Beyond Edge Deletion: A Comprehensive Approach to Counterfactual Explanation in Graph Neural Networks

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) are increasingly adopted across domains such as molecular biology and social network analysis, yet their black-box nature hinders interpretability and trust. This is especially problematic in high-stakes applications, such as predicting molecule toxicity, drug discovery, or guiding financial fraud detections, where transparent explanations are essential. Counterfactual explanations - minimal changes that flip a model's prediction - offer a transparent lens into GNNs' behavior. In this work, we introduce XPlore, a novel technique that significantly broadens the counterfactual search space. It consists of gradient-guided perturbations to adjacency and node feature matrices. Unlike most prior methods, which focus solely on edge deletions, our approach belongs to the growing class of techniques that optimize edge insertions and node-feature perturbations, here jointly performed under a unified gradient-based framework, enabling a richer and more nuanced exploration of counterfactuals. To quantify both structural and semantic fidelity, we introduce a cosine similarity metric for learned graph embeddings that addresses a key limitation of traditional distance-based metrics, and demonstrate that XPlore produces more coherent and minimal counterfactuals. Empirical results on 13 real-world and 5 synthetic benchmarks show up to +56.3% improvement in validity and +52.8% in fidelity over state-of-the-art baselines, while retaining competitive runtime.

A Multi-Agent Framework for Interpreting Multivariate Physiological Time Series

Continuous physiological monitoring is central to emergency care, yet deploying trustworthy AI is challenging. While LLMs can translate complex physiological signals into clinical narratives, it is unclear how agentic systems perform relative to zero-shot inference. To address these questions, we present Vivaldi, a role-structured multi-agent system that explains multivariate physiological time series. Due to regulatory constraints that preclude live deployment, we instantiate Vivaldi in a controlled, clinical pilot to a small, highly qualified cohort of emergency medicine experts, whose evaluations reveal a context-dependent picture that contrasts with prevailing assumptions that agentic reasoning uniformly improves performance. Our experiments show that agentic pipelines substantially benefit non-thinking and medically fine-tuned models, improving expert-rated explanation justification and relevance by +6.9 and +9.7 points, respectively. Contrarily, for thinking models, agentic orchestration often degrades explanation quality, including a 14-point drop in relevance, while improving diagnostic precision (ESI F1 +3.6). We also find that explicit tool-based computation is decisive for codifiable clinical metrics, whereas subjective targets, such as pain scores and length of stay, show limited or inconsistent changes. Expert evaluation further indicates that gains in clinical utility depend on visualization conventions, with medically specialized models achieving the most favorable trade-offs between utility and clarity. Together, these findings show that the value of agentic AI lies in the selective externalization of computation and structure rather than in maximal reasoning complexity, and highlight concrete design trade-offs and learned lessons, broadly applicable to explainable AI in safety-critical healthcare settings.

Reinforcement Unlearning via Group Relative Policy Optimization

During pretraining, LLMs inadvertently memorize sensitive or copyrighted data, posing significant compliance challenges under legal frameworks like the GDPR and the EU AI Act. Fulfilling these mandates demands techniques that can remove information from a deployed model without retraining from scratch. Existing unlearning approaches attempt to address this need, but often leak the very data they aim to erase, sacrifice fluency and robustness, or depend on costly external reward models. We introduce PURGE (Policy Unlearning through Relative Group Erasure), a novel method grounded in the Group Relative Policy Optimization framework that formulates unlearning as a verifiable problem. PURGE uses an intrinsic reward signal that penalizes any mention of forbidden concepts, allowing safe and consistent unlearning. Our approach reduces token usage per target by up to a factor of 46 compared with SotA methods, while improving fluency by 5.48 percent and adversarial robustness by 12.02 percent over the base model. On the Real World Knowledge Unlearning (RWKU) benchmark, PURGE achieves 11 percent unlearning effectiveness while preserving 98 percent of original utility. PURGE shows that framing LLM unlearning as a verifiable task, enables more reliable, efficient, and scalable forgetting, suggesting a promising new direction for unlearning research that combines theoretical guarantees, improved safety, and practical deployment efficiency.

Moral Lenses, Political Coordinates: Towards Ideological Positioning of Morally Conditioned LLMs

While recent research has systematically documented political orientation in large language models (LLMs), existing evaluations rely primarily on direct probing or demographic persona engineering to surface ideological biases. In social psychology, however, political ideology is also understood as a downstream consequence of fundamental moral intuitions. In this work, we investigate the causal relationship between moral values and political positioning by treating moral orientation as a controllable condition. Rather than simply assigning a demographic persona, we condition models to endorse or reject specific moral values and evaluate the resulting shifts on their political orientations, using the Political Compass Test. By treating moral values as lenses, we observe how moral conditioning actively steers model trajectories across economic and social dimensions. Our findings show that such conditioning induces pronounced, value-specific shifts in models' political coordinates. We further notice that these effects are systematically modulated by role framing and model scale, and are robust across alternative assessment instruments instantiating the same moral value. This highlights that effective alignment requires anchoring political assessments within the context of broader social values including morality, paving the way for more socially grounded alignment techniques.

Injecting Falsehoods: Adversarial Man-in-the-Middle Attacks Undermining Factual Recall in LLMs

LLMs are now an integral part of information retrieval. As such, their role as question answering chatbots raises significant concerns due to their shown vulnerability to adversarial man-in-the-middle (MitM) attacks. Here, we propose the first principled attack evaluation on LLM factual memory under prompt injection via Xmera, our novel, theory-grounded MitM framework. By perturbing the input given to "victim" LLMs in three closed-book and fact-based QA settings, we undermine the correctness of the responses and assess the uncertainty of their generation process. Surprisingly, trivial instruction-based attacks report the highest success rate (up to ~85.3%) while simultaneously having a high uncertainty for incorrectly answered questions. To provide a simple defense mechanism against Xmera, we train Random Forest classifiers on the response uncertainty levels to distinguish between attacked and unattacked queries (average AUC of up to ~96%). We believe that signaling users to be cautious about the answers they receive from black-box and potentially corrupt LLMs is a first checkpoint toward user cyberspace safety.

CURE: Controlled Unlearning for Robust Embeddings -- Mitigating Conceptual Shortcuts in Pre-Trained Language Models

Pre-trained language models have achieved remarkable success across diverse applications but remain susceptible to spurious, concept-driven correlations that impair robustness and fairness. In this work, we introduce CURE, a novel and lightweight framework that systematically disentangles and suppresses conceptual shortcuts while preserving essential content information. Our method first extracts concept-irrelevant representations via a dedicated content extractor reinforced by a reversal network, ensuring minimal loss of task-relevant information. A subsequent controllable debiasing module employs contrastive learning to finely adjust the influence of residual conceptual cues, enabling the model to either diminish harmful biases or harness beneficial correlations as appropriate for the target task. Evaluated on the IMDB and Yelp datasets using three pre-trained architectures, CURE achieves an absolute improvement of +10 points in F1 score on IMDB and +2 points on Yelp, while introducing minimal computational overhead. Our approach establishes a flexible, unsupervised blueprint for combating conceptual biases, paving the way for more reliable and fair language understanding systems.

Probabilistic Aggregation and Targeted Embedding Optimization for Collective Moral Reasoning in Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive moral reasoning abilities. Yet they often diverge when confronted with complex, multi-factor moral dilemmas. To address these discrepancies, we propose a framework that synthesizes multiple LLMs' moral judgments into a collectively formulated moral judgment, realigning models that deviate significantly from this consensus. Our aggregation mechanism fuses continuous moral acceptability scores (beyond binary labels) into a collective probability, weighting contributions by model reliability. For misaligned models, a targeted embedding-optimization procedure fine-tunes token embeddings for moral philosophical theories, minimizing JS divergence to the consensus while preserving semantic integrity. Experiments on a large-scale social moral dilemma dataset show our approach builds robust consensus and improves individual model fidelity. These findings highlight the value of data-driven moral alignment across multiple models and its potential for safer, more consistent AI systems.

SCISSOR: Mitigating Semantic Bias through Cluster-Aware Siamese Networks for Robust Classification

Shortcut learning undermines model generalization to out-of-distribution data. While the literature attributes shortcuts to biases in superficial features, we show that imbalances in the semantic distribution of sample embeddings induce spurious semantic correlations, compromising model robustness. To address this issue, we propose SCISSOR (Semantic Cluster Intervention for Suppressing ShORtcut), a Siamese network-based debiasing approach that remaps the semantic space by discouraging latent clusters exploited as shortcuts. Unlike prior data-debiasing approaches, SCISSOR eliminates the need for data augmentation and rewriting. We evaluate SCISSOR on 6 models across 4 benchmarks: Chest-XRay and Not-MNIST in computer vision, and GYAFC and Yelp in NLP tasks. Compared to several baselines, SCISSOR reports +5.3 absolute points in F1 score on GYAFC, +7.3 on Yelp, +7.7 on Chest-XRay, and +1 on Not-MNIST. SCISSOR is also highly advantageous for lightweight models with ~9.5% improvement on F1 for ViT on computer vision datasets and ~11.9% for BERT on NLP. Our study redefines the landscape of model generalization by addressing overlooked semantic biases, establishing SCISSOR as a foundational framework for mitigating shortcut learning and fostering more robust, bias-resistant AI systems.

Graph Style Transfer for Counterfactual Explainability

Counterfactual explainability seeks to uncover model decisions by identifying minimal changes to the input that alter the predicted outcome. This task becomes particularly challenging for graph data due to preserving structural integrity and semantic meaning. Unlike prior approaches that rely on forward perturbation mechanisms, we introduce Graph Inverse Style Transfer (GIST), the first framework to re-imagine graph counterfactual generation as a backtracking process, leveraging spectral style transfer. By aligning the global structure with the original input spectrum and preserving local content faithfulness, GIST produces valid counterfactuals as interpolations between the input style and counterfactual content. Tested on 8 binary and multi-class graph classification benchmarks, GIST achieves a remarkable +7.6% improvement in the validity of produced counterfactuals and significant gains (+45.5%) in faithfully explaining the true class distribution. Additionally, GIST's backtracking mechanism effectively mitigates overshooting the underlying predictor's decision boundary, minimizing the spectral differences between the input and the counterfactuals. These results challenge traditional forward perturbation methods, offering a novel perspective that advances graph explainability.

RAZOR: Sharpening Knowledge by Cutting Bias with Unsupervised Text Rewriting

Despite the widespread use of LLMs due to their superior performance in various tasks, their high computational costs often lead potential users to opt for the pretraining-finetuning pipeline. However, biases prevalent in manually constructed datasets can introduce spurious correlations between tokens and labels, creating so-called shortcuts and hindering the generalizability of fine-tuned models. Existing debiasing methods often rely on prior knowledge of specific dataset biases, which is challenging to acquire a priori. We propose RAZOR (Rewriting And Zero-bias Optimization Refinement), a novel, unsupervised, and data-focused debiasing approach based on text rewriting for shortcut mitigation. RAZOR leverages LLMs to iteratively rewrite potentially biased text segments by replacing them with heuristically selected alternatives in a shortcut space defined by token statistics and positional information. This process aims to align surface-level text features more closely with diverse label distributions, thereby promoting the learning of genuine linguistic patterns. Compared with unsupervised SoTA models, RAZOR improves by 3.5% on the FEVER and 6.5% on MNLI and SNLI datasets according to the F1 score. Additionally, RAZOR effectively mitigates specific known biases, reducing bias-related terms by x2 without requiring prior bias information, a result that is on par with SoTA models that leverage prior information. Our work prioritizes data manipulation over architectural modifications, emphasizing the pivotal role of data quality in enhancing model performance and fairness. This research contributes to developing more robust evaluation benchmarks for debiasing methods by incorporating metrics for bias reduction and overall model efficacy.