arXiv:2606. 12702v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into clinical systems, making it essential to evaluate the real-world utility of these systems.
By Alyssa Unell, Miguel Fuentes, Brenna Li, Bridget Lin, Meena Jagadeesan, Sanmi Koyejo, Nigam Shah
arXiv:2501. 14940v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values is essential for their safe deployment and widespread adoption.
By Guangzhi Sun, Xiao Zhan, Shutong Feng, Philip C. Woodland, Jose Such
arXiv:2605. 18937v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Patient-managed Personal Health Records (PHRs) promises to empower patients to better understand their health; but information in the record is complex, potentially hindering insights.
By Rory Sayres, Kejia Chen, Ayush Jain, Matthew Thompson, Jonathan Richina, Xiang Yin, Jimmy Hu, Fan Zhang, Bob Lou, Mike Sanchez, Ines Mezerreg, Meredith Schreier, Hamsa Subramaniam, I-Ching Lee, Yugang Jia, Daniel Mcduff, Yossi Matias, Avinatan Hassidim, Dale Webster, Yun Liu, Jackie Barr, Quang Duong
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly support science, but they can also convert hazardous scientific knowledge into actionable misuse guidance. Existing benchmarks often rely on templated queries disconnected from real-world hazards, and employ LLM-as-a-Judge paradigms without domain grounding.
The paper evaluates how modern large language models use internal web search to answer factual questions. Using 783 static queries and 288 dynamic queries, the authors find that enabling retrieval improves accuracy on static questions but hurts confidence calibration. On dynamic queries, models often retrieve but still achieve less than 70% accuracy, mainly due to poor query formulation and source selection, indicating that internal web search works better as a quick verification tool than a full information‑retrieval system.
By Sahil Kale
The paper introduces CarryOnBench, an interactive benchmark that tests whether large language models can revise their interpretation of user intent and recover utility while staying safe in multi‑turn conversations. Using 398 harmful‑looking queries with benign intents, the benchmark simulates 5,970 conversations across 14 models, evaluating both intent‑aligned utility and safety with a new metric called Ben‑Util. Results show that models often withhold information due to misinterpretation, but most can recover with clarifications, revealing failure modes such as unsafe and redundant recovery that single‑turn tests miss.
By Mingqian Zheng, Malia Morgan, Liwei Jiang, Carolyn Rose, Maarten Sap