Reasoning-augmented vision language models (VLMs) generate explicit chains of thought that promise greater capability and transparency but also introduce new failure modes: models may reach correct answers via visually unfaithful intermediate steps, or reason faithfully yet fail on the final prediction. Standard evaluations that only measure final-answer accuracy cannot distinguish these behaviors.We introduce the visual faithfulness of reasoning chains as a distinct evaluation dimension, focusing on whether the perception steps of a reasoning chain are grounded in the image. We propose a training- and reference-free framework that decomposes chains into perception versus reasoning steps and uses off-the-shelf VLM judges for step-level faithfulness, additionally verifying this approach through a human meta-evaluation. Building on this metric, we present a lightweight self-reflection procedure that detects and locally regenerates unfaithful perception steps without any training. Across multiple reasoning-trained VLMs and perception-heavy benchmarks, our method reduces Unfaithful Perception Rate while preserving final-answer accuracy, improving the reliability of multimodal reasoning.

This paper introduces a novel framework for simulating and analyzing how uncooperative behaviors can destabilize or collapse LLM-based multi-agent systems. Our framework includes two key components: (1) a game theory-based taxonomy of uncooperative agent behaviors, addressing a notable gap in the existing literature; and (2) a structured, multi-stage simulation pipeline that dynamically generates and refines uncooperative behaviors as agents’ states evolve. We evaluate the framework via a collaborative resource management setting, measuring system stability using metrics such as survival time and resource overuse rate. Empirically, our framework achieves ~96.7% accuracy in generating realistic uncooperative behaviors, validated by human evaluations. Our results reveal a striking contrast: cooperative agents maintain perfect system stability (100% survival over 12 rounds with 0% resource overuse), while any uncooperative behavior can trigger rapid system collapse within 1–7 rounds. We also evaluate LLM-based defense methods, finding they detect some uncooperative behaviors, but some behaviors remain largely undetectable. These gaps highlight how uncooperative agents degrade collective outcomes and underscore the need for more resilient multi-agent systems.

Response generation is one of the critical components in task-oriented dialog systems. Existing studies have shown that large pre-trained language models can be adapted to this task. The typical paradigm of adapting such extremely large language models would be by fine-tuning on the downstream tasks which is not only time-consuming but also involves significant resources and access to fine-tuning data. Prompting (Schick and Schütze, 2020) has been an alternative to fine-tuning in many NLP tasks. In our work, we explore the idea of using prompting for response generation in task-oriented dialog systems. Specifically, we propose an approach that performs contextual dynamic prompting where the prompts are learnt from dialog contexts. We aim to distill useful prompting signals from the dialog context. On experiments with MultiWOZ 2.2 dataset (Zang et al., 2020), we show that contextual dynamic prompts improve response generation in terms of combined score (Mehri et al., 2019) by 3 absolute points, and an additional 17 points when dialog states are incorporated. Furthermore, we carried out human annotation on these conversations and found that agents which incorporate context are preferred over agents with vanilla prefix-tuning.

Social media users often make explicit predictions about upcoming events. Such statements vary in the degree of certainty the author expresses toward the outcome: “Leonardo DiCaprio will win Best Actor” vs. “Leonardo DiCaprio may win” or “No way Leonardo wins!”. Can popular beliefs on social media predict who will win? To answer this question, we build a corpus of tweets annotated for veridicality on which we train a log-linear classifier that detects positive veridicality with high precision. We then forecast uncertain outcomes using the wisdom of crowds, by aggregating users’ explicit predictions. Our method for forecasting winners is fully automated, relying only on a set of contenders as input. It requires no training data of past outcomes and outperforms sentiment and tweet volume baselines on a broad range of contest prediction tasks. We further demonstrate how our approach can be used to measure the reliability of individual accounts’ predictions and retrospectively identify surprise outcomes.