A Label-Free Heterophily-Guided Approach for Unsupervised Graph Fraud Detection

Graph fraud detection (GFD) has rapidly advanced in protecting online services by identifying malicious fraudsters. Recent supervised GFD research highlights that heterophilic connections between fraudsters and users can greatly impact detection performance, since fraudsters tend to camouflage themselves by building more connections to benign users. Despite the promising performance of supervised GFD methods, the reliance on labels limits their applications to unsupervised scenarios; Additionally, accurately capturing complex and diverse heterophily patterns without labels poses a further challenge. To fill the gap, we propose a Heterophily-guided Unsupervised Graph fraud dEtection approach (HUGE) for unsupervised GFD, which contains two essential components: a heterophily estimation module and an alignment-based fraud detection module. In the heterophily estimation module, we design a novel label-free heterophily metric called HALO, which captures the critical graph properties for GFD, enabling its outstanding ability to estimate heterophily from node attributes. In the alignment-based fraud detection module, we develop a joint MLP-GNN architecture with ranking loss and asymmetric alignment loss. The ranking loss aligns the predicted fraud score with the relative order of HALO, providing an extra robustness guarantee by comparing heterophily among non-adjacent nodes. Moreover, the asymmetric alignment loss effectively utilizes structural information while alleviating the feature-smooth effects of GNNs.Extensive experiments on 6 datasets demonstrate that HUGE significantly outperforms competitors, showcasing its effectiveness and robustness. The source code of HUGE is at https://github.com/CampanulaBells/HUGE-GAD.

Out-of-Distribution Detection on Graphs: A Survey

Graph machine learning has witnessed rapid growth, driving advancements across diverse domains. However, the in-distribution assumption, where training and testing data share the same distribution, often breaks in real-world scenarios, leading to degraded model performance under distribution shifts. This challenge has catalyzed interest in graph out-of-distribution (GOOD) detection, which focuses on identifying graph data that deviates from the distribution seen during training, thereby enhancing model robustness. In this paper, we provide a rigorous definition of GOOD detection and systematically categorize existing methods into four types: enhancement-based, reconstruction-based, information propagation-based, and classification-based approaches. We analyze the principles and mechanisms of each approach and clarify the distinctions between GOOD detection and related fields, such as graph anomaly detection, outlier detection, and GOOD generalization. Beyond methodology, we discuss practical applications and theoretical foundations, highlighting the unique challenges posed by graph data. Finally, we discuss the primary challenges and propose future directions to advance this emerging field. The repository of this survey is available at https://github.com/ca1man-2022/Awesome-GOOD-Detection.

XAttnMark: Learning Robust Audio Watermarking with Cross-Attention

The rapid proliferation of generative audio synthesis and editing technologies has raised significant concerns about copyright infringement, data provenance, and the spread of misinformation through deepfake audio. Watermarking offers a proactive solution by embedding imperceptible, identifiable, and traceable marks into audio content. While recent neural network-based watermarking methods like WavMark and AudioSeal have improved robustness and quality, they struggle to achieve both robust detection and accurate attribution simultaneously. This paper introduces Cross-Attention Robust Audio Watermark (XAttnMark), which bridges this gap by leveraging partial parameter sharing between the generator and the detector, a cross-attention mechanism for efficient message retrieval, and a temporal conditioning module for improved message distribution. Additionally, we propose a psychoacoustic-aligned temporal-frequency masking loss that captures fine-grained auditory masking effects, enhancing watermark imperceptibility. Our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance in both detection and attribution, demonstrating superior robustness against a wide range of audio transformations, including challenging generative editing with strong editing strength. The project webpage is available at https://liuyixin-louis.github.io/xattnmark/.

MMVU: Measuring Expert-Level Multi-Discipline Video Understanding

We introduce MMVU, a comprehensive expert-level, multi-discipline benchmark for evaluating foundation models in video understanding. MMVU includes 3,000 expert-annotated questions spanning 27 subjects across four core disciplines: Science, Healthcare, Humanities & Social Sciences, and Engineering. Compared to prior benchmarks, MMVU features three key advancements. First, it challenges models to apply domain-specific knowledge and perform expert-level reasoning to analyze specialized-domain videos, moving beyond the basic visual perception typically assessed in current video benchmarks. Second, each example is annotated by human experts from scratch. We implement strict data quality controls to ensure the high quality of the dataset. Finally, each example is enriched with expert-annotated reasoning rationals and relevant domain knowledge, facilitating in-depth analysis. We conduct an extensive evaluation of 32 frontier multimodal foundation models on MMVU. The latest System-2-capable models, o1 and Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking, achieve the highest performance among the tested models. However, they still fall short of matching human expertise. Through in-depth error analyses and case studies, we offer actionable insights for future advancements in expert-level, knowledge-intensive video understanding for specialized domains.

Re-evaluating Automatic LLM System Ranking for Alignment with Human Preference

Evaluating and ranking the capabilities of different LLMs is crucial for understanding their performance and alignment with human preferences. Due to the high cost and time-consuming nature of human evaluations, an automatic LLM bencher (i.e., an automatic evaluation framework that aims to rank LLMs based on their alignment with human preferences) is indispensable. An automatic LLM bencher consists of four components: the input set (e.g., a user instruction), the evaluation model (e.g., an LLM), the evaluation type (e.g., pairwise comparison), and the aggregation method (e.g., the ELO rating system). However, previous work has not thoroughly explored how to select these components or how their different combinations influence the results. In this work, through controlled experiments, we provide a series of recommendations on how to choose each component to better automate the evaluation of LLMs. Furthermore, we discovered that when evaluating LLMs with similar performance, the performance of the automatic LLM bencher declines sharply, underscoring the limitations of current benchers and calling for future work. Lastly, we found that the evaluation models' performance at the instance level (e.g., the accuracy of selecting the best output) does not always align with their effectiveness when used as a component of a bencher, highlighting the importance of dedicated system-level evaluation of benchers.

Who Gets Recommended? Investigating Gender, Race, and Country Disparities in Paper Recommendations from Large Language Models

This paper investigates the performance of several representative large models in the tasks of literature recommendation and explores potential biases in research exposure. The results indicate that not only LLMs' overall recommendation accuracy remains limited but also the models tend to recommend literature with greater citation counts, later publication date, and larger author teams. Yet, in scholar recommendation tasks, there is no evidence that LLMs disproportionately recommend male, white, or developed-country authors, contrasting with patterns of known human biases.

M3SciQA: A Multi-Modal Multi-Document Scientific QA Benchmark for Evaluating Foundation Models

Existing benchmarks for evaluating foundation models mainly focus on single-document, text-only tasks. However, they often fail to fully capture the complexity of research workflows, which typically involve interpreting non-textual data and gathering information across multiple documents. To address this gap, we introduce M3SciQA, a multi-modal, multi-document scientific question answering benchmark designed for a more comprehensive evaluation of foundation models. M3SciQA consists of 1,452 expert-annotated questions spanning 70 natural language processing paper clusters, where each cluster represents a primary paper along with all its cited documents, mirroring the workflow of comprehending a single paper by requiring multi-modal and multi-document data. With M3SciQA, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation of 18 foundation models. Our results indicate that current foundation models still significantly underperform compared to human experts in multi-modal information retrieval and in reasoning across multiple scientific documents. Additionally, we explore the implications of these findings for the future advancement of applying foundation models in multi-modal scientific literature analysis.

COMAL: A Convergent Meta-Algorithm for Aligning LLMs with General Preferences

Many alignment methods, including reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), rely on the Bradley-Terry reward assumption, which is insufficient to capture the full range of general human preferences. To achieve robust alignment with general preferences, we model the alignment problem as a two-player zero-sum game, where the Nash equilibrium policy guarantees a 50% win rate against any competing policy. However, previous algorithms for finding the Nash policy either diverge or converge to a Nash policy in a modified game, even in a simple synthetic setting, thereby failing to maintain the 50% win rate guarantee against all other policies. We propose a meta-algorithm, Convergent Meta Alignment Algorithm (COMAL), for language model alignment with general preferences, inspired by convergent algorithms in game theory. Theoretically, we prove that our meta-algorithm converges to an exact Nash policy in the last iterate. Additionally, our meta-algorithm is simple and can be integrated with many existing methods designed for RLHF and preference optimization with minimal changes. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework when combined with existing preference policy optimization methods.

ReIFE: Re-evaluating Instruction-Following Evaluation

The automatic evaluation of instruction following typically involves using large language models (LLMs) to assess response quality. However, there is a lack of comprehensive evaluation of these LLM-based evaluators across two dimensions: the base LLMs and the evaluation protocols. Therefore, we present a thorough meta-evaluation of instruction following, including 25 base LLMs and 15 recently proposed evaluation protocols, on 4 human-annotated datasets, assessing the evaluation accuracy of the LLM-evaluators. Our evaluation allows us to identify the best-performing base LLMs and evaluation protocols with a high degree of robustness. Moreover, our large-scale evaluation reveals: (1) Base LLM performance ranking remains largely consistent across evaluation protocols, with less capable LLMs showing greater improvement from protocol enhancements; (2) Robust evaluation of evaluation protocols requires many base LLMs with varying capability levels, as protocol effectiveness can depend on the base LLM used; (3) Evaluation results on different datasets are not always consistent, so a rigorous evaluation requires multiple datasets with distinctive features. We release our meta-evaluation suite ReIFE, which provides the codebase and evaluation result collection for more than 500 LLM-evaluator configurations, to support future research in instruction-following evaluation.

Empirical Perturbation Analysis of Linear System Solvers from a Data Poisoning Perspective

The perturbation analysis of linear solvers applied to systems arising broadly in machine learning settings -- for instance, when using linear regression models -- establishes an important perspective when reframing these analyses through the lens of a data poisoning attack. By analyzing solvers' responses to such attacks, this work aims to contribute to the development of more robust linear solvers and provide insights into poisoning attacks on linear solvers. In particular, we investigate how the errors in the input data will affect the fitting error and accuracy of the solution from a linear system-solving algorithm under perturbations common in adversarial attacks. We propose data perturbation through two distinct knowledge levels, developing a poisoning optimization and studying two methods of perturbation: Label-guided Perturbation (LP) and Unconditioning Perturbation (UP). Existing works mainly focus on deriving the worst-case perturbation bound from a theoretical perspective, and the analysis is often limited to specific kinds of linear system solvers. Under the circumstance that the data is intentionally perturbed -- as is the case with data poisoning -- we seek to understand how different kinds of solvers react to these perturbations, identifying those algorithms most impacted by different types of adversarial attacks.