arXiv:2605.15990v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tremendous efforts have been put into evaluating the inclusivity and effectiveness of AI systems across cultures. However, the cultural capabilities considered in much of the literature remain vaguely defined, are referred to using interchangeable terminology, and are typically limited to recalling accurate information about various demographics, regions, and nationalities. To address this construct ambiguity, we draw from Intercultural Communication scholarship and propose a three-level taxonomy of AI-relevant cultural capabilities: Cultural Awareness answers "Does the model know?", Cultural Sensitivity answers "How does it frame its knowledge?", and Cultural Competence answers "Can it adapt as the interaction evolves?". Beyond conceptual clarification, we position this taxonomy as a practical tool for improving the validity and interpretability of AI evaluation in real-world, multicultural settings. Without such construct clarity, evaluation results risk overstating model capabilities and may lead to inappropriate deployment decisions in culturally sensitive contexts.
Science Journals
arXiv:2605.15393v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed to perform tasks with minimal human oversight, it is crucial that these models operate robustly. In particular, a model that can solve a given problem should not fail simply because certain entities$\unicode{x2013}$such as names, numbers, or other contextual details$\unicode{x2013}$have changed while the underlying problem logic remains the same. Prior work suggests that current LLMs still struggle with this form of robustness: they often succeed on some variations of a problem but fail on others. However, existing evaluations often lack a systematic way to identify which logic-preserving variations are most likely to induce failure. Instead, they typically test a random subset of allowable variations, which can overstate robustness. To address this gap, we introduce logic-preserving difficulty scaling (LPDS), a framework that (i) quantifies the difficulty of a problem variation and (ii) systematically searches the space of allowable variations to find those that maximize difficulty and expose failures. We show that as difficulty increases, performance declines and errors in the models' reasoning chains become more pronounced. We further demonstrate that LPDS efficiently finds difficult problem variations for a model, resulting in performance drops up to 5 times larger compared to random sampling. Finally, we show that fine-tuning on more difficult variations leads to more consistent robustness gains than training on easier ones.
arXiv:2605.15384v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Memory plays a central role in enabling large language models (LLMs) to operate over sequential tasks by accumulating and reusing experience over time. However, existing evaluations of LLM memory mostly rely on aggregate metrics such as final hold-out accuracy or cumulative online performance, which can obscure critical failure modes such as forgetting and negative transfer. In this paper, we introduce SeqMem-Eval, a diagnostic evaluation framework for sequentially evolving LLM memory. Drawing inspiration from continual learning, it targets a test-time setting in which memory is external, prompt-mediated, and updated without modifying model parameters. Rather than focusing only on final performance, SeqMem-Eval evaluates how memory states evolve, generalize, consolidate experience, and retain useful information during sequential inference. Specifically, it measures online utility, hold-out generalization, backward transfer, and forgetting, providing a finer-grained view of memory quality. Through extensive experiments across diverse tasks and memory methods, we show that higher final or cumulative accuracy does not necessarily imply better memory quality: many methods exhibit strong performance gains while suffering from substantial forgetting or negative transfer. Moreover, different memory designs exhibit distinct trade-offs between adaptability and stability that remain invisible under standard evaluation metrics.
arXiv:2604.17669v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: This paper presents a comprehensive review of the NTIRE 2026 Low Light Image Enhancement Challenge, highlighting the proposed solutions and final results. The objective of this challenge is to identify effective networks capable of producing clearer and visually compelling images in diverse and challenging conditions by learning representative visual cues with the purpose of restoring information loss due to low-contrast and noisy images. A total of 195 participants registered for the first track and 153 for the second track of the competition, and 22 teams ultimately submitted valid entries. This paper thoroughly evaluates the state-of-the-art advances in (joint denoising and) low-light image enhancement, showcasing the significant progress in the field, while leveraging samples of our novel dataset.
arXiv:2604.26126v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: This paper proposes a deep reinforcement learning (DRL)-based event-triggered controller design for networked artificial pancreas (AP) systems. Although existing DRL-based AP controllers typically assume periodic control updates, networked control systems (NCSs) require a reduction in communication frequency to achieve energy-efficient operation, which is directly tied to control updates. However, jointly learning both insulin dosing and update timing significantly increases the complexity of the learning problem. To alleviate this complexity, we develop a practical DRL-based controller design that avoids explicitly learning update timing by introducing a rule-based criterion defined by changes in blood glucose. As a result, decision-making occurs at irregular intervals, and the problem is naturally formulated as a semi-Markov decision process (SMDP), for which we extend a standard DRL algorithm. Numerical experiments demonstrate that the proposed method improves communication efficiency while maintaining control performance.
arXiv:2605.15224v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model-based agents make mistakes, yet critique can often guide the same model toward correct behavior. However, when critique is removed, the model may fail again on the same query, indicating that it has not internalized the critique's guidance into its underlying capability. Meanwhile, a frozen critic cannot improve its feedback quality over time, limiting the potential for iterative self-improvement. To address this, we propose learning to internalize self-critique with reinforcement learning(ICRL), a novel framework that jointly trains a solver and a critic from a shared backbone to convert critique-induced success into unassisted solver ability. The critic is rewarded based on the solver's subsequent performance gain, incentivizing actionable feedback. To address the distribution shift between critique-conditioned and critique-free behavior, ICRL introduces a distribution-calibration re-weighting ratio that selectively transfers critique-guided improvements compatible with the solver's own prompt distribution. Additionally, a role-wise group advantage estimation stabilizes joint optimization across the two roles. Together, these mechanisms ensure that the solver learns to improve itself without external critique, rather than becoming dependent on critique-conditioned behavior. We evaluate ICRL on diverse benchmarks spanning agentic and mathematical reasoning tasks, using Qwen3-4B and Qwen3-8B as backbones. Results show consistent improvements, with average gains of 6.4 points over GRPO on agentic tasks, and 7.0 points on mathematical reasoning. Notably, the learned 8B critic is comparable to 32B critics while using substantially fewer tokens. The code is available at https://github.com/brick-pid/ICRL.
arXiv:2605.15226v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We ask whether agentic AI systems built for software engineering transfer to realistic hardware engineering. Existing hardware LLM benchmarks isolate sub-tasks but none jointly requires repository navigation, hierarchy-aware localization, Electronic Design Automation (EDA) executable verification, and maintenance-style patching. We introduce \textbf{Phoenix-bench}, a synchronized corpus of 511 verified Verilator instances from 114 GitHub repositories, each shipped with the developer patch, design-flow labels, fail-to-pass and pass-to-pass testbenches, and a Docker-pinned EDA environment so resolved-rate differences reflect agent behavior rather than toolchain availability. Using Phoenix-bench we run a uniform evaluation of four commercial agents and eight open-source agentic structures across four LLM backbones, plus two diagnostic interventions (file-level oracle localization and one round of testbench-log feedback). Three findings emerge. (i)~Software and hardware are fundamentally different engineering tasks: the same agent loses 37\% to 58\% from SWE-bench Verified to Phoenix-bench because hardware bugs propagate across parallel instantiated modules through signal flow rather than along a software-style call graph, and software-tuned agents stop at the symptom file instead of tracing back through the instantiation chain. (ii)~Failures concentrate on design control-flow / finite state machine (FSM) bugs, verification testbench bugs, and hard cases that demand cross-hierarchy signal-flow tracking and coordinated multi-file edits. (iii)~Localization granularity matters far more than localization itself: a perfect file-level oracle yields only $+1.4$\% because the agent then breaks files that did not need editing, while a single round of test case feedback lifts resolved rate by $42$\% to $45$\% because the test case tells \emph{where} the bug is and \emph{what} the fix has to look like.
arXiv:2510.06062v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Reinforcement learning (RL) has shown great promise in large language models (LLMs) post-training, which typically rely on token-level clipping to maintain stability during optimization. Despite the empirical success of GRPO-style methods, we identify a fundamental and previously overlooked challenge in this popular Outcome-Supervised RL (OSRL) paradigm. We reveal that in OSRL, where advantages are shared across tokens within a response, importance sampling (IS) ratios deviate from their traditional purpose of distribution correction as in classic RL, which become token-level weights that allocate the shared advantage signal across tokens. We show that this hidden role shift induces a critical mismatch for positive-advantage tokens, leading to unbalanced token weighting between positive and negative tokens. Specifically, it suppresses the update of underrepresented tokens that are lagging behind, while over-amplifying already high-probability tokens. This mismatch results in rich-get-richer dynamics that over-reinforce confident tokens, weaken catch-up learning that drive entropy collapse, excessive repetition, and premature convergence. To address this, we propose Asymmetric Importance Sampling Policy Optimization (ASPO), a simple yet effective strategy that reverses the ratio-induced weighting of positive-advantage tokens, while stabilizing extreme updates and maintaining gradient flow. This mismatch correction aligns their update direction with the learning dynamics of negative ones. Comprehensive experiments across math reasoning and coding benchmarks demonstrate that ASPO significantly mitigates entropy collapse, improves training stability, and enhances performance over strong GRPO-based baselines. Our analysis provides new insights into the role of token-level weighting in OSRL and highlights the critical importance of correcting ratio-induced weighting in LLM RL.