While LVLMs rapidly improve, long-video question answering still remains challenging: relevant evidence is sparse, and question-relevant context often fails to provide cues that discriminate the correct answer from plausible alternatives. Diagnostic analysis on a manually annotated subset of MMR-V shows that prior agentic systems substantially improve cue retrieval over direct VLM inference yet fail to achieve a corresponding gain in answer accuracy, indicating that the bottleneck lies in option-discriminative evidence rather than topical relevance alone. We propose PACE (Progressive Acquisition of Critical Evidence), a factor-guided framework for long-video evidence acquisition. PACE proceeds in two stages: it first indexes clip-level descriptions guided by question-derived factors without observing the candidate answers; it then uses the candidate answers to derive contrastive cues and queries the index for verification. On MMR-V with the open-source Qwen3-VL backbone, PACE achieves 42.6% accuracy, outperforming direct inference and prior agentic baselines including Deep Video Discovery (DVD). On the same diagnostic subset, PACE recovers 66.9% of the annotated cues, providing empirical evidence that its gains are associated with improved evidence recovery rather than stronger answer-side priors alone. Consistent gains over DVD on LVBench, Video-MME, EgoSchema, and LongVideoBench suggest that option-aware evidence acquisition transfers beyond MMR-V.

Multimodal Large Language Models have sparked significant interest due to their potential for social intelligence; however, their ability to perform sequential motivation reasoning remains insufficiently studied. Existing evaluations predominantly examine static text or isolated visual snapshots, which do not reflect the cumulative nature of real-world behavioral drivers. To address this gap, we introduce MulTivationBench, a benchmark designed to rigorously evaluate multimodal motivation reasoning within story-driven visual narratives. The benchmark builds upon established psychological frameworks—Maslow’s hierarchy and Reiss’s basic desires—and requires models to integrate accumulated multimodal context to infer evolving motivations. Results indicate that MulTivationBench presents a significant challenge: all tested models struggle to maintain consistent motivation reasoning across sequential contexts, revealing a critical disconnect between static recognition capabilities and the dynamic reasoning essential for human-like social understanding.

Session history is a common way of recording user interacting behaviors throughout a browsing activity with multiple products. For example, if an user clicks a product webpage and then leaves, it might because there are certain features that don’t satisfy the user, which serve as an important indicator of on-the-spot user preferences. However, all prior works fail to capture and model customer intention effectively because insufficient information exploitation and only apparent information like descriptions and titles are used. There is also a lack of data and corresponding benchmark for explicitly modeling intention in E-commerce product purchase sessions. To address these issues, we introduce the concept of an intention tree and propose a dataset curation pipeline. Together, we construct a sibling multimodal benchmark, SessionIntentBench, that evaluates L(V)LMs’ capability on understanding inter-session intention shift with four subtasks. With 1,952,177 intention entries, 1,132,145 session intention trajectories, and 13,003,664 available tasks mined using 10,905 sessions, we provide a scalable way to exploit the existing session data for customer intention understanding. We conduct human annotations to collect ground-truth label for a subset of collected data to form an evaluation gold set. Extensive experiments on the annotated data further confirm that current L(V)LMs fail to capture and utilize the intention across the complex session setting. Further analysis show injecting intention enhances LLMs’ performances.

Legal rules encompass not only codified statutes but also implicit adjudicatory principles derived from precedents that contain discretionary norms, social morality, and policy. While computational legal research has advanced in applying established rules to cases, inducing legal rules from judicial decisions remains understudied across jurisdictions. The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) offers unprecedented potential to automate the extraction of such latent principles, yet progress is stymied by the absence of formal task definitions and benchmarks. To address this gap, we formalize Legal Rule Induction (LRI) as the task of deriving concise, generalizable doctrinal rules from analogous precedents, distilling their shared preconditions, normative behaviors, and legal consequences. We further propose a reproducible pipeline for LRI dataset construction and, instantiating it on Chinese law as a representative jurisdiction, introduce the first LRI benchmark comprising 5,121 case sets (38,088 court cases) for model tuning and 216 expert-annotated gold test sets. Experimental results reveal that: 1) State-of-the-art LLMs struggle with over-generalization and hallucination; 2) Training on our dataset markedly enhances LLMs’ capabilities in capturing nuanced rule patterns across similar cases.

Long-horizon LLM agents typically choose from an environment-enumerated list of grounded actions (Planning with Actions, PwA). While this interface reduces formatting risk, scaling the list increases screening load and can bottleneck planning. We study Planning with Schemas (PwS), which replaces action enumeration with a small set of action templates that the agent instantiates into executable actions. We introduce a cognitive-bandwidth perspective of this trade-off and quantify screening vs. instantiation pressure using context length proxy and failure actions proxy. Across four interactive environments, we identify an inflection point: PwA excels at small interfaces but degrades as action lists grow, whereas PwS becomes increasingly competitive and often superior. A distractor-injection stress test reproduces the PwA drop by enlarging the action space alone, isolating screening load and highlighting schema instantiation as the key remaining bottleneck.

Real-world decision-making often involves uncertainty expressed in linguistic rather than numerical terms, and Prospect Theory (PT) provides a classic framework for modeling human behavior under such uncertainty. Although recent studies have developed frameworks to estimate PT parameters for Large Language Models (LLMs), few have examined whether PT itself adequately describes LLM decision-making behavior. To address these gaps, we develop a streamlined workflow grounded in a classic behavioral economics experimental paradigm. First, we estimate PT parameters and evaluate how well the resulting model captures LLM decision-making behavior. We then derive probability mappings for epistemic markers in the same context and inject them into prompts to examine the stability of PT parameters under linguistic uncertainty. Our findings suggest that PT does not consistently provide a reliable account of LLM decision-making across models, and that its application to LLMs is likely sensitive to epistemic uncertainty. The findings caution against the deployment of PT-based frameworks in real-world applications where epistemic ambiguity is prevalent, giving valuable insights in behaviour interpretation and future alignment direction for LLM decision-making.

Understanding user intentions is challenging for online platforms. Recent work on intention knowledge graphs addresses this but often lacks focus on connecting intentions, which is crucial for modeling user behavior and predicting future actions. This paper introduces a framework to automatically generate an intention knowledge graph, capturing connections between user intentions. Using the Amazon m2 dataset, we construct an intention graph with 351 million edges, demonstrating high plausibility and acceptance. Our model effectively predicts new session intentions and enhances product recommendations, outperforming previous state-of-the-art methods and showcasing the approach’s practical utility.

Large Language Model (LLM) routing is a pivotal technique for navigating a diverse landscape of LLMs, enabling the selection of the best-performing LLMs for specific user queries while balancing performance and cost. However, current routing approaches often face limitations in scalability when dealing with a large pool of specialized LLMs, or in their adaptability to extending model scope and evolving capability domains. To overcome those challenges, we propose InferenceDynamics, a flexible and scalable multi-dimensional routing framework by modeling the capability and knowledge of models. We operate it on our comprehensive dataset RouteMix, and demonstrate its effectiveness and generalizability in group-level routing using modern benchmarks including MMLU-Pro, GPQA, BigGenBench, and LiveBench, showcasing its ability to identify and leverage top-performing models for given tasks, leading to superior outcomes with cost efficiency. The broader adoption of InferenceDynamics can empower users to harness the full specialized potential of the LLM ecosystem, and our code will be made publicly available to encourage further research.

Literature review tables are essential for summarizing and comparing collections of scientific papers. In this paper, we study automatic generation of such tables from a pool of papers to satisfy a user’s information need. Building on recent work (Newman et al., 2024), we move beyond oracle settings by (i) simulating well-specified yet schema-agnostic user demands that avoid leaking gold column names or values, (ii) explicitly modeling retrieval noise via semantically related but out-of-scope distractor papers verified by human annotators, and (iii) introducing a lightweight, annotation-free, utilization-oriented evaluation that decomposes utility (schema coverage, unary cell fidelity, pairwise relational consistency) and measures paper selection via a two-way QA procedure (gold→system and system→gold) with recall, precision, and F1. To support reproducible evaluation, we introduce arXiv2Table, a benchmark of 1,957 tables referencing 7,158 papers, with human-verified distractors and rewritten, schema-agnostic user demands. We also develop an iterative, batch-based generation method that co-refines paper filtering and schema over multiple rounds. We validate the evaluation protocol with human audits and cross-evaluator checks. Extensive experiments show that our method consistently improves over strong baselines, while absolute scores remain modest, underscoring the task’s difficulty. Our data and code is available at https://github.com/JHU-CLSP/arXiv2Table.

The evolution of AI systems toward agentic operation and context-aware retrieval necessitates transforming unstructured text into structured formats like tables, knowledge graphs, and charts. While such conversions enable critical applications from summarization to data mining, current research lacks a comprehensive synthesis of methodologies, datasets, and metrics. This systematic review examines text-to-structure techniques and the encountered challenges, evaluates current datasets and assessment criteria, and outlines potential directions for future research. We also introduce a universal evaluation framework for structured outputs, establishing text-to-structure as foundational infrastructure for next-generation AI systems.

Conceptualization, a fundamental element of human cognition, plays a pivotal role in human generalizable reasoning.Generally speaking, it refers to the process of sequentially abstracting specific instances into higher-level concepts and then forming abstract knowledge that can be applied in unfamiliar or novel situations. This enhances models’ inferential capabilities and supports the effective transfer of knowledge across various domains.Despite its significance, the broad nature of this term has led to inconsistencies in understanding conceptualization across various works, as there exists different types of instances that can be abstracted in a wide variety of ways.There is also a lack of a systematic overview that comprehensively examines existing works on the definition, execution, and application of conceptualization to enhance reasoning tasks.In this paper, we address these gaps by first proposing a categorization of different types of conceptualizations into four levels based on the types of instances being conceptualized, in order to clarify the term and define the scope of our work.Then, we present the first comprehensive survey of over 150 papers, surveying various definitions, resources, methods, and downstream applications related to conceptualization into a unified taxonomy, with a focus on the entity and event levels.Furthermore, we shed light on potential future directions in this field and hope to garner more attention from the community.

A core part of scientific peer review involves providing expert critiques that directly assess the scientific claims a paper makes. While it is now possible to automatically generate plausible (if generic) reviews, ensuring that these reviews are sound and grounded in the papers’ claims remains challenging. To facilitate LLM benchmarking on these challenges, we introduce CLAIMCHECK, an annotated dataset of NeurIPS 2023 and 2024 submissions and reviews mined from OpenReview. CLAIMCHECK is richly annotated by ML experts for weakness statements in the reviews and the paper claims that they dispute, as well as fine-grained labels of the validity, objectivity, and type of the identified weaknesses. We benchmark several LLMs on three claim-centric tasks supported by CLAIMCHECK, requiring models to (1) associate weaknesses with the claims they dispute, (2) predict fine-grained labels for weaknesses and rewrite the weaknesses to enhance their specificity, and (3) verify a paper’s claims with grounded reasoning. Our experiments reveal that cutting-edge LLMs, while capable of predicting weakness labels in (2), continue to underperform relative to human experts on all other tasks.

Knowledge Editing (KE) aims to adjust a Large Language Model’s (LLM) internal representations and parameters to correct inaccuracies and improve output consistency without incurring the computational expense of re-training the entire model. However, editing commonsense knowledge still faces difficulties, including limited knowledge coverage in existing resources, the infeasibility of annotating labels for an overabundance of commonsense knowledge, and the strict knowledge formats of current editing methods. In this paper, we address these challenges by presenting ConceptEdit, a framework that integrates conceptualization and instantiation into the KE pipeline for LLMs to enhance their commonsense reasoning capabilities. ConceptEdit dynamically diagnoses implausible commonsense knowledge within an LLM using another verifier LLM and augments the source knowledge to be edited with conceptualization for stronger generalizability. Experimental results demonstrate that LLMs enhanced with ConceptEdit successfully generate commonsense knowledge with improved plausibility compared to other baselines and achieve stronger performance across multiple question answering benchmarks. Our data, code, and models are publicly available at https://github.com/HKUST-KnowComp/ConKE.

Inductive reasoning, a cornerstone of human cognition, enables generalization from limited data but hasn’t yet been fully achieved by large language models (LLMs). While modern LLMs excel at reasoning tasks, their ability to maintain stable and consistent rule abstraction under imperfect observations remains underexplored. To fill this gap, in this work, we introduce Robust Rule Induction, a task that evaluates LLMs’ capability in inferring rules from data that are fused with noisy examples. To address this task, we further propose Sample-steered Rule Refinement (SRR), a method enhancing reasoning stability via observation diversification and execution-guided feedback. Experiments across arithmetic, cryptography, and list functions reveal: (1) SRR outperforms other methods with minimal performance degradation under noise; (2) Despite slight accuracy variation, LLMs exhibit instability under noise (e.g., 0 accuracy change with only 70 consistent score);(3) Counterfactual task gaps highlight LLMs’ reliance on memorized patterns over genuine abstraction. Our findings challenge LLMs’ reasoning robustness, revealing susceptibility to hypothesis drift and pattern overfitting, while providing empirical evidence critical for developing human-like inductive systems.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are catalyzing a paradigm shift in scientific discovery, evolving from task-specific automation tools into increasingly autonomous agents and fundamentally redefining research processes and human-AI collaboration. This survey systematically charts this burgeoning field, placing a central focus on the changing roles and escalating capabilities of LLMs in science. Through the lens of the scientific method, we introduce a foundational three-level taxonomy—Tool, Analyst, and Scientist—to delineate their escalating autonomy and evolving responsibilities within the research lifecycle. We further identify pivotal challenges and future research trajectories such as robotic automation, self-improvement, and ethical governance. Overall, this survey provides a conceptual architecture and strategic foresight to navigate and shape the future of AI-driven scientific discovery, fostering both rapid innovation and responsible advancement.

Misleading visualizations, which manipulate chart representations to support specific claims, can distort perception and lead to incorrect conclusions. Despite decades of research, they remain a widespread issue, posing risks to public understanding and raising safety concerns for AI systems involved in data-driven communication. While recent multimodal large language models (MLLMs) show strong chart comprehension abilities, their capacity to detect and interpret misleading charts remains unexplored. We introduce Misleading ChartQA benchmark, a large-scale multimodal dataset designed to evaluate MLLMs on misleading chart reasoning. It contains 3,026 curated examples spanning 21 misleader types and 10 chart types, each with standardized chart code, CSV data, multiple-choice questions, and labeled explanations, validated through iterative MLLM checks and exhausted expert human review. We benchmark 24 state-of-the-art MLLMs, analyze their performance across misleader types and chart formats, and propose a novel region-aware reasoning pipeline that enhances model accuracy. Our work lays the foundation for developing MLLMs that are robust, trustworthy, and aligned with the demands of responsible visual communication.

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in high-stakes domains, accurately assessing their confidence is crucial. Humans typically express confidence through epistemic markers (e.g., “fairly confident”) instead of numerical values. However, it remains unclear whether LLMs consistently use these markers to reflect their intrinsic confidence due to the difficulty of quantifying uncertainty associated with various markers. To address this gap, we first define marker confidence as the observed accuracy when a model employs an epistemic marker. We evaluate its stability across multiple question-answering datasets in both in-distribution and out-of-distribution settings for open-source and proprietary LLMs. Our results show that while markers generalize well within the same distribution, their confidence is inconsistent in out-of-distribution scenarios. These findings raise significant concerns about the reliability of epistemic markers for confidence estimation, underscoring the need for improved alignment between marker based confidence and actual model uncertainty. Our code is available at https://github.com/HKUST-KnowComp/MarCon.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems show remarkable potential as question answering tools in the K-12 Education domain, where knowledge is typically queried within the restricted scope of authoritative textbooks. However, discrepancies between these textbooks and the parametric knowledge inherent in Large Language Models (LLMs) can undermine the effectiveness of RAG systems. To systematically investigate RAG system robustness against such knowledge discrepancies, we introduce KnowShiftQA. This novel question answering dataset simulates these discrepancies by applying deliberate hypothetical knowledge updates to both answers and source documents, reflecting how textbook knowledge can shift. KnowShiftQA comprises 3,005 questions across five subjects, designed with a comprehensive question typology focusing on context utilization and knowledge integration. Our extensive experiments on retrieval and question answering performance reveal that most RAG systems suffer a substantial performance drop when faced with these knowledge discrepancies. Furthermore, questions requiring the integration of contextual (textbook) knowledge with parametric (LLM) knowledge pose a significant challenge to current LLMs.

To enable Large Language Models (LLMs) to function as conscious agents with generalizable reasoning capabilities, it is crucial that they possess the ability to comprehend situational changes (transitions) in distribution triggered by environmental factors or actions from other agents. Despite its fundamental significance, this ability remains underexplored due to the complexity of modeling infinite possible changes in an event and their associated distributions, coupled with the lack of benchmark data with situational transitions. Addressing these gaps, we propose a novel formulation of reasoning with distributional changes as a three-step discriminative process, termed as MetAphysical ReaSoning. We then introduce the first-ever benchmark, MARS, comprising three tasks corresponding to each step. These tasks systematically assess LLMs’ capabilities in reasoning the plausibility of (i) changes in actions, (ii) states caused by changed actions, and (iii) situational transitions driven by changes in action. Extensive evaluations with 20 (L)LMs of varying sizes and methods indicate that all three tasks in this process pose significant challenges, even after fine-tuning. Further analyses reveal potential causes for the underperformance of LLMs and demonstrate that pre-training on large-scale conceptualization taxonomies can potentially enhance LMs’ metaphysical reasoning capabilities. Our data and models are publicly accessible at https://github.com/HKUST-KnowComp/MARS.

Goal-oriented script planning, or the ability to devise coherent sequences of actions toward specific goals, is commonly employed by humans to plan for typical activities. In e-commerce, customers increasingly seek LLM-based assistants to generate scripts and recommend products at each step, thereby facilitating convenient and efficient shopping experiences. However, this capability remains underexplored due to several challenges, including the inability of LLMs to simultaneously conduct script planning and product retrieval, difficulties in matching products caused by semantic discrepancies between planned actions and search queries, and a lack of methods and benchmark data for evaluation. In this paper, we step forward by formally defining the task of E-commerce Script Planning (EcomScript) as three sequential subtasks. We propose a novel framework that enables the scalable generation of product-enriched scripts by associating products with each step based on the semantic similarity between the actions and their purchase intentions. By applying our framework to real-world e-commerce data, we construct the very first large-scale EcomScript dataset, EcomScriptBench, which includes 605,229 scripts sourced from 2.4 million products. Human annotations are then conducted to provide gold labels for a sampled subset, forming an evaluation benchmark. Extensive experiments reveal that current (L)LMs face significant challenges with EcomScript tasks, even after fine-tuning, while injecting product purchase intentions improves their performance.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked substantial interest and debate concerning their potential emergence of Theory of Mind (ToM) ability. Theory of mind evaluations currently focuses on testing models using machine-generated data or game settings prone to shortcuts and spurious correlations, which lacks evaluation of machine ToM ability in real-world human interaction scenarios. This poses a pressing demand to develop new real-world scenario benchmarks. We introduce NegotiationToM, a new benchmark designed to stress-test machine ToM in real-world negotiation surrounding covered multi-dimensional mental states (i.e., desires, beliefs, and intentions). Our benchmark builds upon the Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI) agent modeling theory and conducts the necessary empirical experiments to evaluate large language models. Our findings demonstrate that NegotiationToM is challenging for state-of-the-art LLMs, as they consistently perform significantly worse than humans, even when employing the chain-of-thought (CoT) method.

Enhancing Language Models’ (LMs) ability to understand purchase intentions in E-commerce scenarios is crucial for their effective assistance in various downstream tasks. However, previous approaches that distill intentions from LMs often fail to generate meaningful and human-centric intentions applicable in real-world E-commerce contexts. This raises concerns about the true comprehension and utilization of purchase intentions by LMs. In this paper, we present IntentionQA, a double-task multiple-choice question answering benchmark to evaluate LMs’ comprehension of purchase intentions in E-commerce. Specifically, LMs are tasked to infer intentions based on purchased products and utilize them to predict additional purchases. IntentionQA consists of 4,360 carefully curated problems across three difficulty levels, constructed using an automated pipeline to ensure scalability on large E-commerce platforms. Human evaluations demonstrate the high quality and low false-negative rate of our benchmark. Extensive experiments across 19 language models show that they still struggle with certain scenarios, such as understanding products and intentions accurately, jointly reasoning with products and intentions, and more, in which they fall far behind human performances.

This paper aims to quantitatively evaluate the performance of ChatGPT, an interactive large language model, on inter-sentential relations such as temporal relations, causal relations, and discourse relations. Given ChatGPT’s promising performance across various tasks, we proceed to carry out thorough evaluations on the whole test sets of 11 datasets, including temporal and causal relations, PDTB2.0-based, and dialogue-based discourse relations. To ensure the reliability of our findings, we employ three tailored prompt templates for each task, including the zero-shot prompt template, zero-shot prompt engineering (PE) template, and in-context learning (ICL) prompt template, to establish the initial baseline scores for all popular sentence-pair relation classification tasks for the first time. Through our study, we discover that ChatGPT exhibits exceptional proficiency in detecting and reasoning about causal relations, albeit it may not possess the same level of expertise in identifying the temporal order between two events. While it is capable of identifying the majority of discourse relations with existing explicit discourse connectives, the implicit discourse relation remains a formidable challenge. Concurrently, ChatGPT demonstrates subpar performance in the dialogue discourse parsing task that requires structural understanding in a dialogue before being aware of the discourse relation.

In the information era, the vast proliferation of online content poses significant challenges, particularly concerning the trustworthiness of these digital statements, which can have profound societal implications. Although it is possible to manually annotate and verify the authenticity of such content, the sheer volume and rapid pace of information generation render this approach impractical, both in terms of time and cost. Therefore, it is imperative to develop automated systems capable of validating online claims, ensuring that users can use the wealth of information available on the Internet effectively and reliably. Using primarily ChatGPT and the Google search API, GProofT fact checking framework generates question-answer pairs to systematically extract and verify the facts within claims. Based on the outcomes of these QA pairs, claims are subsequently labeled as Supported, Conflicted Evidence/Cherry-Picking, or Refuted. Shown by extensive experiments, GProofT Retrieval generally performs effectively in fact-checking and makes a substantial contribution to the task. Our code is released on https://github.com/HKUST-KnowComp/GProofT.

The task of condensing large chunks of textual information into concise and structured tables has gained attention recently due to the emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) and their potential benefit for downstream tasks, such as text summarization and text mining. Previous approaches often generate tables that directly replicate information from the text, limiting their applicability in broader contexts, as text-to-table generation in real-life scenarios necessitates information extraction, reasoning, and integration. However, there is a lack of both datasets and methodologies towards this task. In this paper, we introduce LiveSum, a new benchmark dataset created for generating summary tables of competitions based on real-time commentary texts. We evaluate the performances of state-of-the-art LLMs on this task in both fine-tuning and zero-shot settings, and additionally propose a novel pipeline called T³(Text-Tuple-Table) to improve their performances. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that LLMs still struggle with this task even after fine-tuning, while our approach can offer substantial performance gains without explicit training. Further analyses demonstrate that our method exhibits strong generalization abilities, surpassing previous approaches on several other text-to-table datasets. Our codeand data can be found at https://github.com/HKUST-KnowComp/LiveSum.

Improving user experience and providing personalized search results in E-commerce platforms heavily rely on understanding purchase intention. However, existing methods for acquiring large-scale intentions bank on distilling large language models with human annotation for verification. Such an approach tends to generate product-centric intentions, overlook valuable visual information from product images, and incurs high costs for scalability. To address these issues, we introduce MIND, a multimodal framework that allows Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) to infer purchase intentions from multimodal product metadata and prioritize human-centric ones. Using Amazon Review data, we apply MIND and create a multimodal intention knowledge base, which contains 1,264,441 intentions derived from 126,142 co-buy shopping records across 107,215 products. Extensive human evaluations demonstrate the high plausibility and typicality of our obtained intentions and validate the effectiveness of our distillation framework and filtering mechanism. Further experiments reveal the positive downstream benefits that MIND brings to intention comprehension tasks and highlight the importance of multimodal generation and role-aware filtering. Additionally, MIND shows robustness to different prompts and superior generation quality compared to previous methods.

Privacy issues arise prominently during the inappropriate transmission of information between entities. Existing research primarily studies privacy by exploring various privacy attacks, defenses, and evaluations within narrowly predefined patterns, while neglecting that privacy is not an isolated, context-free concept limited to traditionally sensitive data (e.g., social security numbers), but intertwined with intricate social contexts that complicate the identification and analysis of potential privacy violations. The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) offers unprecedented opportunities for incorporating the nuanced scenarios outlined in privacy laws to tackle these complex privacy issues. However, the scarcity of open-source relevant case studies restricts the efficiency of LLMs in aligning with specific legal statutes. To address this challenge, we introduce a novel framework, GoldCoin, designed to efficiently ground LLMs in privacy laws for judicial assessing privacy violations. Our framework leverages the theory of contextual integrity as a bridge, creating numerous synthetic scenarios grounded in relevant privacy statutes (e.g., HIPAA), to assist LLMs in comprehending the complex contexts for identifying privacy risks in the real world. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that GoldCoin markedly enhances LLMs’ capabilities in recognizing privacy risks across real court cases, surpassing the baselines on different judicial tasks.

Understanding users’ intentions in e-commerce platforms requires commonsense knowledge. In this paper, we present FolkScope, an intention knowledge graph construction framework, to reveal the structure of humans’ minds about purchasing items. As commonsense knowledge is usually ineffable and not expressed explicitly, it is challenging to perform information extraction. Thus, we propose a new approach that leverages the generation power of large language models (LLMs) and human-in-the-loop annotation to semi-automatically construct the knowledge graph. LLMs first generate intention assertions via e-commerce specific prompts to explain shopping behaviors, where the intention can be an open reason or a predicate falling into one of 18 categories aligning with ConceptNet, e.g., IsA, MadeOf, UsedFor, etc. Then we annotate plausibility and typicality labels of sampled intentions as training data in order to populate human judgments to all automatic generations. Last, to structurize the assertions, we propose pattern mining and conceptualization to form more condensed and abstract knowledge. Extensive evaluations and study demonstrate that our constructed knowledge graph can well model e-commerce knowledge and have many potential applications.

Commonsense reasoning, aiming at endowing machines with a human-like ability to make situational presumptions, is extremely challenging to generalize. For someone who barely knows about “meditation,” while is knowledgeable about “singing,” he can still infer that “meditation makes people relaxed” from the existing knowledge that “singing makes people relaxed” by first conceptualizing “singing” as a “relaxing event” and then instantiating that event to “meditation.”This process, known as conceptual induction and deduction, is fundamental to commonsense reasoning while lacking both labeled data and methodologies to enhance commonsense modeling. To fill such a research gap, we propose CAT (Contextualized ConceptuAlization and InsTantiation),a semi-supervised learning framework that integrates event conceptualization and instantiation to conceptualize commonsense knowledge bases at scale. Extensive experiments show that our framework achieves state-of-the-art performances on two conceptualization tasks, and the acquired abstract commonsense knowledge can significantly improve commonsense inference modeling. Our code, data, and fine-tuned models are publicly available at [https://github.com/HKUST-KnowComp/CAT](https://github.com/HKUST-KnowComp/CAT).

Detecting commonsense causal relations (causation) between events has long been an essential yet challenging task. Given that events are complicated, an event may have different causes under various contexts. Thus, exploiting context plays an essential role in detecting causal relations. Meanwhile, previous works about commonsense causation only consider two events and ignore their context, simplifying the task formulation. This paper proposes a new task to detect commonsense causation between two events in an event sequence (i.e., context), called contextualized commonsense causal reasoning. We also design a zero-shot framework: COLA (Contextualized Commonsense Causality Reasoner) to solve the task from the causal inference perspective. This framework obtains rich incidental supervision from temporality and balances covariates from multiple timestamps to remove confounding effects. Our extensive experiments show that COLA can detect commonsense causality more accurately than baselines.