Committee

arXiv:2505.03828v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: E-commerce platforms generate vast volumes of user feedback, such as star ratings, written reviews, and comments. However, most recommendation engines rely primarily on numerical scores, often overlooking the nuanced opinions embedded in free text. This paper comprehensively reviews sentiment-aware recommendation systems from a natural language processing perspective, covering advancements from 2023 to early 2025. It highlights the benefits of integrating sentiment analysis into e-commerce recommenders to enhance prediction accuracy and explainability through detailed opinion extraction. Our survey categorizes recent work into four main approaches: deep learning classifiers that combine sentiment embeddings with user item interactions, transformer based methods for nuanced feature extraction, graph neural networks that propagate sentiment signals, and conversational recommenders that adapt in real time to user feedback. We summarize model architectures and demonstrate how sentiment flows through recommendation pipelines, impacting dialogue-based suggestions. Key challenges include handling noisy or sarcastic text, dynamic user preferences, and bias mitigation. Finally, we outline research gaps and provide a roadmap for developing smarter, fairer, and more user-centric recommendation tools.

arXiv:2504.18884v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: With the advance of large language models (LLMs), LLMs have been utilized for the various tasks. However, the issues of variability and reproducibility of results from each trial of LLMs have been largely overlooked in existing literature while actual human annotation uses majority voting to resolve disagreements among annotators. Therefore, this study introduces the straightforward ensemble strategy to a sentiment analysis using LLMs. As the results, we demonstrate that the ensemble of multiple inference using medium-sized LLMs produces more robust and accurate results than using a large model with a single attempt with reducing RMSE by 18.6%.

arXiv:2505.00661v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models exhibit exciting capabilities, yet can show surprisingly narrow generalization from finetuning. E.g. they can fail to generalize to simple reversals of relations they are trained on, or fail to make simple logical deductions based on trained information. These failures to generalize from fine-tuning can hinder practical application of these models. On the other hand, language models’ in-context learning shows different inductive biases, and can generalize better in some cases. Here, we explore these differences in generalization between in-context- and fine-tuning-based learning. To do so, we constructed several novel datasets to evaluate and improve models’ abilities to generalize from finetuning data. The datasets are designed to create clean tests of generalization, by isolating the knowledge in the dataset from that in pretraining. We expose pretrained large models to controlled subsets of the information in these datasets — either in context, or through fine-tuning — and evaluate their performance on test sets that require various types of generalization. We find overall that in data-matched settings, in-context learning can generalize more flexibly than fine-tuning (though we also find some qualifications of prior findings, such as cases when fine-tuning can generalize to reversals embedded in a larger structure of knowledge). We build on these findings to propose a method to enable improved generalization from fine-tuning: adding in-context inferences to finetuning data. We show that this method improves generalization across various splits of our datasets and other benchmarks. Our results have implications for understanding the inductive biases of different modes of learning in language models, and practically improving their performance.

arXiv:2505.03997v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We train Transformer-based language models on ten foundational algorithmic tasks and observe pronounced phase transitions in their loss curves that deviate from established power-law scaling trends. Over large ranges of compute, the validation loss barely improves, then abruptly decreases. Probing the models’ internal representations reveals the learning of quiet features during the stagnant phase, followed by sudden acquisition of loud features that coincide with the sharp drop in loss. Our ablation experiments show that disrupting a single learned feature can dramatically degrade performance, providing evidence of their causal role in task performance. These findings challenge the prevailing assumption that next-token predictive loss reliably tracks incremental progress; instead, key internal features may be developing below the surface until they coalesce, triggering a rapid performance gain.

arXiv:2502.00290v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Over the past few years, Large Language Models (LLMs) have developed rapidly and are widely applied in various domains. However, LLMs face the issue of hallucinations, generating responses that may be unreliable when the models lack relevant knowledge. To be aware of potential hallucinations, uncertainty estimation methods have been introduced, and most of them have confirmed that reliability lies in critical tokens. However, probability-based methods perform poorly in identifying token reliability, limiting their practical utility. In this paper, we reveal that the probability-based method fails to estimate token reliability due to the loss of evidence strength information which is accumulated in the training stage. Therefore, we present Logits-induced token uncertainty (LogTokU), a framework for estimating decoupled token uncertainty in LLMs, enabling real-time uncertainty estimation without requiring multiple sampling processes. We employ evidence modeling to implement LogTokU and use the estimated uncertainty to guide downstream tasks. The experimental results demonstrate that LogTokU has significant effectiveness and promise.

arXiv:2505.03788v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We introduce a novel approach for calibrating uncertainty quantification (UQ) tailored for multi-modal large language models (LLMs). Existing state-of-the-art UQ methods rely on consistency among multiple responses generated by the LLM on an input query under diverse settings. However, these approaches often report higher confidence in scenarios where the LLM is consistently incorrect. This leads to a poorly calibrated confidence with respect to accuracy. To address this, we leverage cross-modal consistency in addition to self-consistency to improve the calibration of the multi-modal models. Specifically, we ground the textual responses to the visual inputs. The confidence from the grounding model is used to calibrate the overall confidence. Given that using a grounding model adds its own uncertainty in the pipeline, we apply temperature scaling – a widely accepted parametric calibration technique – to calibrate the grounding model’s confidence in the accuracy of generated responses. We evaluate the proposed approach across multiple multi-modal tasks, such as medical question answering (Slake) and visual question answering (VQAv2), considering multi-modal models such as LLaVA-Med and LLaVA. The experiments demonstrate that the proposed framework achieves significantly improved calibration on both tasks.

arXiv:2505.03961v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: According to Yuval Noah Harari, large-scale human cooperation is driven by shared narratives that encode common beliefs and values. This study explores whether such narratives can similarly nudge LLM agents toward collaboration. We use a finitely repeated public goods game in which LLM agents choose either cooperative or egoistic spending strategies. We prime agents with stories highlighting teamwork to different degrees and test how this influences negotiation outcomes. Our experiments explore four questions:(1) How do narratives influence negotiation behavior? (2) What differs when agents share the same story versus different ones? (3) What happens when the agent numbers grow? (4) Are agents resilient against self-serving negotiators? We find that story-based priming significantly affects negotiation strategies and success rates. Common stories improve collaboration, benefiting each agent. By contrast, priming agents with different stories reverses this effect, and those agents primed toward self-interest prevail. We hypothesize that these results carry implications for multi-agent system design and AI alignment.