With the rapid improvement of LLMs' coding capabilities, the bottleneck of LLM-based automated software development is shifting from generating correct code to eliciting users' requirements. Despite growing interest, the interview competence of LLMs in conversational requirements elicitation remains fully underexplored. Existing evaluations often depend on a few scenarios, real user interaction, and subjective human scoring, which hinders systematic and quantitative comparison. To address these challenges, we propose ReqElicitGym, an interactive and automatic evaluation environment for assessing interview competence in conversational requirements elicitation. Specifically, ReqElicitGym introduces a new evaluation dataset and designs both an interactive oracle user and a task evaluator. The dataset contains 101 website requirements elicitation scenarios spanning 10 application types. Both the oracle user and the task evaluator achieve high agreement with real users and expert judgment. Using our ReqElicitGym, any automated conversational requirements elicitation approach (e.g., LLM-based agents) can be evaluated in a reproducible and quantitative manner through interaction with the environment. Based on our ReqElicitGym, we conduct a systematic empirical study on seven representative LLMs, and the results show that current LLMs still exhibit limited interview competence in uncovering implicit requirements. Particularly, they elicit less than half of the users' implicit requirements, and their effective elicitation questions often emerge in later turns of the dialogue. Besides, we found LLMs can elicit interaction and content implicit requirements, but consistently struggle with style-related requirements. We believe ReqElicitGym will facilitate the evaluation and development of automated conversational requirements elicitation.
Automated methods for discovering mechanistic simulator models from observational data offer a promising path toward accelerating scientific progress. Such methods often take the form of agentic-style iterative workflows that repeatedly propose and revise candidate models by imitating human discovery processes. However, existing LLM-based approaches typically implement such workflows via hand-crafted heuristic procedures, without an explicit probabilistic formulation. We recast model discovery as probabilistic inference, i.e., as sampling from an unknown distribution over mechanistic models capable of explaining the data. This perspective provides a unified way to reason about model proposal, refinement, and selection within a single inference framework. As a concrete instantiation of this view, we introduce ModelSMC, an algorithm based on Sequential Monte Carlo sampling. ModelSMC represents candidate models as particles which are iteratively proposed and refined by an LLM, and weighted using likelihood-based criteria. Experiments on real-world scientific systems illustrate that this formulation discovers models with interpretable mechanisms and improves posterior predictive checks. More broadly, this perspective provides a probabilistic lens for understanding and developing LLM-based approaches to model discovery.
Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate significant potential in multi-agent negotiation tasks, yet evaluation in this domain remains challenging due to a lack of robust and generalizable benchmarks. Abdelnabi et al. (2024) introduce a negotiation benchmark based on Scoreable Games, with the aim of developing a highly complex and realistic evaluation framework for LLMs. Our work investigates the reproducibility of claims in their benchmark, and provides a deeper understanding of its usability and generalizability. We replicate the original experiments on additional models, and introduce additional metrics to verify negotiation quality and evenness of evaluation. Our findings reveal that while the benchmark is indeed complex, model comparison is ambiguous, raising questions about its objectivity. Furthermore, we identify limitations in the experimental setup, particularly in information leakage detection and thoroughness of the ablation study. By examining and analyzing the behavior of a wider range of models on an extended version of the benchmark, we reveal insights that provide additional context to potential users. Our results highlight the importance of context in model-comparative evaluations.
Large Language Models (LLMs), despite extensive pretraining on broad internet corpora, often struggle to adapt effectively to specialized domains. There is growing interest in fine-tuning these models for such domains; however, progress is constrained by the scarcity and limited coverage of high-quality, task-relevant data. To address this, synthetic data generation methods such as paraphrasing or knowledge extraction are commonly applied. Although these approaches excel at factual recall and conceptual knowledge, they suffer from two critical shortcomings: (i) they provide minimal support for interpretive reasoning capabilities in these specialized domains, and (ii) they often produce synthetic corpora that are excessively large and redundant, resulting in poor sample efficiency. To overcome these gaps, we propose an adversarial question-generation framework that produces a compact set of semantically challenging questions. These questions are constructed by comparing the outputs of the model to be adapted and a robust expert model grounded in reference documents, using an iterative, feedback-driven process designed to reveal and address comprehension gaps. Evaluation on specialized subsets of the LegalBench corpus demonstrates that our method achieves greater accuracy with substantially fewer synthetic samples.
Mechanistic models encode scientific knowledge about dynamical systems and are widely used in downstream scientific and policy applications. Recent work has explored LLM-based agentic frameworks to automatically construct mechanistic models from data; however, existing problem settings substantially oversimplify real-world conditions, leaving it unclear whether LLM-generated mechanistic models are reliable in practice. To address this gap, we introduce the Neural-Integrated Mechanistic Modeling (NIMM) evaluation framework, which evaluates LLM-generated mechanistic models under realistic settings with partial observations and diversified task objectives. Our evaluation reveals fundamental challenges in current baselines, ranging from model effectiveness to code-level correctness. Motivated by these findings, we design NIMMgen, an agentic framework for neural-integrated mechanistic modeling that enhances code correctness and practical validity through iterative refinement. Experiments across three datasets from diversified scientific domains demonstrate its strong performance. We also show that the learned mechanistic models support counterfactual intervention simulation.
Academic advising in higher education is under severe strain, with advisor-to-student ratios commonly exceeding 300:1. These structural bottlenecks limit timely access to guidance, increase the risk of delayed graduation, and contribute to inequities in student support. We introduce Aurora, a modular neuro-symbolic advising agent that unifies retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), symbolic reasoning, and normalized curricular databases to deliver policy-compliant, verifiable recommendations at scale. Aurora integrates three components: (i) a Boyce-Codd Normal Form (BCNF) catalog schema for consistent program rules, (ii) a Prolog engine for prerequisite and credit enforcement, and (iii) an instruction-tuned large language model for natural-language explanations of its recommendations. To assess performance, we design a structured evaluation suite spanning common and edge-case advising scenarios, including short-term scheduling, long-term roadmapping, skill-aligned pathways, and out-of-scope requests. Across this diverse set, Aurora improves semantic alignment with expert-crafted answers from 0.68 (Raw LLM baseline) to 0.93 (+36%), achieves perfect precision and recall in nearly half of in-scope cases, and consistently produces correct fallbacks for unanswerable prompts. On commodity hardware, Aurora delivers sub-second mean latency (0.71s across 20 queries), approximately 83X faster than a Raw LLM baseline (59.2s). By combining symbolic rigor with neural fluency, Aurora advances a paradigm for accurate, explainable, and scalable AI-driven advising.
LLM-based systems increasingly generate structured workflows for complex tasks. In practice, automatic evaluation of these workflows is difficult, because metric scores are often not calibrated, and score changes do not directly communicate the severity of workflow degradation. We introduce WorkflowPerturb, a controlled benchmark for studying workflow evaluation metrics. It works by applying realistic, controlled perturbations to golden workflows. WorkflowPerturb contains 4,973 golden workflows and 44,757 perturbed variants across three perturbation types (Missing Steps, Compressed Steps, and Description Changes), each applied at severity levels of 10%, 30%, and 50%. We benchmark multiple metric families and analyze their sensitivity and calibration using expected score trajectories and residuals. Our results characterize systematic differences across metric families and support severity-aware interpretation of workflow evaluation scores. Our dataset will be released upon acceptance.
Instruction optimization provides a lightweight, model-agnostic approach to enhancing the reasoning performance of large language models (LLMs). This paper presents the first systematic comparison of instruction optimization, based on the DSPy optimization framework, for tabular fact verification. We evaluate four out-of-the-box prompting techniques that cover both text-only prompting and code use: direct prediction, Chain-of-Thought (CoT), ReAct with SQL tools, and CodeAct with Python execution. We study three optimizers from the DSPy framework -- COPRO, MiPROv2, and SIMBA -- across four benchmarks and three model families. We find that instruction optimization consistently improves verification accuracy, with MiPROv2 yielding the most stable gains for CoT, and SIMBA providing the largest benefits for ReAct agents, particularly at larger model scales. Behavioral analyses reveal that SIMBA encourages more direct reasoning paths by applying heuristics, thereby improving numerical comparison abilities in CoT reasoning and helping avoid unnecessary tool calls in ReAct agents. Across different prompting techniques, CoT remains effective for tabular fact checking, especially with smaller models. Although ReAct agents built with larger models can achieve competitive performance, they require careful instruction optimization.
In environments with sparse or delayed rewards, reinforcement learning (RL) incurs high sample complexity due to the large number of interactions needed for learning. This limitation has motivated the use of large language models (LLMs) for subgoal discovery and trajectory guidance. While LLMs can support exploration, frequent reliance on LLM calls raises concerns about scalability and reliability. We address these challenges by constructing a memory graph that encodes subgoals and trajectories from both LLM guidance and the agent's own successful rollouts. From this graph, we derive a utility function that evaluates how closely the agent's trajectories align with prior successful strategies. This utility shapes the advantage function, providing the critic with additional guidance without altering the reward. Our method relies primarily on offline input and only occasional online queries, avoiding dependence on continuous LLM supervision. Preliminary experiments in benchmark environments show improved sample efficiency and faster early learning compared to baseline RL methods, with final returns comparable to methods that require frequent LLM interaction.
Reinforcement learning (RL) agents often suffer from high sample complexity in sparse or delayed reward settings due to limited prior structure. Large language models (LLMs) can provide subgoal decompositions, plausible trajectories, and abstract priors that facilitate early learning. However, heavy reliance on LLM supervision introduces scalability constraints and dependence on potentially unreliable signals. We propose MIRA (Memory-Integrated Reinforcement Learning Agent), which incorporates a structured, evolving memory graph to guide early training. The graph stores decision-relevant information, including trajectory segments and subgoal structures, and is constructed from both the agent's high-return experiences and LLM outputs. This design amortizes LLM queries into a persistent memory rather than requiring continuous real-time supervision. From this memory graph, we derive a utility signal that softly adjusts advantage estimation to influence policy updates without modifying the underlying reward function. As training progresses, the agent's policy gradually surpasses the initial LLM-derived priors, and the utility term decays, preserving standard convergence guarantees. We provide theoretical analysis showing that utility-based shaping improves early-stage learning in sparse-reward environments. Empirically, MIRA outperforms RL baselines and achieves returns comparable to approaches that rely on frequent LLM supervision, while requiring substantially fewer online LLM queries. Project webpage: https://narjesno.github.io/MIRA/
Traditional AI alignment primarily focuses on individual model outputs; however, autonomous agents in long-horizon workflows require sustained reliability across entire interaction trajectories. We introduce APEMO (Affect-aware Peak-End Modulation for Orchestration), a runtime scheduling layer that optimizes computational allocation under fixed budgets by operationalizing temporal-affective signals. Instead of modifying model weights, APEMO detects trajectory instability through behavioral proxies and targets repairs at critical segments, such as peak moments and endings. Evaluation across multi-agent simulations and LLM-based planner--executor flows demonstrates that APEMO consistently enhances trajectory-level quality and reuse probability over structural orchestrators. Our results reframe alignment as a temporal control problem, offering a resilient engineering pathway for the development of long-horizon agentic systems.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to automate scientific workflows, yet their integration with heterogeneous computational tools remains ad hoc and fragile. Current agentic approaches often rely on unstructured text to manage context and coordinate execution, generating often overwhelming volumes of information that may obscure decision provenance and hinder auditability. In this work, we present El Agente Gráfico, a single-agent framework that embeds LLM-driven decision-making within a type-safe execution environment and dynamic knowledge graphs for external persistence. Central to our approach is a structured abstraction of scientific concepts and an object-graph mapper that represents computational state as typed Python objects, stored either in memory or persisted in an external knowledge graph. This design enables context management through typed symbolic identifiers rather than raw text, thereby ensuring consistency, supporting provenance tracking, and enabling efficient tool orchestration. We evaluate the system by developing an automated benchmarking framework across a suite of university-level quantum chemistry tasks previously evaluated on a multi-agent system, demonstrating that a single agent, when coupled to a reliable execution engine, can robustly perform complex, multi-step, and parallel computations. We further extend this paradigm to two other large classes of applications: conformer ensemble generation and metal-organic framework design, where knowledge graphs serve as both memory and reasoning substrates. Together, these results illustrate how abstraction and type safety can provide a scalable foundation for agentic scientific automation beyond prompt-centric designs.
Quantum chemistry calculations are a key component of the materials discovery process. The results from first-principles explorations enable the prediction of material properties prior to experimental validation. Despite their impact, the practical use of first-principles methods remains limited by the expertise required to design, execute, and troubleshoot complex computational workflows. Even when workflows are successfully built, they are sometimes rigid and not adaptable to different use cases. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) and agentic systems offer a pathway to flexibly automate these processes and lower barriers to entry. Here, we introduce El Agente Sólido, a hierarchical multi-agent framework for automating solid-state quantum chemistry workflows using the open-source Quantum ESPRESSO simulation package. The framework translates high-level scientific objectives expressed in natural language into end-to-end computational pipelines that include structure generation, input file construction, workflow execution, and post-processing analysis. El Agente Sólido integrates density functional theory with phonon calculations and machine-learning interatomic potentials to enable efficient and physically consistent simulations. Extensive benchmarking and case studies demonstrate that El Agente Sólido reliably executes a wide range of solid-state calculations, highlighting its potential to improve reproducibility and accelerate computational materials discovery
Feature engineering remains a critical yet challenging bottleneck in machine learning, particularly for tabular data, as identifying optimal features from an exponentially large feature space traditionally demands substantial domain expertise. To address this challenge, we introduce FAMOSE (Feature AugMentation and Optimal Selection agEnt), a novel framework that leverages the ReAct paradigm to autonomously explore, generate, and refine features while integrating feature selection and evaluation tools within an agent architecture. To our knowledge, FAMOSE represents the first application of an agentic ReAct framework to automated feature engineering, especially for both regression and classification tasks. Extensive experiments demonstrate that FAMOSE is at or near the state-of-the-art on classification tasks (especially tasks with more than 10K instances, where ROC-AUC increases 0.23% on average), and achieves the state-of-the-art for regression tasks by reducing RMSE by 2.0% on average, while remaining more robust to errors than other algorithms. We hypothesize that FAMOSE's strong performance is because ReAct allows the LLM context window to record (via iterative feature discovery and evaluation steps) what features did or did not work. This is similar to a few-shot prompt and guides the LLM to invent better, more innovative features. Our work offers evidence that AI agents are remarkably effective in solving problems that require highly inventive solutions, such as feature engineering.
LLM-based agents show promise for automating penetration testing, yet reported performance varies widely across systems and benchmarks. We analyze 28 LLM-based penetration testing systems and evaluate five representative implementations across three benchmarks of increasing complexity. Our analysis reveals two distinct failure modes: Type A failures stem from capability gaps (missing tools, inadequate prompts) that engineering readily addresses, while Type B failures persist regardless of tooling due to planning and state management limitations. We show that Type B failures share a root cause that is largely invariant to the underlying LLM: agents lack real-time task difficulty estimation. As a result, agents misallocate effort, over-commit to low-value branches, and exhaust context before completing attack chains. Based on this insight, we present Excalibur, a penetration testing agent that couples strong tooling with difficulty-aware planning. A Tool and Skill Layer eliminates Type A failures through typed interfaces and retrieval-augmented knowledge. A Task Difficulty Assessment (TDA) mechanism addresses Type B failures by estimating tractability through four measurable dimensions (horizon estimation, evidence confidence, context load, and historical success) and uses these estimates to guide exploration-exploitation decisions within an Evidence-Guided Attack Tree Search (EGATS) framework. Excalibur achieves up to 91% task completion on CTF benchmarks with frontier models (39 to 49% relative improvement over baselines) and compromises 4 of 5 hosts on the GOAD Active Directory environment versus 2 by prior systems. These results show that difficulty-aware planning yields consistent end-to-end gains across models and addresses a limitation that model scaling alone does not eliminate.
PDEs are central to scientific and engineering modeling, yet designing accurate numerical solvers typically requires substantial mathematical expertise and manual tuning. Recent neural network-based approaches improve flexibility but often demand high computational cost and suffer from limited interpretability. We introduce \texttt{AutoNumerics}, a multi-agent framework that autonomously designs, implements, debugs, and verifies numerical solvers for general PDEs directly from natural language descriptions. Unlike black-box neural solvers, our framework generates transparent solvers grounded in classical numerical analysis. We introduce a coarse-to-fine execution strategy and a residual-based self-verification mechanism. Experiments on 24 canonical and real-world PDE problems demonstrate that \texttt{AutoNumerics} achieves competitive or superior accuracy compared to existing neural and LLM-based baselines, and correctly selects numerical schemes based on PDE structural properties, suggesting its viability as an accessible paradigm for automated PDE solving.
This paper introduces KLong, an open-source LLM agent trained to solve extremely long-horizon tasks. The principle is to first cold-start the model via trajectory-splitting SFT, then scale it via progressive RL training. Specifically, we first activate basic agentic abilities of a base model with a comprehensive SFT recipe. Then, we introduce Research-Factory, an automated pipeline that generates high-quality training data by collecting research papers and constructing evaluation rubrics. Using this pipeline, we build thousands of long-horizon trajectories distilled from Claude 4.5 Sonnet (Thinking). To train with these extremely long trajectories, we propose a new trajectory-splitting SFT, which preserves early context, progressively truncates later context, and maintains overlap between sub-trajectories. In addition, to further improve long-horizon task-solving capability, we propose a novel progressive RL, which schedules training into multiple stages with progressively extended timeouts. Experiments demonstrate the superiority and generalization of KLong, as shown in Figure 1. Notably, our proposed KLong (106B) surpasses Kimi K2 Thinking (1T) by 11.28% on PaperBench, and the performance improvement generalizes to other coding benchmarks like SWE-bench Verified and MLE-bench.
In multi-agent IR pipelines for tasks such as search and ranking, LLM-based agents exchange intermediate reasoning in terms of Chain-of-Thought (CoT) with each other. Current CoT evaluation narrowly focuses on target task accuracy. However, this metric fails to assess the quality or utility of the reasoning process itself. To address this limitation, we introduce two novel measures: reusability and verifiability. We decouple CoT generation from execution using a Thinker-Executor framework. Reusability measures how easily an Executor can reuse the Thinker's CoT. Verifiability measures how frequently an Executor can match the Thinker's answer using the CoT. We evaluated four Thinker models against a committee of ten Executor models across five benchmarks. Our results reveal that reusability and verifiability do not correlate with standard accuracy, exposing a blind spot in current accuracy-based leaderboards for reasoning capability. Surprisingly, we find that CoTs from specialized reasoning models are not consistently more reusable or verifiable than those from general-purpose LLMs like Llama and Gemma.
Learning from self-sampled data and sparse environmental feedback remains a fundamental challenge in training self-evolving agents. Temporal credit assignment mitigates this issue by transforming sparse feedback into dense supervision signals. However, previous approaches typically depend on learning task-specific value functions for credit assignment, which suffer from poor sample efficiency and limited generalization. In this work, we propose to leverage pretrained knowledge from large language models (LLMs) to transform sparse rewards into dense training signals (i.e., the advantage function) through retrospective in-context learning (RICL). We further propose an online learning framework, RICOL, which iteratively refines the policy based on the credit assignment results from RICL. We empirically demonstrate that RICL can accurately estimate the advantage function with limited samples and effectively identify critical states in the environment for temporal credit assignment. Extended evaluation on four BabyAI scenarios show that RICOL achieves comparable convergent performance with traditional online RL algorithms with significantly higher sample efficiency. Our findings highlight the potential of leveraging LLMs for temporal credit assignment, paving the way for more sample-efficient and generalizable RL paradigms.
Large language models (LLMs), and conversational agents based on them, are exposed to personal data (PD) during pre-training and during user interactions. Prior work shows that PD can resurface, yet users lack insight into how strongly models associate specific information to their identity. We audit PD across eight LLMs (3 open-source; 5 API-based, including GPT-4o), introduce LMP2 (Language Model Privacy Probe), a human-centered, privacy-preserving audit tool refined through two formative studies (N=20), and run two studies with EU residents to capture (i) intuitions about LLM-generated PD (N1=155) and (ii) reactions to tool output (N2=303). We show empirically that models confidently generate multiple PD categories for well-known individuals. For everyday users, GPT-4o generates 11 features with 60% or more accuracy (e.g., gender, hair color, languages). Finally, 72% of participants sought control over model-generated associations with their name, raising questions about what counts as PD and whether data privacy rights should extend to LLMs.
Embodied AI systems (e.g., autonomous vehicles, service robots, and LLM-driven interactive agents) are rapidly transitioning from controlled environments to safety critical real-world deployments. Unlike disembodied AI, failures in embodied intelligence lead to irreversible physical consequences, raising fundamental questions about security, safety, and reliability. While existing research predominantly analyzes embodied AI through the lenses of Large Language Model (LLM) vulnerabilities or classical Cyber-Physical System (CPS) failures, this survey argues that these perspectives are individually insufficient to explain many observed breakdowns in modern embodied systems. We posit that a significant class of failures arises from embodiment-induced system-level mismatches, rather than from isolated model flaws or traditional CPS attacks. Specifically, we identify four core insights that explain why embodied AI is fundamentally harder to secure: (i) semantic correctness does not imply physical safety, as language-level reasoning abstracts away geometry, dynamics, and contact constraints; (ii) identical actions can lead to drastically different outcomes across physical states due to nonlinear dynamics and state uncertainty; (iii) small errors propagate and amplify across tightly coupled perception-decision-action loops; and (iv) safety is not compositional across time or system layers, enabling locally safe decisions to accumulate into globally unsafe behavior. These insights suggest that securing embodied AI requires moving beyond component-level defenses toward system-level reasoning about physical risk, uncertainty, and failure propagation.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for diagnostic tasks in medicine. In clinical practice, the correct diagnosis can rarely be immediately inferred from the initial patient presentation alone. Rather, reaching a diagnosis often involves systematic history taking, during which clinicians reason over multiple potential conditions through iterative questioning to resolve uncertainty. This process requires considering differential diagnoses and actively excluding emergencies that demand immediate intervention. Yet, the ability of medical LLMs to generate informative follow-up questions and thus reason over differential diagnoses remains underexplored. Here, we introduce MedClarify, an AI agent for information-seeking that can generate follow-up questions for iterative reasoning to support diagnostic decision-making. Specifically, MedClarify computes a list of candidate diagnoses analogous to a differential diagnosis, and then proactively generates follow-up questions aimed at reducing diagnostic uncertainty. By selecting the question with the highest expected information gain, MedClarify enables targeted, uncertainty-aware reasoning to improve diagnostic performance. In our experiments, we first demonstrate the limitations of current LLMs in medical reasoning, which often yield multiple, similarly likely diagnoses, especially when patient cases are incomplete or relevant information for diagnosis is missing. We then show that our information-theoretic reasoning approach can generate effective follow-up questioning and thereby reduces diagnostic errors by ~27 percentage points (p.p.) compared to a standard single-shot LLM baseline. Altogether, MedClarify offers a path to improve medical LLMs through agentic information-seeking and to thus promote effective dialogues with medical LLMs that reflect the iterative and uncertain nature of real-world clinical reasoning.
The Web is evolving from a medium that humans browse to an environment where software agents act on behalf of users. Advances in large language models (LLMs) make natural language a practical interface for goal-directed tasks, yet most current web agents operate on low-level primitives such as clicks and keystrokes. These operations are brittle, inefficient, and difficult to verify. Complementing content-oriented efforts such as NLWeb's semantic layer for retrieval, we argue that the agentic web also requires a semantic layer for web actions. We propose \textbf{Web Verbs}, a web-scale set of typed, semantically documented functions that expose site capabilities through a uniform interface, whether implemented through APIs or robust client-side workflows. These verbs serve as stable and composable units that agents can discover, select, and synthesize into concise programs. This abstraction unifies API-based and browser-based paradigms, enabling LLMs to synthesize reliable and auditable workflows with explicit control and data flow. Verbs can carry preconditions, postconditions, policy tags, and logging support, which improves \textbf{reliability} by providing stable interfaces, \textbf{efficiency} by reducing dozens of steps into a few function calls, and \textbf{verifiability} through typed contracts and checkable traces. We present our vision, a proof-of-concept implementation, and representative case studies that demonstrate concise and robust execution compared to existing agents. Finally, we outline a roadmap for standardization to make verbs deployable and trustworthy at web scale.
High-quality exploratory data analysis (EDA) is essential in the data science pipeline, but remains highly dependent on analysts' expertise and effort. While recent LLM-based approaches partially reduce this burden, they struggle to generate effective analysis plans and appropriate insights and visualizations when user intent is abstract. Meanwhile, a vast collection of analysis notebooks produced across platforms and organizations contains rich analytical knowledge that can potentially guide automated EDA. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) provides a natural way to leverage such corpora, but general methods often treat notebooks as static documents and fail to fully exploit their potential knowledge for automating EDA. To address these limitations, we propose NotebookRAG, a method that takes user intent, datasets, and existing notebooks as input to retrieve, enhance, and reuse relevant notebook content for automated EDA generation. For retrieval, we transform code cells into context-enriched executable components, which improve retrieval quality and enable rerun with new data to generate updated visualizations and reliable insights. For generation, an agent leverages enhanced retrieval content to construct effective EDA plans, derive insights, and produce appropriate visualizations. Evidence from a user study with 24 participants confirms the superiority of our method in producing high-quality and intent-aligned EDA notebooks.
The threat of algorithmic collusion, and whether it merits regulatory intervention, remains debated, as existing evaluations of its emergence often rely on long learning horizons, assumptions about counterparty rationality in adopting collusive strategies, and symmetry in hyperparameters and economic settings among players. To study collusion risk, we introduce a meta-game design for analyzing algorithmic behavior under test-time constraints. We model agents as possessing pretrained policies with distinct strategic characteristics (e.g., competitive, naively cooperative, robustly collusive), and formulate the problem as selecting a meta-strategy that combines a pretrained, initial policy with an in-game adaptation rule. We seek to examine whether collusion can emerge under rational choices and how agents co-adapt toward cooperation or competition. To this end, we sample normal-form empirical games over meta-strategy profiles, % across random initial game states, compute relevant game statistics (e.g., payoffs against individuals and regret against an equilibrium mixture of opponents), and construct empirical best-response graphs to uncover strategic relationships. We evaluate both reinforcement-learning and LLM-based strategies in repeated pricing games under symmetric and asymmetric cost settings, and present findings on the feasibility of algorithmic collusion and the effectiveness of pricing strategies in practical ``test-time'' environments. The source code and the full paper with appendix are available at: https://github.com/chailab-rutgers/CollusionMetagame.
This paper presents SimulatorCoder, an agent powered by large language models (LLMs), designed to generate and optimize deep neural network (DNN) accelerator simulators based on natural language descriptions. By integrating domain-specific prompt engineering including In-Context Learning (ICL), Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning, and a multi-round feedback-verification flow, SimulatorCoder systematically transforms high-level functional requirements into efficient, executable, and architecture-aligned simulator code. Experiments based on the customized SCALE-Sim benchmark demonstrate that structured prompting and feedback mechanisms substantially improve both code generation accuracy and simulator performance. The resulting simulators not only maintain cycle-level fidelity with less than 1% error compared to manually implemented counterparts, but also consistently achieve lower simulation runtimes, highlighting the effectiveness of LLM-based methods in accelerating simulator development. Our code is available at https://github.com/xiayuhuan/SimulatorCoder.
As Large Language Models (LLMs) transition from standalone chat interfaces to foundational reasoning layers in multi-agent systems and recursive evaluation loops (LLM-as-a-judge), the detection of durable, provider-level behavioral signatures becomes a critical requirement for safety and governance. Traditional benchmarks measure transient task accuracy but fail to capture stable, latent response policies -- the ``prevailing mindsets'' embedded during training and alignment that outlive individual model versions. This paper introduces a novel auditing framework that utilizes psychometric measurement theory -- specifically latent trait estimation under ordinal uncertainty -- to quantify these tendencies without relying on ground-truth labels. Utilizing forced-choice ordinal vignettes masked by semantically orthogonal decoys and governed by cryptographic permutation-invariance, the research audits nine leading models across dimensions including Optimization Bias, Sycophancy, and Status-Quo Legitimization. Using Mixed Linear Models (MixedLM) and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) analysis, the research identifies that while item-level framing drives high variance, a persistent ``lab signal'' accounts for significant behavioral clustering. These findings demonstrate that in ``locked-in'' provider ecosystems, latent biases are not merely static errors but compounding variables that risk creating recursive ideological echo chambers in multi-layered AI architectures.
Large language model(LLM)-driven multi-agent systems(MAS) coordinate specialized agents through predefined interaction topologies and have shown promise for complex tasks such as competition-level code generation. Recent studies demonstrate that carefully designed multi-agent workflows and communication graphs can significantly improve code generation performance by leveraging collaborative reasoning. However, existing methods neither adapt topology density to task difficulty nor iteratively refine the topology within an instance using execution feedback, which leads to redundant communication and performance bottlenecks. To address these issues, we propose AgentConductor: a reinforcement learning-optimized MAS with an LLM-based orchestrator agent as its core, which enables end-to-end feedback-driven dynamic generation of interaction topologies. For each query, AgentConductor infers agent roles and task difficulty, then constructs a task-adapted, density-aware layered directed acyclic graph (DAG) topology, underpinned by two key innovations. First, we design a novel topological density function that captures communication-aware mathematical characterizations of multi-agent interactions. Second, we adopt difficulty interval partitioning to avoid excessive pruning for precise topological density upper bound measurement per difficulty level and finer-grained control. Empirically, across three competition-level and two foundational code datasets, AgentConductor achieves state-of-the-art accuracy, outperforming the strongest baseline by up to 14.6% in pass@1 accuracy, 13% in density reduction, and 68% in token cost reduction.
Despite recent breakthroughs, audio foundation models struggle in processing complex multi-source acoustic scenes. We refer to this challenging domain as audio stories, which can have multiple speakers and background/foreground sound effects. Compared to traditional audio processing tasks, audio stories introduce new layers of semantic, temporal, and physical complexity. To address this challenge, we propose AudioChat, a framework for developing audio foundation models that can generate, edit, and understand audio stories. AudioChat introduces a new paradigm in which LLM-based toolcalling agents simulate interactions between users and the system, and these simulated dialogues are used as training data. We also introduce a novel Audio Transfusion Forcing objective to train the AudioChat model, allowing it to simultaneously decompose high-level instructions via structured chain-of-thought reasoning and perform interactive multi-turn audio understanding/generation. To evaluate generation and editing performance, we develop three new metrics that directly measure task performance instead of relying upon distribution-based scoring. We highly encourage readers to visit our demo to better understand the capabilities of AudioChat: https://wanchichen.github.io/audiochat/.
As 6G wireless systems evolve, growing functional complexity and diverse service demands are driving a shift from rule-based control to intent-driven autonomous intelligence. User requirements are no longer captured by a single metric (e.g., throughput or reliability), but by multi-dimensional objectives such as latency sensitivity, energy preference, computational constraints, and service-level requirements. These objectives may also change over time due to environmental dynamics and user-network interactions. Therefore, accurate understanding of both the communication environment and user intent is critical for autonomous and sustainably evolving 6G communications. Large language models (LLMs), with strong contextual understanding and cross-modal reasoning, provide a promising foundation for intent-aware network agents. Compared with rule-driven or centrally optimized designs, LLM-based agents can integrate heterogeneous information and translate natural-language intents into executable control and configuration decisions. Focusing on a closed-loop pipeline of intent perception, autonomous decision making, and network execution, this paper investigates agentic AI for the 6G physical layer and its realization pathways. We review representative physical-layer tasks and their limitations in supporting intent awareness and autonomy, identify application scenarios where agentic AI is advantageous, and discuss key challenges and enabling technologies in multimodal perception, cross-layer decision making, and sustainable optimization. Finally, we present a case study of an intent-driven link decision agent, termed AgenCom, which adaptively constructs communication links under diverse user preferences and channel conditions.