Large language models

Model releases, architecture work and prompting research on large language models — from frontier-lab announcements to the arXiv papers behind them.

32,584 stories · RSS feed

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 17

Legal LLM Hallucination Should Be Evaluated as Failure of Legal Warrant

The paper argues that hallucinations by legal language models should be judged as failures of legal warrant rather than mere factual or citation errors. It defines claim-authority warrant as a context-sensitive relationship between a legal claim and applicable, current authority, and proposes that evaluating warrant can uncover failures missed by traditional accuracy or citation metrics. The authors outline a pilot study, benchmark specifications, and a research agenda to assess whether legal AI systems’ claims are properly licensed by law.

By Maksym Taranukhin, Vered Shwartz
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 17

ProofVerifier: A Scalable, Diversity-Driven Framework for Natural-Language Proof Verification

arXiv:2602.02377v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: While large language models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance on mathematical problems with verifiable answers, many advanced problems are pr...

By Haotong Yang, Zitong Wang, Shijia Kang, Siqi Yang, Wenkai Yu, Xu Niu, Yike Sun, Yi Hu, Zhouchen Lin, Muhan Zhang
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 17

Do Social Patterns Hold in Synthetic Data? Analyzing Cyberbullying Dynamics in LLM-Generated and Authentic Dialogues

The paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can generate synthetic cyberbullying conversations that replicate the social dynamics of real interactions. Using a comprehensive framework, the authors compare authentic dialogues with synthetic ones from GPT, Grok, and LLaMA across structural, linguistic, affective, and temporal dimensions, and conduct human evaluations of realism. Results show that while LLMs preserve high‑level interaction patterns, they systematically distort finer‑grained social phenomena, with model‑specific biases such as GPT’s suppression of harmful content and Grok’s amplification of aggression.

By Arefeh Kazemi, Hamza Qadeer, Sinan Asci, Joachim Wagner, Brian Davis
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 17

RankGround: Efficient High-Resolution GUI Grounding via Lightweight Reranker-Guided Crop Selection

RankGround is a two‑stage framework for GUI grounding that uses a single Vision‑Language Model call per query. It introduces GroundRanker, a lightweight multimodal reranker that selects the most promising crop from a dense candidate set, trained with a two‑stage curriculum on ranking supervision data derived from existing grounding datasets. Experiments show RankGround outperforms strong baselines, achieving 1.4× faster inference and a 5.5% average improvement in localization accuracy over the second‑best method across all backbones and screen scales.

By Liyang Fan, Xinping Bi, Yitai Li, Shuaimin Li, Hui Li, Min Yang
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 17

Code Consistency Preference Optimization Verification for Language Model Alignment

The paper introduces Code Consistency Preference Optimization Verification (CCPO), a method that generates computationally sound solutions with dependency graphs to improve execution-consistent preference optimization for language models. By building a scientific reasoning dataset and extracting reasoning steps, prerequisites, and derivability relationships, the authors compute execution consistency scores that are used to fine‑tune models such as Llama‑3‑8B and DeepSeekMath‑7B, achieving significant performance gains on MATH (+17.0%) and GSM8K (+15.1%). The extended Scientific Feasibility Control framework further boosts accuracy on PhyX physics reasoning to 50.1%, surpassing existing models while maintaining high scientific validity and reducing law violations.

By Yunlong Tan, Mingqiao Mo, Hao Zhang
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 17

Which Demographics do LLMs Default to During Annotation?

The paper investigates which demographic attributes large language models (LLMs) default to when annotating text without explicit demographic cues. By comparing non‑demographic, placebo‑conditioned, and demographic‑conditioned prompts on politeness and offensiveness tasks in the POPQUORN dataset, the authors find that LLMs exhibit notable gender, race, and age influences in their annotations. This contrasts with earlier studies that reported no such effects, highlighting the importance of considering demographic bias in LLM‑based annotation workflows.

By Johannes Sch\"afer, Aidan Combs, Christopher Bagdon, Jiahui Li, Nadine Probol, Lynn Greschner, Sean Papay, Yarik Menchaca Resendiz, Aswathy Velutharambath, Amelie W\"uhrl, Sabine Weber, Roman Klinger