Ning Tang

AI
h-index45
4papers
350citations
Novelty61%
AI Score53

4 Papers

99.3SIMar 20
PolicySim: An LLM-Based Agent Social Simulation Sandbox for Proactive Policy Optimization

Renhong Huang, Ning Tang, Jiarong Xu et al.

Social platforms serve as central hubs for information exchange, where user behaviors and platform interventions jointly shape opinions. However, intervention policies like recommendation and content filtering, can unintentionally amplify echo chambers and polarization, posing significant societal risks. Proactively evaluating the impact of such policies is therefore crucial. Existing approaches primarily rely on reactive online A/B testing, where risks are identified only after deployment, making risk identification delayed and costly. LLM-based social simulations offer a promising pre-deployment alternative, but current methods fall short in realistically modeling platform interventions and incorporating feedback from the platform. Bridging these gaps is essential for building actionable frameworks to assess and optimize platform policies. To this end, we propose PolicySim, an LLM-based social simulation sandbox for the proactive assessment and optimization of intervention policies. PolicySim models the bidirectional dynamics between user behavior and platform interventions through two key components: (1) a user agent module refined via supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and direct preference optimization (DPO) to achieve platform-specific behavioral realism; and (2) an adaptive intervention module that employs a contextual bandit with message passing to capture dynamic network structures. Experiments show that PolicySim can accurately simulate platform ecosystems at both micro and macro levels and support effective intervention policy.

IRDec 24, 2025
Tree of Preferences for Diversified Recommendation

Hanyang Yuan, Ning Tang, Tongya Zheng et al.

Diversified recommendation has attracted increasing attention from both researchers and practitioners, which can effectively address the homogeneity of recommended items. Existing approaches predominantly aim to infer the diversity of user preferences from observed user feedback. Nonetheless, due to inherent data biases, the observed data may not fully reflect user interests, where underexplored preferences can be overwhelmed or remain unmanifested. Failing to capture these preferences can lead to suboptimal diversity in recommendations. To fill this gap, this work aims to study diversified recommendation from a data-bias perspective. Inspired by the outstanding performance of large language models (LLMs) in zero-shot inference leveraging world knowledge, we propose a novel approach that utilizes LLMs' expertise to uncover underexplored user preferences from observed behavior, ultimately providing diverse and relevant recommendations. To achieve this, we first introduce Tree of Preferences (ToP), an innovative structure constructed to model user preferences from coarse to fine. ToP enables LLMs to systematically reason over the user's rationale behind their behavior, thereby uncovering their underexplored preferences. To guide diversified recommendations using uncovered preferences, we adopt a data-centric approach, identifying candidate items that match user preferences and generating synthetic interactions that reflect underexplored preferences. These interactions are integrated to train a general recommender for diversification. Moreover, we scale up overall efficiency by dynamically selecting influential users during optimization. Extensive evaluations of both diversity and relevance show that our approach outperforms existing methods in most cases and achieves near-optimal performance in others, with reasonable inference latency.

LGJan 24, 2025
Humanity's Last Exam

Long Phan, Alice Gatti, Ziwen Han et al. · amazon-science, apple-ml

Benchmarks are important tools for tracking the rapid advancements in large language model (LLM) capabilities. However, benchmarks are not keeping pace in difficulty: LLMs now achieve over 90\% accuracy on popular benchmarks like MMLU, limiting informed measurement of state-of-the-art LLM capabilities. In response, we introduce Humanity's Last Exam (HLE), a multi-modal benchmark at the frontier of human knowledge, designed to be the final closed-ended academic benchmark of its kind with broad subject coverage. HLE consists of 2,500 questions across dozens of subjects, including mathematics, humanities, and the natural sciences. HLE is developed globally by subject-matter experts and consists of multiple-choice and short-answer questions suitable for automated grading. Each question has a known solution that is unambiguous and easily verifiable, but cannot be quickly answered via internet retrieval. State-of-the-art LLMs demonstrate low accuracy and calibration on HLE, highlighting a significant gap between current LLM capabilities and the expert human frontier on closed-ended academic questions. To inform research and policymaking upon a clear understanding of model capabilities, we publicly release HLE at https://lastexam.ai.

AIJun 15, 2025
SciSage: A Multi-Agent Framework for High-Quality Scientific Survey Generation

Xiaofeng Shi, Qian Kou, Yuduo Li et al.

The rapid growth of scientific literature demands robust tools for automated survey-generation. However, current large language model (LLM)-based methods often lack in-depth analysis, structural coherence, and reliable citations. To address these limitations, we introduce SciSage, a multi-agent framework employing a reflect-when-you-write paradigm. SciSage features a hierarchical Reflector agent that critically evaluates drafts at outline, section, and document levels, collaborating with specialized agents for query interpretation, content retrieval, and refinement. We also release SurveyScope, a rigorously curated benchmark of 46 high-impact papers (2020-2025) across 11 computer science domains, with strict recency and citation-based quality controls. Evaluations demonstrate that SciSage outperforms state-of-the-art baselines (LLM x MapReduce-V2, AutoSurvey), achieving +1.73 points in document coherence and +32% in citation F1 scores. Human evaluations reveal mixed outcomes (3 wins vs. 7 losses against human-written surveys), but highlight SciSage's strengths in topical breadth and retrieval efficiency. Overall, SciSage offers a promising foundation for research-assistive writing tools.