Reasoning distillation from powerful teacher models to smaller students faces the Gap Curse: as teachers grow more sophisticated, their complex distributions increasingly diverge from what students can approximate, causing performance degradation. Existing mitigation strategies either filter out challenging examples through data selection or introduce weaker intermediate assistant models, inherently compromising supervision coverage or quality. We propose Teacher Alignment, which directly adapts the teacher toward the student’s distribution without discarding data or degrading reasoning quality. However, naive alignment through standard knowledge distillation triggers catastrophic collapse of the teacher’s reasoning capabilities. To address this, we reformulate teacher alignment as reinforcement learning and introduce TeacherGRPO, built on Group Relative Policy Optimization with two key innovations: (i) Curriculum Selective Alignment applies dual token- and distribution-level curricula to focus rewards on high-signal reasoning gaps while filtering noise from trivial tokens and uncertain tail distributions, and (ii) Importance-Adaptive Length Regularization selectively penalizes verbose redundancy while preserving pedagogically critical reasoning steps. The aligned teacher then distills knowledge to students via standard pipelines. Extensive experiments show TeacherGRPO significantly outperforms baselines across diverse reasoning benchmarks and distillation methods. Our code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/TeacherGRPO-290F/README.md.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as transformative, powerful tools for processing and acting on unstructured financial data. However, existing surveys suffer from methodological fragmentation, evaluation inconsistency, and application disconnect. This hinders the transition of research from academia to real-life applications in financial institutions. To address these gaps, we (1) introduce a unified taxonomy organizing approaches by computational complexity, (2) propose a three-stage evaluation framework, and (3) examine LLM deployment approaches suited to specific operational contexts. Furthermore, we identify key challenges including validation frameworks, data contamination, and operational compliance that need to be further investigated.

Graph topology is a fundamental determinant of memory leakage in multi-agent LLM systems, yet its effects remain poorly quantified. We introduce MAMA (Multi-Agent Memory Attack), a controlled evaluation framework for comparing topology-conditioned memory leakage in multi-agent LLM systems. MAMA operates on synthetic documents containing labeled Personally Identifiable Information (PII) entities, from which we generate sanitized task instructions. We execute a two-phase protocol: Engram (seeding private information into a target agent’s memory) and Resonance (multi-round interaction where an attacker attempts extraction). Over 10 rounds, we measure leakage using a two-stage recovery criterion that combines exact-match extraction with LLM-based inference over the attacker’s final output. We evaluate six canonical topologies (complete, circle, chain, tree, star, star-ring) across n∈{4,5,6}, attacker–target placements, and base models. Results are consistent: denser connectivity, shorter attacker–target distance, and higher target centrality increase leakage; most leakage occurs in early rounds and then plateaus; model choice shifts absolute rates but preserves broad structural trends; spatiotemporal/location attributes leak more readily than identity credentials or regulated identifiers. We distill practical guidance for system design: favor sparse or hierarchical connectivity, maximize attacker–target separation, and restrict hub/shortcut pathways via topology-aware access control. Our code is available at https://github.com/llll121/mama-eval.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed through hosted APIs, making model extraction a practical threat to model ownership and service security. Individual extraction queries often resemble benign requests, while existing evaluations often focus on single-query anomaly scoring or pure benign-versus-attacker user settings. We formulate model extraction monitoring as benign-calibrated traffic-window distribution testing: embed incoming queries into a semantic space and test whether their aggregate distribution deviates from historical benign traffic. We instantiate this formulation with maximum mean discrepancy (MMD), using only benign-vs-benign comparisons to set the decision threshold. We evaluate on fourteen attacker-normal query pairs from four extraction scenarios and compare with adapted PRADA, SEAT, CAP, DATE, marginal Mahalanobis, and pseudo-class energy baselines. Across three random seeds, MMD achieves 0.3% benign FPR, 100.0% pure-attacker TPR, 90.5% average TPR over attacker fractions, and 95.1% balanced accuracy. These results show that benign-calibrated distribution testing is a strong empirical baseline for model extraction detection in both user-level and mixed multi-user LLM API traffic.

We study fact-level repair for cross-modal factual generation, where a fluent textual output may contain specific facts that are not supported by the input. Existing inference-time repair methods often generate feedback by jointly conditioning on the input and the current output. This design can let hallucinated claims in the output bias the model’s interpretation of the input, and its free-form feedback is difficult to rank or schedule at the fact level. We present TIGER, an inference-time framework that redesigns feedback for localized repair. TIGER independently extracts an observation graph from the input and a claim graph from the current output, then assigns each claim a graph-conditioned risk score based on support and conflict. The model repairs selected high-risk claims while keeping the backbone frozen. We provide a convergence analysis showing that the expected total risk decreases geometrically to an explicit asymptotic bound under mild assumptions. Experiments on four text-output cross-modal paths, including image-to-text, image+text-to-text, audio-to-text, and video-to-text, show that TIGER reduces unsupported content while preserving task quality. The gains hold across multiple backbones, and a CrisisFACTS case study suggests that the same repair mechanism can improve grounding in noisy multi-source settings.

Rubric-based text evaluation increasingly relies on large language models (LLMs) as scalable judges, yet frozen black-box models can interpret the same criteria inconsistently, produce score attributions that are difficult to audit, and map judgments poorly onto human scoring scales. We define this challenge as criteria transfer: translating human rubric intent into a stable, auditable inference-time scoring protocol. We introduce RULERS, which locks a task-level rubric specification, executes it through structured, evidence-grounded judgments, and calibrates the resulting signals to human score boundaries. Across four rubric-governed benchmarks and multiple frozen backbone models, RULERS achieves stronger agreement with human scores in most evaluated settings, while better matching empirical score distributions and remaining more stable under semantically equivalent rubric perturbations. Calibration controls and component ablations show that these gains cannot be attributed to post-hoc alignment alone, but depend on the combination of fixed criteria, traceable evidence, and calibrated score interpretation. These findings suggest that reliable LLM judging requires faithfully operationalizing human evaluation standards rather than relying on prompt-level scoring alone. Our code is available at https://github.com/LabRAI/Rulers.git.

Large language models deployed as commercial APIs are vulnerable to model extraction attacks, while existing defenses either act too late or degrade utility for legitimate users. We propose Knowledge Trap, a defense that redirects extraction attacks toward low-transferability knowledge through a Honeypot Knowledge Graph (HKG) and breadcrumb-guided exploration. Instead of blocking queries or perturbing outputs, Knowledge Trap consumes the attacker’s limited query budget on knowledge with negligible downstream utility while preserving benign-user performance. Experiments in medical and financial domains show that Knowledge Trap reduces surrogate Agreement by 6.2% on average without degrading legitimate-user accuracy, outperforming existing defenses that impose measurable user impact. These results suggest that defending knowledge-space traversal is a practical direction for mitigating LLM extraction attacks.

Large language models (LLMs) hold promise for advancing patient–provider communication, yet a persistent gap remains between benchmark-driven model development and the realities of clinical practice. This work presents a systematic, clinically grounded review of text-based medical datasets for LLM training and evaluation. We propose a scenario-based taxonomy derived from established clinical frameworks to map major knowledge-based and conversation-based corpora against core communication scenarios. We further synthesize core communication skills from gold-standard clinical assessment instruments and meta-analyze state-of-the-art medical LLM performance, highlighting how dataset properties, fine-tuning strategies, and evaluation metrics shape both knowledge acquisition and communicative competence. To empirically validate these findings, we conducted controlled fine-tuning experiments across representative LLMs, demonstrating that data composition and scenario alignment critically affect model performance. Our findings highlight the urgent need for scenario-rich datasets and standardized, human-centered evaluation protocol to advance clinically relevant medical LLMs.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across various domains, including their emerging role in mitigating threats to human life, infrastructure, and the environment during natural disasters. Despite increasing research on disaster-focused LLMs, there remains a lack of systematic reviews and in-depth analyses of their applications in natural disaster management. To address this gap, this paper presents a comprehensive survey of LLMs in disaster response, introducing a taxonomy that categorizes existing works based on disaster phases and application scenarios. By compiling public datasets and identifying key challenges and opportunities, this study aims to provide valuable insights for the research community and practitioners in developing advanced LLM-driven solutions to enhance resilience against natural disasters.

Advances in large language models (LLMs) significantly enhance reasoning capabilities but their deployment is restricted in resource-constrained scenarios. Knowledge distillation addresses this by transferring knowledge from powerful teacher models to compact and transparent students.However, effectively capturing the teacher’s comprehensive reasoning is challenging due to conventional token-level supervision’s limited scope. Using multiple reasoning paths per query alleviates this problem, but treating each path identically is suboptimal as paths vary widely in quality and suitability across tasks and models.We propose Quality-filtered Routing with Cooperative Distillation(QR-Distill), combining path quality filtering, conditional routing, and cooperative peer teaching. First, quality filtering retains only correct reasoning paths scored by an LLM-based evaluation. Second, conditional routing dynamically assigns paths tailored to each student’s current learning state. Finally, cooperative peer teaching enables students to mutually distill diverse insights, addressing knowledge gaps and biases toward specific reasoning styles. Experiments demonstrate QR-Distill’s superiority over traditional single- and multi-path distillation methods. Ablation studies further highlight the importance of each component—quality filtering, conditional routing, and peer teaching—in effective knowledge transfer. Our code is available at https://github.com/LzyFischer/Distill.

In recent years, Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have become successful in molecular property prediction tasks such as toxicity analysis. However, due to the black-box nature of GNNs, their outputs can be concerning in high-stakes decision-making scenarios, e.g., drug discovery. Facing such an issue, Graph Counterfactual Explanation (GCE) has emerged as a promising approach to improve GNN transparency. However, current GCE methods usually fail to take domain-specific knowledge into consideration, which can result in outputs that are not easily comprehensible by humans. To address this challenge, we propose a novel GCE method, LLM-GCE, to unleash the power of large language models (LLMs) in explaining GNNs for molecular property prediction. Specifically, we utilize an autoencoder to generate the counterfactual graph topology from a set of counterfactual text pairs (CTPs) based on an input graph. Meanwhile, we also incorporate a CTP dynamic feedback module to mitigate LLM hallucination, which provides intermediate feedback derived from the generated counterfactuals as an attempt to give more faithful guidance. Extensive experiments demonstrate the superior performance of LLM-GCE. Our code is released on https://github.com/YinhanHe123/new_LLM4GNNExplanation.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown unprecedented performance in various real-world applications. However, they are known to generate factually inaccurate outputs, a.k.a. the hallucination problem. In recent years, incorporating external knowledge extracted from Knowledge Graphs (KGs) has become a promising strategy to improve the factual accuracy of LLM-generated outputs. Nevertheless, most existing explorations rely on LLMs themselves to perform KG knowledge extraction, which is highly inflexible as LLMs can only provide binary judgment on whether a certain knowledge (e.g., a knowledge path in KG) should be used. In addition, LLMs tend to pick only knowledge with direct semantic relationship with the input text, while potentially useful knowledge with indirect semantics can be ignored. In this work, we propose a principled framework KELP with three stages to handle the above problems. Specifically, KELP is able to achieve finer granularity of flexible knowledge extraction by generating scores for knowledge paths with input texts via latent semantic matching. Meanwhile, knowledge paths with indirect semantic relationships with the input text can also be considered via trained encoding between the selected paths in KG and the input text. Experiments on real-world datasets validate the effectiveness of KELP.