SDMay 18Code
A Survey of Large Audio Language Models: Generalization, Trustworthiness, and OutlookKaiwen Luo, Zhenhong Zhou, Leo Wang et al.
The foundational capabilities established by Large Language Models (LLMs) have paved the way for Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), within which Large Audio Language Models (LALMs) are essential for realizing universal auditory intelligence. Despite their remarkable performance, the escalation of LALMs' capabilities has significantly outpaced the development of systemic frameworks to ensure their trustworthiness. This survey provides a comprehensive investigation into the endogenous mechanisms of LALMs, detailing the architectural innovations and alignment algorithms that facilitate emergent reasoning. Specifically, we analyze how the transition to unified end-to-end frameworks and the integration of continuous acoustic signals inherently expand the attack surface. To rigorously evaluate the risks within these paradigms, we establish a comprehensive taxonomy of trustworthiness, categorizing critical vulnerabilities such as cross-modal jailbreaking, latent acoustic backdoors, and biometric privacy leakage. We review the state-of-the-art through six analytical pillars: hallucination, robustness, safety, privacy, fairness, and authentication. The profound imbalance between a mature offensive landscape and underdeveloped defenses further validates the critical trustworthiness gaps and multidimensional risks facing audio-centric intelligence. Finally, we propose a strategic roadmap advocating for "Defense-in-Depth" architectures, causal auditory world modeling, and intrinsic representation engineering to bridge the gap between empirical performance and intrinsically trustworthy audio intelligence. Our project has been uploaded to GitHub https://github.com/Kwwwww74/Awesome-Trustworthy-AudioLLMs.
HCApr 12
Tracing Prompt-Level Trajectories to Understand Student Learning with AI in Programming EducationTianyu Shao, Miguel Feijóo-García, Yi Zhang et al.
As AI tools such as ChatGPT enter programming classrooms, students encounter differing rules across courses and instructors, which shape how they use AI and leave them with unequal capabilities for leveraging it. We investigate how students engaged with AI in an introductory Python assignment, analyzing student-LLM chat histories and final code submissions from 163 students. We examined prompt-level strategies, traced trajectories of interaction, and compared AI-generated code with student submissions. We identified trajectories ranging from full delegation to iterative refinement, with hybrid forms in between. Although most students directly copied AI-generated code in their submission, many students scaffolded the code generation through iterative refinement. We also contrasted interaction patterns with assignment outcomes and course performance. Our findings show that prompting trajectories serve as promising windows into students' self-regulation and learning orientation. We draw design implications for educational AI systems that promote personalized and productive student-AI collaborative learning.
ROFeb 4
Game-Based and Gamified Robotics Education: A Comparative Systematic Review and Design GuidelinesSyed T. Mubarrat, Byung-Cheol Min, Tianyu Shao et al.
Robotics education fosters computational thinking, creativity, and problem-solving, but remains challenging due to technical complexity. Game-based learning (GBL) and gamification offer engagement benefits, yet their comparative impact remains unclear. We present the first PRISMA-aligned systematic review and comparative synthesis of GBL and gamification in robotics education, analyzing 95 studies from 12,485 records across four databases (2014-2025). We coded each study's approach, learning context, skill level, modality, pedagogy, and outcomes (k = .918). Three patterns emerged: (1) approach-context-pedagogy coupling (GBL more prevalent in informal settings, while gamification dominated formal classrooms [p < .001] and favored project-based learning [p = .009]); (2) emphasis on introductory programming and modular kits, with limited adoption of advanced software (~17%), advanced hardware (~5%), or immersive technologies (~22%); and (3) short study horizons, relying on self-report. We propose eight research directions and a design space outlining best practices and pitfalls, offering actionable guidance for robotics education.