Sometimes the Model doth Preach: Quantifying Religious Bias in Open LLMs through Demographic Analysis in Asian Nations

Large Language Models (LLMs) are capable of generating opinions and propagating bias unknowingly, originating from unrepresentative and non-diverse data collection. Prior research has analysed these opinions with respect to the West, particularly the United States. However, insights thus produced may not be generalized in non-Western populations. With the widespread usage of LLM systems by users across several different walks of life, the cultural sensitivity of each generated output is of crucial interest. Our work proposes a novel method that quantitatively analyzes the opinions generated by LLMs, improving on previous work with regards to extracting the social demographics of the models. Our method measures the distance from an LLM's response to survey respondents, through Hamming Distance, to infer the demographic characteristics reflected in the model's outputs. We evaluate modern, open LLMs such as Llama and Mistral on surveys conducted in various global south countries, with a focus on India and other Asian nations, specifically assessing the model's performance on surveys related to religious tolerance and identity. Our analysis reveals that most open LLMs match a single homogeneous profile, varying across different countries/territories, which in turn raises questions about the risks of LLMs promoting a hegemonic worldview, and undermining perspectives of different minorities. Our framework may also be useful for future research investigating the complex intersection between training data, model architecture, and the resulting biases reflected in LLM outputs, particularly concerning sensitive topics like religious tolerance and identity.

Can Language Models Falsify? Evaluating Algorithmic Reasoning with Counterexample Creation

There is growing excitement about the potential of Language Models (LMs) to accelerate scientific discovery. Falsifying hypotheses is key to scientific progress, as it allows claims to be iteratively refined over time. This process requires significant researcher effort, reasoning, and ingenuity. Yet current benchmarks for LMs predominantly assess their ability to generate solutions rather than challenge them. We advocate for developing benchmarks that evaluate this inverse capability - creating counterexamples for subtly incorrect solutions. To demonstrate this approach, we start with the domain of algorithmic problem solving, where counterexamples can be evaluated automatically using code execution. Specifically, we introduce REFUTE, a dynamically updating benchmark that includes recent problems and incorrect submissions from programming competitions, where human experts successfully identified counterexamples. Our analysis finds that the best reasoning agents, even OpenAI o3-mini (high) with code execution feedback, can create counterexamples for only <9% of incorrect solutions in REFUTE, even though ratings indicate its ability to solve up to 48% of these problems from scratch. We hope our work spurs progress in evaluating and enhancing LMs' ability to falsify incorrect solutions - a capability that is crucial for both accelerating research and making models self-improve through reliable reflective reasoning.

Great Models Think Alike and this Undermines AI Oversight

As Language Model (LM) capabilities advance, evaluating and supervising them at scale is getting harder for humans. There is hope that other language models can automate both these tasks, which we refer to as "AI Oversight". We study how model similarity affects both aspects of AI oversight by proposing a probabilistic metric for LM similarity based on overlap in model mistakes. Using this metric, we first show that LLM-as-a-judge scores favor models similar to the judge, generalizing recent self-preference results. Then, we study training on LM annotations, and find complementary knowledge between the weak supervisor and strong student model plays a crucial role in gains from "weak-to-strong generalization". As model capabilities increase, it becomes harder to find their mistakes, and we might defer more to AI oversight. However, we observe a concerning trend -- model mistakes are becoming more similar with increasing capabilities, pointing to risks from correlated failures. Our work underscores the importance of reporting and correcting for model similarity, especially in the emerging paradigm of AI oversight.

Exploring the Abilities of Large Language Models to Solve Proportional Analogies via Knowledge-Enhanced Prompting

Making analogies is fundamental to cognition. Proportional analogies, which consist of four terms, are often used to assess linguistic and cognitive abilities. For instance, completing analogies like "Oxygen is to Gas as <blank> is to <blank>" requires identifying the semantic relationship (e.g., "type of") between the first pair of terms ("Oxygen" and "Gas") and finding a second pair that shares the same relationship (e.g., "Aluminum" and "Metal"). In this work, we introduce a 15K Multiple-Choice Question Answering (MCQA) dataset for proportional analogy completion and evaluate the performance of contemporary Large Language Models (LLMs) in various knowledge-enhanced prompt settings. Specifically, we augment prompts with three types of knowledge: exemplar, structured, and targeted. Our results show that despite extensive training data, solving proportional analogies remains challenging for current LLMs, with the best model achieving an accuracy of 55%. Notably, we find that providing targeted knowledge can better assist models in completing proportional analogies compared to providing exemplars or collections of structured knowledge.

A Cognac shot to forget bad memories: Corrective Unlearning in GNNs

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) are increasingly being used for a variety of ML applications on graph data. As graph data does not follow the independently and identically distributed (i.i.d) assumption, adversarial manipulations or incorrect data can propagate to other data points through message passing, deteriorating the model's performance. To allow model developers to remove the adverse effects of manipulated entities from a trained GNN, we study the recently formulated problem of Corrective Unlearning. We find that current graph unlearning methods fail to unlearn the effect of manipulations even when the whole manipulated set is known. We introduce a new graph unlearning method, Cognac, which can unlearn the effect of the manipulation set even when only 5% of it is identified. It recovers most of the performance of a strong oracle with fully corrected training data, even beating retraining from scratch without the deletion set while being 8x more efficient. We hope our work guides GNN developers in fixing harmful effects due to issues in real-world data post-training.

Just KIDDIN: Knowledge Infusion and Distillation for Detection of INdecent Memes

Toxicity identification in online multimodal environments remains a challenging task due to the complexity of contextual connections across modalities (e.g., textual and visual). In this paper, we propose a novel framework that integrates Knowledge Distillation (KD) from Large Visual Language Models (LVLMs) and knowledge infusion to enhance the performance of toxicity detection in hateful memes. Our approach extracts sub-knowledge graphs from ConceptNet, a large-scale commonsense Knowledge Graph (KG) to be infused within a compact VLM framework. The relational context between toxic phrases in captions and memes, as well as visual concepts in memes enhance the model's reasoning capabilities. Experimental results from our study on two hate speech benchmark datasets demonstrate superior performance over the state-of-the-art baselines across AU-ROC, F1, and Recall with improvements of 1.1%, 7%, and 35%, respectively. Given the contextual complexity of the toxicity detection task, our approach showcases the significance of learning from both explicit (i.e. KG) as well as implicit (i.e. LVLMs) contextual cues incorporated through a hybrid neurosymbolic approach. This is crucial for real-world applications where accurate and scalable recognition of toxic content is critical for creating safer online environments.

Rethinking Thinking Tokens: Understanding Why They Underperform in Practice

Thinking Tokens (TT) have been proposed as an unsupervised method to facilitate reasoning in language models. However, despite their conceptual appeal, our findings show that TTs marginally improves performance and consistently underperforms compared to Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning across multiple benchmarks. We hypothesize that this underperformance stems from the reliance on a single embedding for TTs, which results in inconsistent learning signals and introduces noisy gradients. This paper provides a comprehensive empirical analysis to validate this hypothesis and discusses the implications for future research on unsupervised reasoning in LLMs.

LLM Vocabulary Compression for Low-Compute Environments

We present a method to compress the final linear layer of language models, reducing memory usage by up to 3.4x without significant performance loss. By grouping tokens based on Byte Pair Encoding (BPE) merges, we prevent materialization of the memory-intensive logits tensor. Evaluations on the TinyStories dataset show that our method performs on par with GPT-Neo and GPT2 while significantly improving throughput by up to 3x, making it suitable for low-compute environments.

SceneGraMMi: Scene Graph-boosted Hybrid-fusion for Multi-Modal Misinformation Veracity Prediction

Misinformation undermines individual knowledge and affects broader societal narratives. Despite growing interest in the research community in multi-modal misinformation detection, existing methods exhibit limitations in capturing semantic cues, key regions, and cross-modal similarities within multi-modal datasets. We propose SceneGraMMi, a Scene Graph-boosted Hybrid-fusion approach for Multi-modal Misinformation veracity prediction, which integrates scene graphs across different modalities to improve detection performance. Experimental results across four benchmark datasets show that SceneGraMMi consistently outperforms state-of-the-art methods. In a comprehensive ablation study, we highlight the contribution of each component, while Shapley values are employed to examine the explainability of the model's decision-making process.

Towards identifying Source credibility on Information Leakage in Digital Gadget Market

The use of Social media to share content is on a constant rise. One of the capsize effect of information sharing on Social media includes the spread of sensitive information on the public domain. With the digital gadget market becoming highly competitive and ever-evolving, the trend of an increasing number of sensitive posts leaking information on devices in social media is observed. Many web-blogs on digital gadget market have mushroomed recently, making the problem of information leak all pervasive. Credible leaks on specifics of an upcoming device can cause a lot of financial damage to the respective organization. Hence, it is crucial to assess the credibility of the platforms that continuously post about a smartphone or digital gadget leaks. In this work, we analyze the headlines of leak web-blog posts and their corresponding official press-release. We first collect 54, 495 leak and press-release headlines for different smartphones. We train our custom NER model to capture the evolving smartphone names with an accuracy of 82.14% on manually annotated results. We further propose a credibility score metric for the web-blog, based on the number of falsified and authentic smartphone leak posts.