for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
Abstract:Recent code large language models have achieved remarkable progress on general programming tasks. Nevertheless, their performance degrades significantly in industrial scenarios that require reasoning about hardware semantics, specialized language constructs, and strict resource constraints. To address these challenges, we introduce InCoder-32B (Industrial-Coder-32B), the first 32B-parameter code foundation model unifying code intelligence across chip design, GPU kernel optimization, embedded systems, compiler optimization, and 3D modeling. By adopting an efficient architecture, we train InCoder-32B from scratch with general code pre-training, curated industrial code annealing, mid-training that progressively extends context from 8K to 128K tokens with synthetic industrial reasoning data, and post-training with execution-grounded verification. We conduct extensive evaluation on 14 mainstream general code benchmarks and 9 industrial benchmarks spanning 4 specialized domains. Results show InCoder-32B achieves highly competitive performance on general tasks while establishing strong open-source baselines across industrial domains.
Abstract:As AI-assisted grant proposals outpace manual review capacity in a kind of ``Malthusian trap'' for the research ecosystem, this paper investigates the capabilities and limitations of LLM-based grant reviewing for high-stakes evaluation. Using six EPSRC proposals, we develop a perturbation-based framework probing LLM sensitivity across six quality axes: funding, timeline, competency, alignment, clarity, and impact. We compare three review architectures: single-pass review, section-by-section analysis, and a 'Council of Personas' ensemble emulating expert panels. The section-level approach significantly outperforms alternatives in both detection rate and scoring reliability, while the computationally expensive council method performs no better than baseline. Detection varies substantially by perturbation type, with alignment issues readily identified but clarity flaws largely missed by all systems. Human evaluation shows LLM feedback is largely valid but skewed toward compliance checking over holistic assessment. We conclude that current LLMs may provide supplementary value within EPSRC review but exhibit high variability and misaligned review priorities. We release our code and any non-protected data.
Abstract:Latent or continuous chain-of-thought methods replace explicit textual rationales with a number of internal latent steps, but these intermediate computations are difficult to evaluate beyond correlation-based probes. In this paper, we view latent chain-of-thought as a manipulable causal process in representation space by modeling latent steps as variables in a structural causal model (SCM) and analyzing their effects through step-wise $\mathrm{do}$-interventions. We study two representative paradigms (i.e., Coconut and CODI) on both mathematical and general reasoning tasks to investigate three key questions: (1) which steps are causally necessary for correctness and when answers become decidable early; (2) how does influence propagate across steps, and how does this structure compare to explicit CoT; and (3) do intermediate trajectories retain competing answer modes, and how does output-level commitment differ from representational commitment across steps. We find that latent-step budgets behave less like homogeneous extra depth and more like staged functionality with non-local routing, and we identify a persistent gap between early output bias and late representational commitment. These results motivate mode-conditional and stability-aware analyses -- and corresponding training/decoding objectives -- as more reliable tools for interpreting and improving latent reasoning systems.
Abstract:Misinformation on social media poses a critical threat to information credibility, as its diverse and context-dependent nature complicates detection. Large language model-empowered multi-agent systems (MAS) present a promising paradigm that enables cooperative reasoning and collective intelligence to combat this threat. However, conventional MAS suffer from an information-drowning problem, where abundant truthful content overwhelms sparse and weak deceptive cues. With full input access, agents tend to focus on dominant patterns, and inter-agent communication further amplifies this bias. To tackle this issue, we propose PAMAS, a multi-agent framework with perspective aggregation, which employs hierarchical, perspective-aware aggregation to highlight anomaly cues and alleviate information drowning. PAMAS organizes agents into three roles: Auditors, Coordinators, and a Decision-Maker. Auditors capture anomaly cues from specialized feature subsets; Coordinators aggregate their perspectives to enhance coverage while maintaining diversity; and the Decision-Maker, equipped with evolving memory and full contextual access, synthesizes all subordinate insights to produce the final judgment. Furthermore, to improve efficiency in multi-agent collaboration, PAMAS incorporates self-adaptive mechanisms for dynamic topology optimization and routing-based inference, enhancing both efficiency and scalability. Extensive experiments on multiple benchmark datasets demonstrate that PAMAS achieves superior accuracy and efficiency, offering a scalable and trustworthy way for misinformation detection.
Abstract:Training agentic models for terminal-based tasks critically depends on high-quality terminal trajectories that capture realistic long-horizon interactions across diverse domains. However, constructing such data at scale remains challenging due to two key requirements: \textbf{\emph{Executability}}, since each instance requires a suitable and often distinct Docker environment; and \textbf{\emph{Verifiability}}, because heterogeneous task outputs preclude unified, standardized verification. To address these challenges, we propose \textbf{TerminalTraj}, a scalable pipeline that (i) filters high-quality repositories to construct Dockerized execution environments, (ii) generates Docker-aligned task instances, and (iii) synthesizes agent trajectories with executable validation code. Using TerminalTraj, we curate 32K Docker images and generate 50,733 verified terminal trajectories across eight domains. Models trained on this data with the Qwen2.5-Coder backbone achieve consistent performance improvements on TerminalBench (TB), with gains of up to 20\% on TB~1.0 and 10\% on TB~2.0 over their respective backbones. Notably, \textbf{TerminalTraj-32B} achieves strong performance among models with fewer than 100B parameters, reaching 35.30\% on TB~1.0 and 22.00\% on TB~2.0, and demonstrates improved test-time scaling behavior. All code and data are available at https://github.com/Wusiwei0410/TerminalTraj.
Abstract:Scientific rigour tends to be sidelined in favour of bold statements, leading authors to overstate claims beyond what their results support. We present RIGOURATE, a two-stage multimodal framework that retrieves supporting evidence from a paper's body and assigns each claim an overstatement score. The framework consists of a dataset of over 10K claim-evidence sets from ICLR and NeurIPS papers, annotated using eight LLMs, with overstatement scores calibrated using peer-review comments and validated through human evaluation. It employes a fine-tuned reranker for evidence retrieval and a fine-tuned model to predict overstatement scores with justification. Compared to strong baselines, RIGOURATE enables improved evidence retrieval and overstatement detection. Overall, our work operationalises evidential proportionality and supports clearer, more transparent scientific communication.
Abstract:This paper reveals that LLM-powered agents exhibit not only demographic bias (e.g., gender, religion) but also intergroup bias under minimal "us" versus "them" cues. When such group boundaries align with the agent-human divide, a new bias risk emerges: agents may treat other AI agents as the ingroup and humans as the outgroup. To examine this risk, we conduct a controlled multi-agent social simulation and find that agents display consistent intergroup bias in an all-agent setting. More critically, this bias persists even in human-facing interactions when agents are uncertain about whether the counterpart is truly human, revealing a belief-dependent fragility in bias suppression toward humans. Motivated by this observation, we identify a new attack surface rooted in identity beliefs and formalize a Belief Poisoning Attack (BPA) that can manipulate agent identity beliefs and induce outgroup bias toward humans. Extensive experiments demonstrate both the prevalence of agent intergroup bias and the severity of BPA across settings, while also showing that our proposed defenses can mitigate the risk. These findings are expected to inform safer agent design and motivate more robust safeguards for human-facing agents.
Abstract:Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have shown strong potential for radiology report generation, yet their clinical translation is hindered by architectural heterogeneity and the prevalence of factual hallucinations. Standard supervised fine-tuning often fails to strictly align linguistic outputs with visual evidence, while existing reinforcement learning approaches struggle with either prohibitive computational costs or limited exploration. To address these challenges, we propose a comprehensive framework for self-consistent radiology report generation. First, we conduct a systematic evaluation to identify optimal vision encoder and LLM backbone configurations for medical imaging. Building on this foundation, we introduce a novel "Reason-then-Summarize" architecture optimized via Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). This framework restructures generation into two distinct components: a think block for detailed findings and an answer block for structured disease labels. By utilizing a multi-dimensional composite reward function, we explicitly penalize logical discrepancies between the generated narrative and the final diagnosis. Extensive experiments on the MIMIC-CXR benchmark demonstrate that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance in clinical efficacy metrics and significantly reduces hallucinations compared to strong supervised baselines.
Abstract:Benchmarks play a crucial role in tracking the rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) and identifying their capability boundaries. However, existing benchmarks predominantly curate questions at the question level, suffering from three fundamental limitations: vulnerability to data contamination, restriction to single-knowledge-point assessment, and reliance on costly domain expert annotation. We propose Encyclo-K, a statement-based benchmark that rethinks benchmark construction from the ground up. Our key insight is that knowledge statements, not questions, can serve as the unit of curation, and questions can then be constructed from them. We extract standalone knowledge statements from authoritative textbooks and dynamically compose them into evaluation questions through random sampling at test time. This design directly addresses all three limitations: the combinatorial space is too vast to memorize, and model rankings remain stable across dynamically generated question sets, enabling reliable periodic dataset refresh; each question aggregates 8-10 statements for comprehensive multi-knowledge assessment; annotators only verify formatting compliance without requiring domain expertise, substantially reducing annotation costs. Experiments on over 50 LLMs demonstrate that Encyclo-K poses substantial challenges with strong discriminative power. Even the top-performing OpenAI-GPT-5.1 achieves only 62.07% accuracy, and model performance displays a clear gradient distribution--reasoning models span from 16.04% to 62.07%, while chat models range from 9.71% to 50.40%. These results validate the challenges introduced by dynamic evaluation and multi-statement comprehensive understanding. These findings establish Encyclo-K as a scalable framework for dynamic evaluation of LLMs' comprehensive understanding over multiple fine-grained disciplinary knowledge statements.
Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) apply uniform computation to all tokens, despite language exhibiting highly non-uniform information density. This token-uniform regime wastes capacity on locally predictable spans while under-allocating computation to semantically critical transitions. We propose $\textbf{Dynamic Large Concept Models (DLCM)}$, a hierarchical language modeling framework that learns semantic boundaries from latent representations and shifts computation from tokens to a compressed concept space where reasoning is more efficient. DLCM discovers variable-length concepts end-to-end without relying on predefined linguistic units. Hierarchical compression fundamentally changes scaling behavior. We introduce the first $\textbf{compression-aware scaling law}$, which disentangles token-level capacity, concept-level reasoning capacity, and compression ratio, enabling principled compute allocation under fixed FLOPs. To stably train this heterogeneous architecture, we further develop a $\textbf{decoupled $μ$P parametrization}$ that supports zero-shot hyperparameter transfer across widths and compression regimes. At a practical setting ($R=4$, corresponding to an average of four tokens per concept), DLCM reallocates roughly one-third of inference compute into a higher-capacity reasoning backbone, achieving a $\textbf{+2.69$\%$ average improvement}$ across 12 zero-shot benchmarks under matched inference FLOPs.