arXiv:2603. 04818v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Disruptions at critical logistics nodes pose severe risks to global supply chains, yet existing risk prediction systems typically prioritize forecasting accuracy without providing operationally interpretable early warnings.
Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) large-scale deployment in industrial warehouse settings specifically necessitates that models exhibit human-expert-level hazard-oriented perception, understanding, and r...
arXiv:2607. 18271v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Time series forecasts are widely used in decision-critical domains, where they are rarely consumed without accompanying explanations.
arXiv:2607. 26820v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) evolve from standalone assistants into autonomous agents, ensuring their safety requires shifting beyond pointwise risk assessment to understand how risks emerge and unfold over long-horizon trajectories.
LogiScope‑VQA is a new benchmark dataset for evaluating vision‑language models in logistics hazard identification. It contains 2,476 images, 2,918 videos, and 10,274 VQA pairs drawn from real industrial warehouses, covering 18 core objects and 20 risk types across 39 subtasks. Experiments show that even advanced proprietary models lag behind human experts, highlighting a significant gap in perception, understanding, and reasoning for industrial safety.
arXiv:2607. 11892v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Human-factor event diagnosis is essential for learning from operational events in nuclear power plants, yet its quality depends strongly on expert interpretation of narrative reports and guideline-based reasoning.
arXiv:2606. 11816v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Forecasting real-world events requires language-model agents to reason under uncertainty from incomplete, time-bounded information.
arXiv:2607. 14416v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The interconnected nature of global financial systems makes them vulnerable to systemic risks, where the failure of a few institutions can trigger catastrophic cascading defaults.
arXiv:2607. 09502v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Explaining machine-learning models is increasingly important for decision-making and consumer trust, yet it is widely believed to come at a cost: existing Explainable AI (XAI) methods suffer from a persistent accuracy-explainability trade-off.
arXiv:2608. 14177v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deep spatiotemporal models integrating graph convolutions and attention mechanisms have demonstrated excellent performance in network-level traffic flow prediction, owing to their exceptional ability to capture complex spatiotemporal dependencies.
arXiv:2607. 17586v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Money mule accounts are critical facilitators of financial fraud, yet detecting them at scale remains challenging due to the heterogeneous nature of transactional and behavioural data.
The study investigates whether Large Language Models (LLMs) can translate technical explanations from credit risk models into stakeholder-friendly narratives. Using Freddie Mac loan data, the authors compare standard tabular models (XGBoost + SHAP) with alternative data pipelines (GNN + GNNExplainer and a bimodal mix) and generate explanations with three LLM configurations: a small fine‑tuned Gemma 3 4B, a large fine‑tuned DeepSeek R1 70B, and a zero‑shot Gemini 2.5. Findings show that the quality of explanations is more dependent on the evidence representation than on the LLM, that narratives reliably identify influential factors but are less consistent about the direction of influence, and that credit professionals demand higher evidentiary standards than non‑professionals.
SAFARI is the first industrial benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) in automotive hazard analysis and risk assessment (HARA) under ISO 26262. It comprises 3,000 de‑identified HARA cases and tests two tasks: open‑ended hazard generation and standards‑grounded risk classification, using a novel reference‑anchored LLM‑as‑a‑judge protocol. Experiments with nine state‑of‑the‑art LLMs show that while hazard narratives are often plausible, risk classification remains weak (best ASIL macro‑F1 = 0.261), with errors mainly due to missing scenario context and misjudged controllability. "whyItMatters":"The benchmark highlights the current limitations of LLMs in safety‑critical engineering workflows, guiding future research and expert oversight in automotive safety analysis."