Moyan Li

Yilun Zhu, Yuan Zhuang, Nikhita Vedula et al.

Many applications of LLM-based text regression require predicting a full conditional distribution rather than a single point value. We study distributional regression under empirical-quantile supervision, where each input is paired with multiple observed quantile outcomes, and the target distribution is represented by a dense grid of quantiles. We address two key limitations of current approaches: the lack of local grounding for distribution estimates, and the reliance on shared representations that create an indirect bottleneck between inputs and quantile outputs. In this paper, we introduce Quantile Token Regression, which, to our knowledge, is the first work to insert dedicated quantile tokens into the input sequence, enabling direct input-output pathways for each quantile through self-attention. We further augment these quantile tokens with retrieval, incorporating semantically similar neighbor instances and their empirical distributions to ground predictions with local evidence from similar instances. We also provide the first theoretical analysis of loss functions for quantile regression, clarifying which distributional objectives each optimizes. Experiments on the Inside Airbnb and StackSample benchmark datasets with LLMs ranging from 1.7B to 14B parameters show that quantile tokens with neighbors consistently outperform baselines (~4 points lower MAPE and 2x narrower prediction intervals), with especially large gains on smaller and more challenging datasets where quantile tokens produce substantially sharper and more accurate distributions.

Yunna Cai, Fan Wang, Haowei Wang et al.

Evaluating the safety alignment of LLM responses in high-risk mental health dialogues is particularly difficult due to missing gold-standard answers and the ethically sensitive nature of these interactions. To address this challenge, we propose PsyCrisis-Bench, a reference-free evaluation benchmark based on real-world Chinese mental health dialogues. It evaluates whether the model responses align with the safety principles defined by experts. Specifically designed for settings without standard references, our method adopts a prompt-based LLM-as-Judge approach that conducts in-context evaluation using expert-defined reasoning chains grounded in psychological intervention principles. We employ binary point-wise scoring across multiple safety dimensions to enhance the explainability and traceability of the evaluation. Additionally, we present a manually curated, high-quality Chinese-language dataset covering self-harm, suicidal ideation, and existential distress, derived from real-world online discourse. Experiments on 3600 judgments show that our method achieves the highest agreement with expert assessments and produces more interpretable evaluation rationales compared to existing approaches. Our dataset and evaluation tool are publicly available to facilitate further research.