Zijie Zhang

Ji Liu, Jiaxiang Ren, Ruoming Jin et al.

As a promising paradigm to collaboratively train models with decentralized data, Federated Learning (FL) can be exploited to fine-tune Large Language Models (LLMs). While LLMs correspond to huge size, the scale of the training data significantly increases, which leads to tremendous amounts of computation and communication costs. The training data is generally non-Independent and Identically Distributed (non-IID), which requires adaptive data processing within each device. Although Low Rank Adaptation (LoRA) can significantly reduce the scale of parameters to update in the fine-tuning process, it still takes unaffordable time to transfer the low-rank parameters of all the layers in LLMs. In this paper, we propose a Fisher Information-based Efficient Curriculum Federated Learning framework (FibecFed) with two novel methods, i.e., adaptive federated curriculum learning and efficient sparse parameter update. First, we propose a fisher information-based method to adaptively sample data within each device to improve the effectiveness of the FL fine-tuning process. Second, we dynamically select the proper layers for global aggregation and sparse parameters for local update with LoRA so as to improve the efficiency of the FL fine-tuning process. Extensive experimental results based on 10 datasets demonstrate that FibecFed yields excellent performance (up to 45.35% in terms of accuracy) and superb fine-tuning speed (up to 98.61% faster) compared with 17 baseline approaches).

Bohan Liu, Zijie Zhang, Peixiong He et al.

The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis (LTH) states that a dense neural network model contains a highly sparse subnetwork (i.e., winning tickets) that can achieve even better performance than the original model when trained in isolation. While LTH has been proved both empirically and theoretically in many works, there still are some open issues, such as efficiency and scalability, to be addressed. Also, the lack of open-source frameworks and consensual experimental setting poses a challenge to future research on LTH. We, for the first time, examine previous research and studies on LTH from different perspectives. We also discuss issues in existing works and list potential directions for further exploration. This survey aims to provide an in-depth look at the state of LTH and develop a duly maintained platform to conduct experiments and compare with the most updated baselines.

Qianqian Xie, Qingheng Xiong, He Zhu et al.

Deep Research Agents (DRAs) aim to solve complex, long-horizon research tasks involving planning, retrieval, multimodal understanding, and report generation, yet their evaluation remains challenging due to dynamic web environments and ambiguous task definitions. We propose DR$^{3}$-Eval, a realistic and reproducible benchmark for evaluating deep research agents on multimodal, multi-file report generation. DR$^{3}$-Eval is constructed from authentic user-provided materials and paired with a per-task static research sandbox corpus that simulates open-web complexity while remaining fully verifiable, containing supportive documents, distractors, and noise. Moreover, we introduce a multi-dimensional evaluation framework measuring Information Recall, Factual Accuracy, Citation Coverage, Instruction Following, and Depth Quality, and validate its alignment with human judgments. Experiments with our developed multi-agent system DR$^{3}$-Agent based on multiple state-of-the-art language models demonstrate that DR$^{3}$-Eval is highly challenging and reveals critical failure modes in retrieval robustness and hallucination control. Our code and data are publicly available.

Zixuan Dong, Jiafu Tang, Zhide Lei et al.

Long-video Omni assistants often fail not by inventing content, but by misbinding real evidence: they hear the right utterance and see the right event, yet attach it to the wrong speaker, moment, or modality. These \emph{almost-true} errors evade standard video QA because local evidence remains valid, so item-level scoring can reward both a supported claim and its near-counterfactual. We introduce a counterfactual event-binding protocol that constructs paired supported/counterfactual claims from the same audio-visual event evidence and evaluates them by strict-pair accuracy. We instantiate it as \bench, a benchmark for long-video Omni hallucination, with 3{,}600 single-claim QA items from 638 long-form videos averaging 24.16 minutes and covering 256.87 hours. Under this protocol, open-weight Omni models remain weak at pair-level binding: Qwen2.5-Omni-7B reaches 32.06\% and Qwen3-Omni-Instruct reaches 41.55\%, versus 76.54\% for a closed-source reference. To narrow this gap without updating the backbone, we propose \method, Modality-Perturbation Reliability Calibration, a frozen-backbone framework that selects audio-negative probes within video-level folds and fuses their response shifts with native audio-visual confidence into per-claim support estimates. \method lifts Qwen2.5-Omni-7B to 36.22\% and Qwen3 to 51.09\% on \bench, and improves target-adapted MCQ accuracy on OmniVideoBench ($+$2.20) and WorldSense ($+$1.51) with Qwen3.

Abu Noman Md Sakib, Md. Main Oddin Chisty, Zijie Zhang

The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) to support patients in addressing medical questions is becoming increasingly prevalent. However, most of the measures currently used to evaluate the performance of these models in this context only measure how closely a model's answers match semantically, and therefore do not provide a true indication of the model's medical accuracy or of the health equity risks associated with it. To address these shortcomings, we present a new evaluation framework for medical question answering called VB-Score (Verification-Based Score) that provides a separate evaluation of the four components of entity recognition, semantic similarity, factual consistency, and structured information completeness for medical question-answering models. We perform rigorous reviews of the performance of three well-known and widely used LLMs on 48 public health-related topics taken from high-quality, authoritative information sources. Based on our analyses, we discover a major discrepancy between the models' semantic and entity accuracy. Our assessments of the performance of all three models show that each of them has almost uniformly severe performance failures when evaluated against our criteria. Our findings indicate alarming performance disparities across various public health topics, with most of the models exhibiting 13.8% lower performance (compared to an overall average) for all the public health topics that relate to chronic conditions that occur in older and minority populations, which indicates the existence of what's known as condition-based algorithmic discrimination. Our findings also demonstrate that prompt engineering alone does not compensate for basic architectural limitations on how these models perform in extracting medical entities and raise the question of whether semantic evaluation alone is a sufficient measure of medical AI safety.