Jipeng Zhang

KaShun Shum, Minrui Xu, Jianshu Zhang et al.

Large language models (LLMs) have become increasingly prevalent in our daily lives, leading to an expectation for LLMs to be trustworthy -- - both accurate and well-calibrated (the prediction confidence should align with its ground truth correctness likelihood). Nowadays, fine-tuning has become the most popular method for adapting a model to practical usage by significantly increasing accuracy on downstream tasks. Despite the great accuracy it achieves, we found fine-tuning is still far away from satisfactory trustworthiness due to "tuning-induced mis-calibration". In this paper, we delve deeply into why and how mis-calibration exists in fine-tuned models, and how distillation can alleviate the issue. Then we further propose a brand new method named Efficient Trustworthy Distillation (FIRST), which utilizes a small portion of teacher's knowledge to obtain a reliable language model in a cost-efficient way. Specifically, we identify the "concentrated knowledge" phenomenon during distillation, which can significantly reduce the computational burden. Then we apply a "trustworthy maximization" process to optimize the utilization of this small portion of concentrated knowledge before transferring it to the student. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our method, where better accuracy (+2.3%) and less mis-calibration (-10%) are achieved on average across both in-domain and out-of-domain scenarios, indicating better trustworthiness.

Weijie Shi, Han Zhu, Jiaming Ji et al.

Legal judgment prediction (LJP) aims to function as a judge by making final rulings based on case claims and facts, which plays a vital role in the judicial domain for supporting court decision-making and improving judicial efficiency. However, existing methods often struggle with logical errors when conducting complex legal reasoning. We propose LegalReasoner, which enhances LJP reliability through step-wise verification and correction of the reasoning process. Specifically, it first identifies dispute points to decompose complex cases, and then conducts step-wise reasoning while employing a process verifier to validate each step's logic from correctness, progressiveness, and potential perspectives. When errors are detected, expert-designed attribution and resolution strategies are applied for correction. To fine-tune LegalReasoner, we release the LegalHK dataset, containing 58,130 Hong Kong court cases with detailed annotations of dispute points, step-by-step reasoning chains, and process verification labels. Experiments demonstrate that LegalReasoner significantly improves concordance with court decisions from 72.37 to 80.27 on LLAMA-3.1-70B. The data is available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/weijiezz/LegalHK.

Xinyuan Li, Murong Xu, Wenbiao Tao et al.

Large language models (LLMs) achieve high performance on mathematical reasoning, but these results can be inflated by training data leakage or superficial pattern matching rather than genuine reasoning. To this end, an adversarial perturbation-based evaluation is needed to measure true mathematical reasoning ability. Current rule-based perturbation methods often generate ill-posed questions and impede the systematic evaluation of question difficulty and the evolution of benchmarks. To bridge this gap, we propose RIDE, a novel adversarial question-rewriting framework that leverages Item Response Theory (IRT) to rigorously measure question difficulty and to generate intrinsically more challenging, well-posed variations of mathematical problems. We employ 35 LLMs to simulate students and build a difficulty ranker from their responses. This ranker provides a reward signal during reinforcement learning and guides a question-rewriting model to reformulate existing questions across difficulty levels. Applying RIDE to competition-level mathematical benchmarks yields perturbed versions that degrade advanced LLM performance, with experiments showing an average 21.73% drop across 26 models, thereby exposing limited robustness in mathematical reasoning and confirming the validity of our evaluation approach.

Renjie Pi, Kehao Miao, Li Peihang et al.

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have demonstrated extraordinary capabilities in conducting conversations based on image inputs. However, we observe that MLLMs exhibit a pronounced form of visual sycophantic behavior. While similar behavior has also been noted in text-based large language models (LLMs), it becomes significantly more prominent when MLLMs process image inputs. We refer to this phenomenon as the "sycophantic modality gap." To better understand this issue, we further analyze the factors that contribute to the exacerbation of this gap. To mitigate the visual sycophantic behavior, we first experiment with naive supervised fine-tuning to help the MLLM resist misleading instructions from the user. However, we find that this approach also makes the MLLM overly resistant to corrective instructions (i.e., stubborn even if it is wrong). To alleviate this trade-off, we propose Sycophantic Reflective Tuning (SRT), which enables the MLLM to engage in reflective reasoning, allowing it to determine whether a user's instruction is misleading or corrective before drawing a conclusion. After applying SRT, we observe a significant reduction in sycophantic behavior toward misleading instructions, without resulting in excessive stubbornness when receiving corrective instructions.