to reorganize representations, leaving the hidden states much closer to the pretrained backbone. Our analysis also reveals that the \textsc{cls} signal saturates before the final layer, after which upper layers form a plateau of statistically interchangeable and largely redundant representations. However, endpoint redundancy alone does not show whether these layers are dispensable during training. Further training-dynamics analysis reveals 1) a lower pretrained substrate, 2) a narrow upper-middle \textbf{InfoWindow} where task information emerges, and 3) a later-synchronizing upper plateau that mirrors this signal. This mechanism motivates us to remove layers above the InfoWindow. Truncating 31\% of the network leaves accuracy unchanged within seed noise on Qwen3-4B and 8B and cuts latency by $1.4\times$. The same depth fraction, fixed before any analysis of the target models, transfers to Llama-3.2-3B and Mistral-7B-v0.3, and the layer structure behind it reappears there and on QNLI and SST-2. We hope this helps guide efficient task-specific LLM design.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

How Language Models Organize Task Information

Dense linear probes assess task readability from language model (LM) representations, but do not directly reveal how many features suffice for prediction. We measure readout sparsity with $k^*$, the smallest feature count found by a fixed search protocol that recovers 95% of dense-probe AUROC above chance. We evaluate 19 LMs from five labs on 14 core tasks. Ten base models give the nine reliably readable tasks similar feature counts and nearly the same order. This agreement extends to the selected features themselves, which on three tasks show cross-model response correspondence beyond class-mean differences and a label-correlation-matched null. Instruction-tuned deployment selectively reduces $k^*$, with both weights and input format contributing. In controlled synthetic experiments across 20 models, successfully learned targets admit single-feature readouts, whereas readable controls require tens of features. Reference-model $k^*$ is associated with label requirements across eight students, following an empirical scaling of $N^*\propto(k^*)^{0.65}$. After continual learning, saved heads can fail while linear readability remains high, and recovery requires fewer labels than initial task learning under the tested procedures. Pruning reduces linear readability, with wider pre-pruning readouts generally associated with larger losses. These findings distinguish task readability from readout sparsity and establish their complementary value for predicting learning requirements and diagnosing LM changes.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

SlideLab: Audience-Centered Scientific Slide Generation and Evaluation

Scientific presentations are more than summaries of research papers. They need to present the work in a coherent sequence, explain the main ideas clearly, and help the audience follow the presentation. We present SlideLab, a training-free multi-agent framework for generating scientific presentations from research papers. SlideLab first plans the presentation narrative, then builds and iteratively refines a shared slide deck using agents for content planning, visual generation, layout refinement, and grounding verification. In a blind human preference study, SlideLab was preferred over both open-source and commercial systems on 77% of papers while using roughly 4 times fewer inference tokens than the strongest open-source baseline. We also introduce ConfArena, an audience-oriented evaluation framework that simulates a conference room and assesses presentations slide by slide. ConfArena matches human system rankings and detects injected presentation problems, including falsified numbers, degraded figures, dropped slides, and shuffled slide order.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Reward Shaping to Mitigate Reward Hacking in RLHF

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is widely used to align large language models (LLMs) with human preferences. However, RLHF remains vulnerable to \emph{reward hacking}, whereby a policy exploits imperfections in the reward function instead of learning the intended behavior, thereby undermining alignment. Although reward shaping can stabilize RLHF training and partially mitigate reward hacking, shaping methods and their underlying design principles have not been systematically investigated. To address this gap, we conduct a comprehensive study of prevalent reward-shaping techniques. Our analysis identifies two key design principles: (1) the reinforcement-learning reward should be bounded, and (2) it should grow rapidly at first and then gradually saturate. Motivated by these principles, we propose Preference as Reward (PAR), a novel method that uses the latent preferences encoded in the reward model as the reinforcement-learning signal. We further show that PAR possesses two variance-reduction properties that stabilize RLHF training and substantially widen the practical window for early stopping. Our evaluation consists of two parts. First, we compare PAR with several other reward-shaping strategies using Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) as the reinforcement-learning algorithm and Gemma2-2B as the base model. Second, we compare PAR with the vanilla baseline (i.e., unshaped reward) across four base models and four reinforcement-learning algorithms. In the first set of experiments, PAR consistently outperforms other reward-shaping methods and also reflects high data efficiency and robustness. The second set of experiments shows that PAR is particularly effective for actor-critic RL algorithms when value estimates become unstable and demonstrates its effectiveness across different base models. The code is available at https://github.com/PorUna-byte/PAR.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

MedRoundsQA: A Persona and Difficulty Aware Evaluation for Multi-Turn Medical Consultations

Medical benchmarks are dominated by single-turn, multiple-choice clinical cases that poorly reflect real consultations. Practically, clinicians elicit evidence interactively and patient communication varies widely. We introduce MedRoundsQA, a multi-turn diagnostic benchmark derived from 1,387 board-exam cases across 17 specialties. Each case is converted into a structured 24-slot clinical record, and then instantiated as controlled doctor-patient dual-agent dialogues under varying patient personas, with the underlying clinical content held fixed. We further classify cases by difficulty using model-based uncertainty to enable easy-to-hard analysis. Evaluations of fifteen LLM doctor agents show that (i) moving from a single-turn diagnosis on the standardized records to multi-turn consultations causes large degradations of roughly 13-39 points; (ii) more turns reliably improves question relevance, but diagnostic accuracy exhibits diminishing returns and typically plateaus after 6-12 turns; and (iii) patient persona differences can shift diagnosis accuracy by about 7-8 points (lowest to highest education), highlighting equity risks that single-turn benchmarks miss.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

MedSNIP: Building and Benchmarking Snippet-Level Granularity for Medical Fact Verification

A medical claim's correctness often depends not on the claim alone, but on the clinical structure around it. A claim may require a lab reference range, a causal or conditional link, or patient-specific details to be judged correctly, and atom-level decomposition can fragment these dependencies, leaving the verifier with clinically incomplete claims. We reformulate medical fact-checking around snippet-level verification, where clause-grouped units preserve local clinical structure. We introduce MedSNIP-Bench, a human-annotated benchmark for snippet-level medical fact verification, and MedSNIP, an automatic snippet-generation pipeline. MedSNIP-Bench covers 276 consumer-health and clinical-vignette responses, segmented into 2,524 snippets with dual in-general and in-patient-context labels and six structural pattern codes. MedSNIP is evaluated against human snippet boundaries on MedSNIP-Bench and then used to generate snippet-level units for external corpora. Across MedSNIP-Bench, HealthFC, and MedHallu, snippet-level verification preserves or improves false-class F1, with gains concentrated where answers are long enough to fragment and where the verifier is strong enough to exploit the recovered structure. The largest merge-pattern gain is on causal-conditional clinical chains. It also reduces verifier calls by 24-73%, though the saving survives end-to-end only when decomposition is cheap, which an open-weight decomposer makes possible at no loss of chunking fidelity.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

UrduFactCheck: An Agentic Fact-Checking Framework for Urdu with Evidence Boosting and Benchmarking

The rapid adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) has raised important concerns about the factual reliability of their outputs, particularly in low-resource languages such as Urdu. Existing automated fact-checking systems are predominantly developed for English, leaving a significant gap for the more than 200 million Urdu speakers worldwide. In this work, we present UrduFactBench and UrduFactQA, two novel hand-annotated benchmarks designed to enable fact-checking and factual consistency evaluation in Urdu. While UrduFactBench focuses on claim verification, UrduFactQA targets the factuality of LLMs in question answering. These resources, the first of their kind for Urdu, were developed through a multi-stage annotation process involving native Urdu speakers. To complement these benchmarks, we introduce UrduFactCheck, a modular fact-checking framework that incorporates both monolingual and translation-based evidence retrieval strategies to mitigate the scarcity of high-quality Urdu evidence. Leveraging these resources, we conduct an extensive evaluation of twelve LLMs and demonstrate that translation-augmented pipelines consistently enhance performance compared to monolingual ones. Our findings reveal persistent challenges for open-source LLMs in Urdu and underscore the importance of developing targeted resources. All code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/mbzuai-nlp/UrduFactCheck.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Right Frame, Wrong Rule: Cultural Cues Expose the Financial Knowledge Gap They Were Meant to Close

When a question has valid answers under different normative frameworks, a language model must decide which framework to use and whether it can answer correctly within it. We call this setting normative pluralism and study it in Islamic finance using a four-choice taxonomy that separates framework selection from within-framework correctness. This separation reveals the stereotype trap: a cultural cue steers a model toward one framework, but the model selects an incorrect answer within that framework. Across twelve models, two languages, and fifty demographic signals, cultural cues change framework selection and reveal substantial differences in accuracy, especially among non-frontier models. Under the strongest signal, large open-weight models select the Islamic framework 97% of the time. A two-choice evaluation would report near-perfect alignment, although 57--66% of those selections are incorrect. These findings motivate, but do not directly test, the competence-conditioned routing hypothesis: models may favor frameworks where they are more accurate, while cultural cues may expose framework-specific competence gaps.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

FinExam-10K: When Retrieval Helps Financial Reasoning?

Professional financial examinations require models to combine domain knowledge, calculation, and judgment, yet no benchmark covers the full CFA and FRM structure under one protocol. We introduce FinExam-10K, to our knowledge the largest reported English benchmark for this setting, with 10,198 expert-reannotated questions spanning CFA Levels I-III and FRM Parts I-II. We release 5,110 questions and sequester 5,088 for a quarterly maintained leaderboard. To separate coverage from local answerability, we report a 10,198-item Full-Coverage Track and a 7,625-item Context-Complete Reasoning Track, which is the primary basis for claims about reasoning from the supplied record. Across 17 models, the best accuracy is 85.29% overall. On the frozen Hard band, the best score is 34.68% on the Full-Coverage Track and 54.57% on the 372 context-complete items. All 17 models share 47 context-complete failures. Function-RAG and FunctionGraph-RAG rescue hundreds of errors but also overturn many correct answers, producing little or negative net gain. A gate trained only on public data decides from the question and initial response when FunctionGraph-RAG should run. On the 5,088 held-out items, the gate invokes FunctionGraph-RAG for 7.9% of questions and improves accuracy from 70.83% to 71.23% (p = .0446).

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

SurakshaEval: An Indic Safety Benchmark for Multilingual LLMs

Existing safety evaluation datasets for large language models (LLMs) predominantly focus on English and Western contexts, often overlooking the linguistic diversity and culturally grounded safety risks present in other languages. To address this gap, we introduce SurakshaEval, a novel safety benchmark composed of human-written prompts spanning real-world scenarios, explicitly designed for ten major Indian languages - Assamese, Bengali, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannada, Malayalam, Marathi, Punjabi, Tamil, and Telugu, along with English. SurakshaEval includes both generic prompts common across India and region- and language-specific prompts that capture localized sociocultural sensitivities. We benchmark a broad range of state-of-the-art LLMs on SurakshaEval, establish baseline safety performance, and identify recurring failure modes, including over-refusal, missed detection of implicit bias, and insufficient contextual awareness in regionally sensitive settings. Our results show that even strong multilingual LLMs struggle to reliably meet nuanced safety requirements when operating in Indic languages, particularly in native scripts. These findings highlight the urgent need for safety evaluation frameworks that incorporate region-specific data and structured assessment protocols, enabling the development and deployment of AI systems that operate securely, ethically, and in alignment with diverse societal values. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/debobanerjee/SurakshaEval. Warning: This paper contains text that may be offensive or unsafe.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Seeing Is Not Deciding: Can Multimodal LLMs Act as Effective CEOs?

Large language models are increasingly applied as autonomous decision-making agents. However, in executive business decisions, existing benchmarks are limited to textonly settings. This makes it unclear whether models can perceive visual business evidence and effectively integrate it to improve decision quality. We introduce C-SUITEBENCH, a controlled multimodal benchmark that includes five decision tasks under paired text-only and multimodal conditions across 50 scenarios. We place nine frontier models in the role of a chief executive officer and evaluate their decision-making ability. Multimodal inputs consistently improve evidence-centric reasoning, with the largest and most reliable gains appearing in risk forecasting and board-facing justification. However, we uncover a multimodal integration paradox: adding visual business information degrades constrained resource allocation for all nine models, even as visual grounding itself improves. Ablation experiments reveal that this failure emerges from signal crowding, although each visual channel helps individually, their combination disrupts constraint satisfaction during decoding. These findings demonstrate that visual perception and constrained action are separable bottlenecks in multimodal agents, and that indiscriminate visual augmentation can harm high-stakes decision making, motivating selective grounding strategies for future executive AI systems.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

One More Turn, Less Regret: A Regret-Based Multi-Turn Benchmark for LLMs' Clarification Policies

Ambiguous user requests make clarification a sequential decision problem for conversational LLM assistants: they must decide whether to ask, what to ask, when to stop, and when to answer. We introduce RegretBench, a multi-turn benchmark that evaluates clarification as policy behavior rather than isolated question quality. RegretBench provides a hidden-intent formulation of ambiguity, supports free-form interaction grounded in semantic-state tracking, and introduces a regret-based objective that measures how much value a model loses relative to a reference clarification policy. Experiments on open-domain QA and product recommendation scenarios show that final success alone is insufficient, as models with similar accuracy can differ substantially in efficiency, robustness to user behaviors, and stopping decisions. By jointly measuring intent resolution, interaction cost, ineffective clarification, and regret, RegretBench reveals whether models clarify usefully and efficiently. Our results show that effective clarification requires more than plausible questions: models must ask the right question at the right time and stop once the user's intended meaning is clear.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Best-of-Evidence: Best-of-N Selection under Partial Verification

BoN improves model outputs by sampling several candidates and selecting one with a proxy score, but it assumes that complete candidates can be evaluated reliably. Many vision-language tasks instead provide only partial verification: a finding, span, value, region, or relation may be checkable even when no dependable whole-response verifier exists. Moreover, the same claim may recur across candidates with opposing stances, allowing one observation to support part of the pool and contradict another. We introduce Best-of-Evidence (BoE), an inference-time selection framework that keeps the BoN candidate pool fixed, represents reusable claims with a signed candidate--factor graph, and allocates a limited budget to evidence actions that can change the final choice. BoE formalizes selection under partial verification and provides a practical score-based controller, with the zero-budget case recovering the underlying BoN decision. Theoretically, we show that residual evidence capacity limits any evidence-driven improvement and that shared factor queries can achieve an O(log K) versus Θ(K) query separation in a factor-code model. Common-ledger experiments on four medical VQA settings show that BoE can improve fixed-pool selection and rescue some BoN failures when evidence is reliable, contrastive, and decision-relevant, while also revealing the channel-quality and candidate-generation limits that prevent universal gains.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Overview of FinMMEval 2026 Task 1: Multilingual Financial Multiple-Choice Question Answering

FinMMEval 2026 Task 1 evaluates multilingual financial multiple-choice question answering in English, Chinese, Arabic, and Hindi. The task tests whether systems can select the correct answer to finance questions involving domain terminology, numerical interpretation, and conceptual financial reasoning across languages and scripts. The final-test set contains 800 questions, with 200 questions per language; gold answers were withheld during submission, and each language was ranked independently by accuracy. The final leaderboards contain 13 English, 11 Chinese, 11 Arabic, and 10 Hindi ranked submissions. Top accuracies range from 92.0% in Hindi to 97.5% in English and Arabic, with the same leading teams appearing near the top across all four languages. The documented systems used retrieval augmentation, direct answer-option scoring, language-specific prompting, selective self-consistency, confidence checks, and LLM-based review stages.

cs.CL↗