Large Language Models (LLMs) are powerful text generators, yet they can produce toxic or harmful content even when given seemingly harmless prompts. This presents a serious safety challenge and can cause real-world harm. Toxicity is often subtle and context-dependent, making it difficult to detect at the token level or through coarse sentence-level signals. Moreover, efforts to mitigate toxicity often face a trade-off between safety and the coherence, or fluency, of the generated text. In this work, we present a targeted subspace intervention strategy based on gradient signals for identifying and suppressing hidden toxic patterns from underlying model representations, while preserving the overall ability to generate safe, fluent content. On the RealToxicityPrompts, our method achieves strong mitigation performance compared to existing baselines while imposing minimal impact on inference complexity. Across LLMs, our approach reduces the toxicity of state-of-the-art detoxification systems by 8-20%, while maintaining comparable fluency. We further validate cross-benchmark generality on ToxiGen, where the same gains hold under adversarial, implicitly toxic prompts. Through extensive quantitative and qualitative analyses, we show that our approach achieves effective toxicity reduction without impairing generative performance, consistently outperforming existing baselines.

Conversational language models are increasingly deployed as central knowledge repositories and "conversational operating systems" in enterprise environments, where they must comply with role-based access control (RBAC) and organizational hierarchies. However, evaluating models on natural language permission compliance is difficult due to the highly proprietary nature of real-world corporate policies, and existing benchmarks do not capture the semantic nuance of overlapping or conflicting rules within free-text queries. To address this gap, we introduce **OrgAccess**, a benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs on their capacity to adhere to complex organizational hierarchies under natural language constraints. Grounded in NIST cybersecurity frameworks and validated via a multi-round expert Delphi process, OrgAccess defines 40 standard permission types across three difficulty tiers (70,000 total instances), simulating scenarios with up to five concurrent, potentially conflicting permissions. Through extensive evaluations of 16 frontier and open-source models, we systematically assess their classification accuracy and diagnostic failure modes on permission-aware query routing. Our findings reveal a pronounced performance decline: as rule complexity increases, even flagship models fail to resolve combinatorial constraint interactions, frequently yielding over-conservative "False Partial" predictions due to safety-tuning hedging. Specifically, the strongest evaluated model achieves an F₁-score of only 0.27 on our hardest split. This demonstrates that current instruction-following and safety alignment paradigms do not inherently translate to robust, multi-constraint rule compliance. More broadly, OrgAccess establishes a formal, reproducible testing framework to diagnose these constraint-adherence deficits and support the systematic integration of conversational agents into highly regulated, multi-user collaborative environments. The dataset is available on the anonymous project page.

Large language models (LLMs) commonly risk copyright infringement by reproducing protected content verbatim or with insufficient transformative modifications, posing significant ethical, legal, and practical concerns. Current inference-time safeguards predominantly rely on restrictive refusal-based filters, often compromising the practical utility of these models. To address this, we collaborated closely with intellectual property experts to develop LAW-LM (Legally Aware Language Model), a legally-grounded framework explicitly designed to align LLM outputs with fair-use doctrine. Central to our method is FairUseDB, a carefully constructed dataset containing 18,000 expert-validated examples covering nine realistic infringement scenarios. Leveraging this dataset, we apply Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) to fine-tune open-source LLMs, encouraging them to produce legally compliant and practically useful alternatives rather than resorting to blunt refusal. Recognizing the shortcomings of traditional evaluation metrics, we propose new measures: Weighted Penalty Utility and Compliance Aware Harmonic Mean (CAH) to balance infringement risk against response utility. Extensive quantitative experiments coupled with expert evaluations confirm that LAW-LM substantially reduces problematic outputs compared to state-of-the-art approaches, while preserving real-world usability.

Data synthesis has become a crucial research area in large language models (LLMs), especially for generating high-quality instruction fine-tuning data to enhance downstream performance. In code generation, a key application of LLMs, manual annotation of code instruction data is costly. Recent methods, such as Code Evol-Instruct and OSS-Instruct, leverage LLMs to synthesize large-scale code instruction data, significantly improving LLM coding capabilities. However, these approaches face limitations due to unidirectional synthesis and randomness-driven generation, which restrict data quality and diversity. To overcome these challenges, we introduce Tree-of-Evolution (ToE), a novel framework that models code instruction synthesis process with a tree structure, exploring multiple evolutionary paths to alleviate the constraints of unidirectional generation. Additionally, we propose optimization-driven evolution, which refines each generation step based on the quality of the previous iteration. Experimental results across five widely-used coding benchmarks—HumanEval, MBPP, EvalPlus, LiveCodeBench, and BigCodeBench—demonstrate that base models fine-tuned on just 75k data synthesized by our method achieve comparable or superior performance to the state-of-the-art open-weight Code LLM, Qwen2.5-Coder-Instruct, which was fine-tuned on millions of samples.

Identifying the worries of individuals and societies plays a crucial role in providing social support and enhancing policy decision-making. Due to the popularity of social media platforms such as Twitter, users share worries about personal issues (e.g., health, finances, relationships) and broader issues (e.g., changes in society, environmental concerns, terrorism) freely. In this paper, we explore and evaluate a wide range of machine learning models to predict worry on Twitter. While this task has been closely associated with emotion prediction, we argue and show that identifying worry needs to be addressed as a separate task given the unique challenges associated with it. We conduct a user study to provide evidence that social media posts express two basic kinds of worry – normative and pathological – as stated in psychology literature. In addition, we show that existing emotion detection techniques underperform, especially while capturing normative worry. Finally, we discuss the current limitations of our approach and propose future applications of the worry identification system.