Maintaining the safety of large language models (LLMs) is crucial as they are increasingly deployed in real-world applications. Existing safety guardrails typically rely on single-pass classification or, more recently, distilled reasoning. Reasoning-based guardrails significantly outperform classification-only baselines, but they incur substantial query latency and token overhead that make them impractical for high-throughput deployment. To address this challenge, we propose CoLaGuard, a guardrail model that transfers multi-step safety reasoning into a continuous latent space through a stage-wise training curriculum, enabling direct hidden-state propagation at inference. Evaluated across ten prompt and response moderation settings from eight unique safety benchmarks on ten prompt- and response-moderation settings spanning eight safety benchmarks, CoLaGuard improves macro-F1 by 8.24 points over Llama Guard 3 and matches our explicit reasoning baseline, GuardReasoner, in macro-F1 while delivering a 12.9× speedup and 22.4× reduction in token usage. Our results suggest that latent reasoning offers a practical alternative to explicit rationale generation for deployable guardrails, jointly improving safety robustness and inference efficiency rather than treating them as competing objectives.

Large language models (LLMs) are trained through multi-stage pipelines over heterogeneous data sources, yet developers lack a principled way to pinpoint the specific data responsible for an observed behavior. This lack of observability reduces debugging to reactive patching and makes failures prone to recur under distribution shift or subsequent model updates. To address this limitation, we propose DebugLM, a framework that equips LLMs with built-in data provenance, enabling them to explicitly trace the origins of their behaviors to specific training data sources. Specifically, the model learns to associate its responses with unique provenance tags that indicate the responsible dataset, empowering developers to precisely identify where undesirable behaviors are learned. Building on this capability, DebugLM further supports targeted test-time remediation, enabling developers to selectively trigger targeted refusal for specified data sources without retraining or modifying model parameters. Experiments demonstrate that DebugLM provides accurate behavior tracing in multi-stage training pipelines and effective test-time remediation while preserving the general utility of the model.

Large Language Models (LLMs) for code generation (i.e., Code LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in AI-assisted software development and testing. However, recent studies have shown that these models are prone to generating vulnerable or even malicious code under adversarial settings. Existing red-teaming approaches rely on extensive human effort, limiting their scalability and practicality, and generally overlook the interactive nature of real-world AI-assisted programming, which often unfolds over multiple turns. To bridge these gaps, we present RedCoder, a red-teaming agent that engages victim models in multi-turn conversation to elicit vulnerable code. The pipeline to construct RedCoder begins with a multi-agent gaming process that simulates adversarial interactions, yielding a set of prototype conversations and an arsenal of reusable attack strategies. We then fine-tune an LLM on these prototype conversations to serve as the backbone of RedCoder. Once deployed, RedCoder autonomously engages Code LLMs in multi-turn conversations, dynamically retrieving relevant strategies from the arsenal to steer the dialogue toward vulnerability-inducing outputs. Experiments across multiple Code LLMs show that our approach outperforms prior single-turn and multi-turn red-team methods in inducing vulnerabilities in code generation, offering a scalable and effective tool for evaluating the security boundaries of modern code-generation systems.

The discovery of novel mechanical metamaterials, whose properties are dominated by their engineered structures rather than chemical composition, is a knowledge-intensive and resource-demanding process. To accelerate the design of novel metamaterials, we present MetaScientist, a human-in-the-loop system that integrates advanced AI capabilities with expert oversight with two primary phases: (1) hypothesis generation, where the system performs complex reasoning to generate novel and scientifically sound hypotheses, supported with domain-specific foundation models and inductive biases retrieved from existing literature; (2) 3D structure synthesis, where a 3D structure is synthesized with a novel 3D diffusion model based on the textual hypothesis and refined it with a LLM-based refinement model to achieve better structure properties. At each phase, domain experts iteratively validate the system outputs, and provide feedback and supplementary materials to ensure the alignment of the outputs with scientific principles and human preferences. Through extensive evaluation from human scientists, MetaScientist is able to deliver novel and valid mechanical metamaterial designs that have the potential to be highly impactful in the metamaterial field.

Ensuring the safety of large language models (LLMs) is critical as they are deployed in real-world applications. Existing guardrails rely on rule-based filtering or single-pass classification, limiting their ability to handle nuanced safety violations. To address this, we propose ThinkGuard, a critique-augmented guardrail model that distills knowledge from high-capacity LLMs by generating structured critiques alongside safety labels. Fine-tuned on critique-augmented data, the captured deliberative thinking ability drastically enhances the guardrail’s cautiousness and interpretability. Evaluated on multiple safety benchmarks, ThinkGuard achieves the highest average F1 and AUPRC, outperforming all baselines. Compared to LLaMA Guard 3, ThinkGuard improves accuracy by 16.1% and macro F1 by 27.0%. Moreover, it surpasses label-only fine-tuned models, confirming that structured critiques enhance both classification precision and nuanced safety reasoning while maintaining computational efficiency.

Recently, the topic-grounded dialogue (TGD) system has become increasingly popular as its powerful capability to actively guide users to accomplish specific tasks through topic-guided conversations. Most existing works utilize side information (e.g. topics or personas) in isolation to enhance the topic selection ability. However, due to disregarding the noise within these auxiliary information sources and their mutual influence, current models tend to predict user-uninteresting and contextually irrelevant topics. To build user-engaging and coherent dialogue agent, we propose a personalized topic selection model for topic-grounded dialogue, named PETD, which takes account of the interaction of side information to selectively aggregate such information for more accurately predicting subsequent topics. Specifically, we evaluate the correlation between global topics and personas and selectively incorporate the global topics aligned with user personas. Furthermore, we propose a contrastive learning based persona selector to filter relevant personas under the constraint of lacking pertinent persona annotations. Throughout the selection and generation, diverse relevant side information is considered. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our proposed method can generate engaging and diverse responses, outperforming state-of-the-art baselines across various evaluation metrics.

Most language models currently available are prone to self-contradiction during dialogues. To mitigate this issue, this study explores a novel contradictory dialogue processing task that aims to detect and modify contradictory statements in a conversation. This task is inspired by research on context faithfulness and dialogue comprehension, which have demonstrated that the detection and understanding of contradictions often necessitate detailed explanations. We develop a dataset comprising contradictory dialogues, in which one side of the conversation contradicts itself. Each dialogue is accompanied by an explanatory label that highlights the location and details of the contradiction. With this dataset, we present a Red Teaming framework for contradictory dialogue processing. The framework detects and attempts to explain the dialogue, then modifies the existing contradictory content using the explanation. Our experiments demonstrate that the framework improves the ability to detect contradictory dialogues and provides valid explanations. Additionally, it showcases distinct capabilities for modifying such dialogues. Our study highlights the importance of the logical inconsistency problem in conversational AI.