Ye Tian, Anzhi Sheng, Angela Fontan, Long Wang, Karl H. Johansson
Whether social influence makes a crowd wiser or more biased hinges on who yields to others and who holds firm. Such heterogeneous susceptibilities to social influence, together with the influence network, determine the weight each agent's initial estimate carries in the collective estimate, known as social power. This paper studies susceptibility optimization for maximizing the wisdom of crowds under the Friedkin-Johnsen model. Minimizing the squared collective bias over susceptibilities leads to a nonconvex problem. To overcome this nonconvexity, we develop a social power reformulation and realization framework, which decomposes the problem into two stages: first characterizing the social power that minimizes the collective bias, then determining the susceptibilities that induce such social power. Social power reformulation yields a quadratic program over the probability simplex. Under uniform-sign biases, the optimal social power concentrates on the least biased agents and immediately determines the optimal susceptibilities; under mixed-sign biases, its geometry enables a linear-time construction algorithm. For social power realization, we introduce the notions of susceptibility realizability and establish necessary and sufficient conditions for them, under which we derive all optimal susceptibilities in closed form using the Laplacian pseudoinverse and eigenvector centrality. These results yield a unified algorithm that solves the original problem globally, with worst-case complexity cubic in the number of agents when realizability holds. Finally, we develop a fully distributed implementation with linear communication complexity, illustrating how collective intelligence can emerge from local interactions.
LLM agents operate Web infrastructure from the command line and rely on a return assumption, namely that each tool call returns within a bounded time and with its requested action finished. Many commands, however, ask a question before they act, and the agent's harness either closes the program's input or keeps it open as a terminal at which nobody types. With closed input, the program can return status 0 without the requested action. With open input, it waits until a time limit, and the agent pays in time and tokens. To the best of our knowledge, this paper is the first to measure and repair the return assumption. We collect 91,469 production tool calls and 89,047 public agent trajectories, test how 8 widely used harnesses launch commands, and build Litmus, a catalog of 158 checked command-line invocations, and Tripwire, a benchmark of 25 task pairs that differ only in whether a question guards the requested action. We then propose RECEIPT, which keeps the input open, reads what each process waits for from system calls, and returns this state to an unmodified agent through a model-checked protocol. On Litmus, closed input causes 11.5% of tested invocations to return status 0 without performing the requested action, and 7 of 8 harnesses close input when no terminal is attached. An unanswered question at a plain terminal multiplies a task's token use by 2.9, and the input connection moves an LLM from 7th to 3rd place among 8. Across 5 LLMs, RECEIPT reduces false claims of success by 73.5% and completes all 25 guarded tasks on a second harness. An agent's reliability therefore depends on what its harness lets it observe as well as on its LLM. Agent builders should report what each tool call did, not only how it ended, and benchmark maintainers should fix and report the input connection before they rank LLMs.
LLM-generated explanations help developers understand automated program repair (APR) rationale and assess patch quality. Incorrect explanations can mislead developers about a repair's reliability, making their detection important. However, manually inspecting the growing volume of generated repairs is impractical, motivating automated detection. Existing methods mainly target incorrect answers from general question-answering LLMs, often by sampling multiple responses and detecting contradictions. Applied to APR, they face two limitations: (1) they may depend on external verifiers that are unavailable or lack APR-specific reasoning; and (2) sampling strategies such as paraphrasing or re-prompting the same input often yield superficial, redundant responses that repeat the original error rather than expose it. We propose MetaReJ, the first method designed to detect incorrect APR explanations using metamorphic testing. Inspired by debate and viva examinations, MetaReJ challenges explanations through an argumentative strategy without requiring external verifiers. It applies novel metamorphic relations (MRs) to recursively question the LLM under equivalent and non-equivalent repair scenarios and detect contradictions. To obtain diverse samples, MetaReJ transforms the buggy program into variants that preserve or alter the underlying bug, then asks the LLM how to repair each variant. Contradictions among responses are encoded as MR violations, which indicate that the original explanation is incorrect. We evaluate MetaReJ on a manually labelled dataset of 1,756 explanations from multiple LLM-based APR systems. MetaReJ achieves an MCC of up to 0.43, outperforming prior methods by up to 333.3% in MCC.
Gongli Xi, Kun Wang, Zeming Gao, Huahui Yi, Haolang Lu, Qianshan Wei, Ye Tian, Wendong Wang
Large multimodal reasoning models solve challenging visual problems via explicit long-chain inference: they gather visual clues from images and decode clues into textual tokens. Yet this capability also increases hallucinations, where the model generates content that is not supported by the input image or the question. To understand this failure mode, we identify \emph{reasoning drift}: during clue gathering, the model over-focuses on question-irrelevant entities, diluting focus on task-relevant cues and gradually decoupling the reasoning trace from visual grounding. As a consequence, many inference-time localization or intervention methods developed for non-reasoning models fail to pinpoint the true clues in reasoning settings. Motivated by these insights, we introduce ClueRecall, a metric for assessing visual clue retrieval, and present ClueTracer, a training-free, parameter-free, and architecture-agnostic plugin for hallucination suppression. ClueTracer starts from the question and traces how key clues propagate along the model's reasoning pathway (question $\rightarrow$ outputs $\rightarrow$ visual tokens), thereby localizing task-relevant patches while suppressing spurious attention to irrelevant regions. Remarkably, \textbf{without any additional training}, ClueTracer improves all \textbf{reasoning} architectures (including \texttt{R1-OneVision}, \texttt{Ocean-R1}, \texttt{MM-Eureka}, \emph{etc}.) by $\mathbf{1.21\times}$ on reasoning benchmarks
Junkai Chen, Huihui Huang Singapore Management University, Yunbo Lyu, Junwen An national university of singaore, National University of Singapore, Jieke Shi Singapore Management University, Chengran Yang, Ting Zhang Monash University, Haoye Tian 等 13 位作者
Large language model-powered code agents are rapidly transforming software engineering, yet the security risks of their generated code have become a critical concern. Existing benchmarks have provided valuable insights, but they fail to capture scenarios in which vulnerabilities are actually introduced by human developers, making fair comparisons between humans and agents infeasible. We therefore introduce SecureVibeBench, a benchmark of 105 C/C++ secure coding tasks sourced from 41 projects in OSS-Fuzz for code agents. SecureVibeBench has the following features: (i) realistic task settings that require multi-file edits in large repositories, (ii) aligned contexts based on real-world open-source vulnerabilities with precisely identified vulnerability introduction points, and (iii) comprehensive evaluation that combines functionality testing and security checking with both static and dynamic oracles. We evaluate 5 popular code agents like OpenHands, supported by 5 LLMs (e.g., Claude sonnet 4.5) on SecureVibeBench. Results show that current agents struggle to produce both correct and secure code, as even the best-performing one, produces merely 23.8% correct and secure solutions on SecureVibeBench.
尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要
cs.CL · cs.AI
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表
Chengran Yang, Ting Zhang Monash University, Jinfeng Jiang Singapore Management University, Xin Zhou, Haoye Tian, Mingzhe Du Nanyang Technological University and National University of Singapore, Jieke Shi Singapore Management University, Junkai Chen 等 12 位作者
The rapid accumulation of software vulnerabilities has outpaced manual remediation, creating an urgent need for Automated Vulnerability Repair (AVR). However, existing methods suffer from syntactic overfitting, mimicking surface forms without understanding the underlying repair logic, and fail to generalize to complex fixes. To transcend these limitations, we propose SeCuRepair, a reliable, scalable, and efficient RL-based AVR framework. By introducing a semantic-aware reward, SeCuRepair optimizes for code semantic equivalence rather than lexical mimicry. Furthermore, SeCuRepair incorporates an expert-aligned reasoning mechanism that explicitly grounds patch generation in a structured diagnosis. Finally, SeCuRepair introduces a difficulty-based curriculum that progressively disentangles the optimization barriers of entangled multi-hunk repairs. Extensive evaluations on a rigorous repository-level split show that SeCuRepair substantially outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, as confirmed by both automatic evaluation and human study.
尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要
cs.CL
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表