Current aligned language models exhibit a dual failure mode we term the Evasive Servant: they sycophantically validate flawed user beliefs while deflecting responsibility with boilerplate disclaimers. We propose the Dignified Peer framework, which targets servility through anti-sycophancy and trustworthiness, and evasiveness through empathy and creativity. Operationalizing this framework requires addressing three concrete gaps: lack of fine-grained per-dimension supervision, objective imbalance during multi-objective optimization, and confound-prone evaluation. We introduce the PersonaKnob dataset, which encodes a compositional partial-order structure of multi-persona preferences, and pair it with Lag-DPO, a tolerance-constrained Lagrangian DPO algorithm that dynamically rebalances dimensions to mitigate collapse. For evaluation, we adapt the Many-Facet Rasch Model (MFRM) to disentangle model capability from judge severity, rubric difficulty, and question complexity, and we validate MFRM scores against human pairwise preferences (Spearman 𝜌 ∈ [0.67, 0.85] across dimensions). Across two open-source backbones, Lag-DPO improves all four dimensions in distribution and reduces sycophancy while preserving safe-refusal balance on out-of-distribution benchmarks; we report these results with explicit weight-sensitivity and uncertainty analyses rather than claim a fully resolved Dignified Peer.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in socially grounded applications, where success requires interpreting context, inferring others’ mental states, and reasoning about unreliable information. Yet existing benchmarks rarely evaluate these demands jointly in complex, evolving settings. We introduce SocialMaze, a benchmark that organizes six tasks across social deduction games, daily-life interactions, and digital community platforms along three descriptive design axes: deep reasoning, dynamic interaction, and information uncertainty. These axes characterize intended sources of task difficulty rather than latent, factor-analytic dimensions of model capability. Automated checks and human validation support data quality. Evaluations of twelve proprietary and open-weight LLMs show substantial variation in the use of evolving interaction histories; stronger chain-of-thought reasoners perform better on tasks requiring deeper inference, while uncertainty consistently degrades performance. Reasoning workflows help weaker short-chain-of-thought backbones but saturate on stronger reasoners. Finally, targeted fine-tuning on curated reasoning traces substantially improves structured social-reasoning tasks, whereas transfer to language-aggregation tasks remains statistically inconclusive. The project homepage is available at https://xzx34.github.io/socialmaze/.

Hard-gated safety checkers often over-refuse and misalign with a vendor’s model spec; prevailing taxonomies also neglect robustness and honesty, yielding safer-on-paper yet less useful systems. This work introduces Guardian-as-an-Advisor (GaaA), a soft-gating pipeline where a guardian predicts a binary risk label plus a concise explanation and prepends this advice to the original query for re-inference, keeping the base model operating under its original spec. To support training and evaluation, GuardSet is constructed—a 208k+ multi-domain dataset unifying harmful and harmless cases with targeted robustness and honesty slices. GuardAdvisor is trained via SFT followed by RL to enforce label–explanation consistency. GuardAdvisor attains competitive detection accuracy while enabling the advisory workflow; when used to augment inputs, responses improve over unaugmented prompts. A latency study shows advisor inference uses below 5% of base-model compute and adds only 2–10% end-to-end overhead under realistic harmful-input rates. Overall, GaaA steers models to comply with the model spec, maintaining safety while reducing over-refusal.

Logical reasoning is a core capability for large language models (LLMs), yet existing benchmarks that rely solely on final-answer accuracy fail to capture the quality of the reasoning process. To address this, we introduce FineLogic, a fine-grained evaluation framework that assesses logical reasoning across three dimensions: overall accuracy, stepwise soundness, and representation-level probing. Leveraging this framework, we conduct a comprehensive study on how different supervision formats in fine-tuning shape reasoning abilities. We fine-tune LLMs on four supervision styles—one in natural language and three symbolic variants—and find a key trade-off: natural language supervision excels at generalization to out-of-distribution and long-chain problems, whereas symbolic supervision is superior at instilling structurally sound, atomic reasoning steps. Furthermore, our probing analysis indicates that fine-tuning primarily refines the model’s step-by-step generation process, rather than improving its ability to converge on an answer early. Together, our framework and analysis provide a more rigorous lens for evaluating and improving logical reasoning in LLMs. The code is available at https://github.com/YujunZhou/FineLogic.

Due to the widespread use of LLMs and the rising critical ethical and safety concerns, LLM unlearning methods have been developed to remove harmful knowledge and undesirable capabilities. In this context, evaluations are mostly based on single-value metrics such as QA accuracy. However, these metrics often fail to capture the nuanced retention of harmful knowledge components, making it difficult to assess the true effectiveness of unlearning. To address this issue, we propose UNCD (UNlearning evaluation using Cognitive Diagnosis), a novel framework that leverages Cognitive Diagnosis Modeling for fine-grained evaluation of LLM unlearning. Our dedicated benchmark, UNCD-Cyber, provides a detailed assessment of the removal of dangerous capabilities. Moreover, we introduce UNCD-Agent, which refines unlearning by diagnosing knowledge remnants and generating targeted unlearning data. Extensive experiments across eight unlearning methods and two base models demonstrate that UNCD not only enhances evaluation but also effectively facilitates the removal of harmful LLM abilities.

Recent advancements in LLMs unlearning have shown remarkable success in removing unwanted data-model influences while preserving the model’s utility for legitimate knowledge. Despite these strides, sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) LLMs–a key subset of the LLM family–have remained unexplored in the context of unlearning. As MoE LLMs are celebrated for their exceptional performance, we ask:How can unlearning be performed effectively and efficiently on MoE LLMs? Our pilot study shows that the dynamic routing nature of MoE LLMs introduces unique challenges, leading to excessive forgetting, uncontrolled knowledge erasure and substantial utility drops when existing unlearning methods are applied. To address this, we propose a novel Selected-Expert Unlearning Framework (SEUF). Through expert attribution, unlearning is concentrated on the most actively engaged experts for the specified knowledge. Concurrently, an anchor loss is applied to the router to stabilize the active state of this targeted expert, ensuring focused and controlled unlearning. SEUF is compatible with various standard unlearning algorithms. Extensive experiments demonstrate that SEUF enhances both forget quality up to 5% and model utility by 35% on MoE LLMs across various benchmarks and LLM architectures (compared to standard unlearning algorithms), while only unlearning 0.06% of the model parameters.

Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable capabilities across diverse applications. However, concerns regarding their security, particularly the vulnerability to jailbreak attacks, persist. Drawing inspiration from adversarial training in deep learning and LLM agent learning processes, we introduce the In-Context Adversarial Game (ICAG) for defending against jailbreaks without the need for fine-tuning. ICAG leverages agent learning to conduct an adversarial game, aiming to dynamically extend knowledge to defend against jailbreaks. Unlike traditional methods that rely on static datasets, ICAG employs an iterative process to enhance both the defense and attack agents. This continuous improvement process strengthens defenses against newly generated jailbreak prompts. Our empirical studies affirm ICAG’s efficacy, where LLMs safeguarded by ICAG exhibit significantly reduced jailbreak success rates across various attack scenarios. Moreover, ICAG demonstrates remarkable transferability to other LLMs, indicating its potential as a versatile defense mechanism. The code is available at https://github.com/YujunZhou/In-Context-Adversarial-Game.