Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) introduce a new generation paradigm of explicitly reasoning before answering, leading to remarkable improvements in complex tasks. However, they pose great safety risks against harmful queries and adversarial attacks. While recent mainstream safety efforts on LRMs, supervised fine-tuning (SFT), improve safety performance, we find that SFT-aligned models struggle to generalize to unseen jailbreak prompts. After thorough investigation, we identify a safety aha moment that can activate safety reasoning and lead to a safe response. This aha moment typically appears in the ‘key sentence’ that follows models’ query understanding process and can indicate whether the model will proceed safely. Based on these insights, we propose SafeKey, including two complementary objectives to better activate the safety aha-moment in the key sentence: (1) a Dual-Path Safety Head to enhance the safety signal in the model’s internal representations before the key sentence, and (2) a Query-Mask Modeling objective to improve the models’ attention on its query understanding, which has important safety hints. Experiments across multiple safety benchmarks demonstrate that our methods significantly improve safety generalization to a wide range of jailbreak attacks and out-of-distribution harmful prompts, lowering the harmfulness rate by 9.6%, while maintaining general abilities. Our analysis reveals how SafeKey enhances safety by reshaping internal attention and improving the quality of hidden representations.

Reasoning abilities of LLMs have been a key focus in recent years. One challenging reasoning domain with interesting nuances is legal reasoning, which requires careful application of rules, and precedents while balancing deductive and analogical reasoning, and conflicts between rules. Although there have been a few works on using LLMs for legal reasoning, their focus has been on overall accuracy. In this paper, we dig deeper to do a step-by-step analysis and figure out where they commit errors. We use the college-level Multiple Choice Question-Answering (MCQA) task from the Civil Procedure dataset and propose a new error taxonomy derived from initial manual analysis of reasoning chains with respect to several LLMs, including two objective measures: soundness and correctness scores. We then develop an LLM-based automated evaluation framework to identify reasoning errors and evaluate the performance of LLMs. The computation of soundness and correctness on the dataset using the auto-evaluator framework reveals several interesting insights. Furthermore, we show that incorporating the error taxonomy as feedback in popular prompting techniques marginally increases LLM performance. Our work will also serve as an evaluation framework that can be used in detailed error analysis of reasoning chains for logic-intensive complex tasks.

Large language models (LLMs) have advanced the automation of data science workflows. Yet it remains unclear whether they can critically leverage external domain knowledge as human data scientists do in practice. To answer this question, we introduce AssistedDS (Assisted Data Science), a benchmark designed to systematically evaluate how LLMs handle domain knowledge in tabular prediction tasks. AssistedDS features both synthetic datasets with explicitly known generative mechanisms and real-world Kaggle competitions, each accompanied by curated bundles of helpful and adversarial documents. These documents provide domain-specific insights into data cleaning, feature engineering, and model selection. We assess state-of-the-art LLMs on their ability to discern and apply beneficial versus harmful domain knowledge, evaluating submission validity, information recall, and predictive performance. Our results demonstrate three key findings: (1) LLMs frequently exhibit an uncritical adoption of provided information, significantly impairing their predictive performance when adversarial content is introduced, (2) helpful guidance is often insufficient to counteract the negative influence of adversarial information, and (3) in Kaggle datasets, LLMs often make errors in handling time-series data, applying consistent feature engineering across different folds, and interpreting categorical variables correctly. These findings highlight a substantial gap in current models’ ability to critically evaluate and leverage expert knowledge, underscoring an essential research direction for developing more robust, knowledge-aware automated data science systems. Our data and code are publicly available [here](https://github.com/jeremyxianx/Assisted-DS).

Recent advances in reasoning and planning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) have enabled their potential as autonomous agents capable of tool use in dynamic environments. However, in multi-turn conversational environments like 𝜏‐bench, these agents often struggle with consistent reasoning, adherence to domain-specific policies, and extracting correct information over a long horizon of tool-calls and conversation. To capture and mitigate these failures, we conduct a comprehensive manual analysis of the common errors occurring in the conversation trajectories. We then experiment with reformulations of inputs to the tool-calling agent for improvement in agent decision making. Finally, we propose the Input-Reformulation Multi-Agent (IRMA) framework, which automatically reformulates user queries augmented with relevant domain rules and tool suggestions for the tool-calling agent to focus on. The results show that IRMA significantly outperforms ReAct, Function Calling, and Self-Reflection by 16.1%, 12.7%, and 19.1%, respectively, in overall pass^5 scores. These findings highlight the superior reliability and consistency of IRMA compared to other methods in dynamic environments.

This work aims to build a text embedder that can capture characteristics of texts specified by user instructions clarifying the similarity criterion. While previous methods improve general task awareness by injecting the instruction information into encoding, they fail to be sensitive to clearer criteria like “evaluate similarity based on emotion”. We instead propose a different viewpoint, which treats the instruction as a “question” about the input text and encodes the expected answers to obtain the representation accordingly. Intuitively, texts with the same (implicit) semantics would share similar answers following the instruction, thus leading to more similar representations. Specifically, we propose InBedder that instantiates this learning-to-answer idea by only fine-tuning language models via abstractive question answering tasks. Despite its simplicity, InBedder demonstrates significantly improved instruction-following capabilities according to our proposed instruction awareness tests and instruction robustness tests, when applied to language models with large language models (LLMs) (e.g., llama-2-7b) and smaller encoder-based LMs (e.g., roberta-large). Additionally, our qualitative analysis of clustering outcomes, achieved by applying diverse instructions to the same unlabeled corpus, demonstrates a high degree of interpretability in the clusters formed.

The applications of large language models (LLMs) have expanded well beyond the confines of text processing, signaling a new era where LLMs are envisioned as generalist agents capable of operating within complex environments. These environments are often highly expansive, making it impossible for the LLM to process them within its short-term memory. Motivated by recent research on extending the capabilities of LLMs with tools, we seek to investigate the intriguing potential of tools to augment LLMs in handling such complexity by introducing a novel class of tools, termed *middleware*, to aid in the proactive exploration within these massive environments. Such specialized tools can serve as a middleware layer shielding the LLM from environmental complexity. In two representative complex environments—knowledge bases (KBs) and databases—we demonstrate the significant potential of augmenting language agents with tools in complex environments. Notably, equipped with the middleware, GPT-4 achieves **2.8**X the performance of the best baseline in tasks requiring access to database content and **2.2**X in KB tasks. Our findings illuminate the path for advancing language agents in real-world applications.

We study open-world multi-label text classification under extremely weak supervision (XWS), where the user only provides a brief description for classification objectives without any labels or ground-truth label space. Similar single-label XWS settings have been explored recently, however, these methods cannot be easily adapted for multi-label. We observe that (1) most documents have a dominant class covering the majority of content and (2) long-tail labels would appear in some documents as a dominant class. Therefore, we first utilize the user description to prompt a large language model (LLM) for dominant keyphrases of a subset of raw documents, and then construct a (initial) label space via clustering. We further apply a zero-shot multi-label classifier to locate the documents with small top predicted scores, so we can revisit their dominant keyphrases for more long-tail labels. We iterate this process to discover a comprehensive label space and construct a multi-label classifier as a novel method, X-MLClass. X-MLClass exhibits a remarkable increase in ground-truth label space coverage on various datasets, for example, a 40% improvement on the AAPD dataset over topic modeling and keyword extraction methods. Moreover, X-MLClass achieves the best end-to-end multi-label classification accuracy.

Event linking connects event mentions in text with relevant nodes in a knowledge base (KB). Prior research in event linking has mainly borrowed methods from entity linking, overlooking the distinct features of events. Compared to the extensively explored entity linking task, events have more complex structures and can be more effectively distinguished by examining their associated arguments. Moreover, the information-rich nature of events leads to the scarcity of event KBs. This emphasizes the need for event linking models to identify and classify event mentions not in the KB as “out-of-KB,” an area that has received limited attention. In this work, we tackle these challenges by introducing an argument-aware approach. First, we improve event linking models by augmenting input text with tagged event argument information, facilitating the recognition of key information about event mentions. Subsequently, to help the model handle “out-of-KB” scenarios, we synthesize out-of-KB training examples from in-KB instances through controlled manipulation of event arguments. Our experiment across two test datasets showed significant enhancements in both in-KB and out-of-KB scenarios, with a notable 22% improvement in out-of-KB evaluations.

In this paper, we introduce a novel approach for enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) for constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs), by converting reasoning problems into classification tasks. Our method leverages the LLM’s ability to decide when to call a function from a set of logical-linguistic primitives, each of which can interact with a local “scratchpad” memory and logical inference engine. Invocation of these primitives in the correct order writes the constraints to the scratchpad memory and enables the logical engine to verifiably solve the problem. We additionally propose a formal framework for exploring the “linguistic” hardness of CSP reasoning-problems for LLMs. Our experimental results demonstrate that under our proposed method, tasks with significant computational hardness can be converted to a form that is easier for LLMs to solve and yields a 40% improvement over baselines. This opens up new avenues for future research into hybrid cognitive models that integrate symbolic and neural approaches.

Despite recent progress in text-to-SQL parsing, current semantic parsers are still not accurate enough for practical use. In this paper, we investigate how to build automatic text-to-SQL error correction models. Noticing that token-level edits are out of context and sometimes ambiguous, we propose building clause-level edit models instead. Besides, while most language models of code are not specifically pre-trained for SQL, they know common data structures and their operations in programming languages such as Python. Thus, we propose a novel representation for SQL queries and their edits that adheres more closely to the pre-training corpora of language models of code. Our error correction model improves the exact set match accuracy of different parsers by 2.4-6.5 and obtains up to 4.3 point absolute improvement over two strong baselines.