Chirag Shah

Sahil Verma, Chirag Shah, John P. Dickerson et al. · uw

Recommender systems influence many of our interactions in the digital world -- impacting how we shop for clothes, sorting what we see when browsing YouTube or TikTok, and determining which restaurants and hotels we are shown when using hospitality platforms. Modern recommender systems are large, opaque models trained on a mixture of proprietary and open-source datasets. Naturally, issues of trust arise on both the developer and user side: is the system working correctly, and why did a user receive (or not receive) a particular recommendation? Providing an explanation alongside a recommendation alleviates some of these concerns. The status quo for auxiliary recommender system feedback is either user-specific explanations (e.g., "users who bought item B also bought item A") or item-specific explanations (e.g., "we are recommending item A because you watched/bought item B"). However, users bring personalized context into their search experience, valuing an item as a function of that item's attributes and their own personal preferences. In this work, we propose RecXplainer, a novel method for generating fine-grained explanations based on a user's preferences over the attributes of recommended items. We evaluate RecXplainer on five real-world and large-scale recommendation datasets using five different kinds of recommender systems to demonstrate the efficacy of RecXplainer in capturing users' preferences over item attributes and using them to explain recommendations. We also compare RecXplainer to five baselines and show RecXplainer's exceptional performance on ten metrics.

Bingbing Wen, Yunhe Feng, Yongfeng Zhang et al.

As recommender systems become increasingly sophisticated and complex, they often suffer from lack of fairness and transparency. Providing robust and unbiased explanations for recommendations has been drawing more and more attention as it can help address these issues and improve trustworthiness and informativeness of recommender systems. However, despite the fact that such explanations are generated for humans who respond more strongly to messages with appropriate emotions, there is a lack of consideration for emotions when generating explanations for recommendations. Current explanation generation models are found to exaggerate certain emotions without accurately capturing the underlying tone or the meaning. In this paper, we propose a novel method based on a multi-head transformer, called Emotion-aware Transformer for Explainable Recommendation (EmoTER), to generate more robust, fair, and emotion-enhanced explanations. To measure the linguistic quality and emotion fairness of the generated explanations, we adopt both automatic text metrics and human perceptions for evaluation. Experiments on three widely-used benchmark datasets with multiple evaluation metrics demonstrate that EmoTER consistently outperforms the existing state-of-the-art explanation generation models in terms of text quality, explainability, and consideration for fairness to emotion distribution. Implementation of EmoTER will be released as an open-source toolkit to support further research.

Sahil Verma, Ashudeep Singh, Varich Boonsanong et al. · microsoft-research, uw

Recommender systems play an essential role in the choices people make in domains such as entertainment, shopping, food, news, employment, and education. The machine learning models underlying these recommender systems are often enormously large and black-box in nature for users, content providers, and system developers alike. It is often crucial for all stakeholders to understand the model's rationale behind making certain predictions and recommendations. This is especially true for the content providers whose livelihoods depend on the recommender system. Drawing motivation from the practitioners' need, in this work, we propose a recourse framework for recommender systems, targeted towards the content providers. Algorithmic recourse in the recommendation setting is a set of actions that, if executed, would modify the recommendations (or ranking) of an item in the desired manner. A recourse suggests actions of the form: "if a feature changes X to Y, then the ranking of that item for a set of users will change to Z." Furthermore, we demonstrate that RecRec is highly effective in generating valid, sparse, and actionable recourses through an empirical evaluation of recommender systems trained on three real-world datasets. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first to conceptualize and empirically test a generalized framework for generating recourses for recommender systems.

Chirag Shah, Ryen W. White, Reid Andersen et al.

Log data can reveal valuable information about how users interact with Web search services, what they want, and how satisfied they are. However, analyzing user intents in log data is not easy, especially for emerging forms of Web search such as AI-driven chat. To understand user intents from log data, we need a way to label them with meaningful categories that capture their diversity and dynamics. Existing methods rely on manual or machine-learned labeling, which are either expensive or inflexible for large and dynamic datasets. We propose a novel solution using large language models (LLMs), which can generate rich and relevant concepts, descriptions, and examples for user intents. However, using LLMs to generate a user intent taxonomy and apply it for log analysis can be problematic for two main reasons: (1) such a taxonomy is not externally validated; and (2) there may be an undesirable feedback loop. To address this, we propose a new methodology with human experts and assessors to verify the quality of the LLM-generated taxonomy. We also present an end-to-end pipeline that uses an LLM with human-in-the-loop to produce, refine, and apply labels for user intent analysis in log data. We demonstrate its effectiveness by uncovering new insights into user intents from search and chat logs from the Microsoft Bing commercial search engine. The proposed work's novelty stems from the method for generating purpose-driven user intent taxonomies with strong validation. This method not only helps remove methodological and practical bottlenecks from intent-focused research, but also provides a new framework for generating, validating, and applying other kinds of taxonomies in a scalable and adaptable way with reasonable human effort.

Ruoxi Shang, Gary Hsieh, Chirag Shah · uw

Trust is not just a cognitive issue but also an emotional one, yet the research in human-AI interactions has primarily focused on the cognitive route of trust development. Recent work has highlighted the importance of studying affective trust towards AI, especially in the context of emerging human-like LLMs-powered conversational agents. However, there is a lack of validated and generalizable measures for the two-dimensional construct of trust in AI agents. To address this gap, we developed and validated a set of 27-item semantic differential scales for affective and cognitive trust through a scenario-based survey study. We then further validated and applied the scale through an experiment study. Our empirical findings showed how the emotional and cognitive aspects of trust interact with each other and collectively shape a person's overall trust in AI agents. Our study methodology and findings also provide insights into the capability of the state-of-art LLMs to foster trust through different routes.

Sahil Verma, Gantavya Bhatt, Avi Schwarzschild et al. · nvidia, uw

Despite the advanced capabilities of contemporary machine learning (ML) models, they remain vulnerable to adversarial and backdoor attacks. This vulnerability is particularly concerning in real-world deployments, where compromised models may exhibit unpredictable behavior in critical scenarios. Such risks are heightened by the prevalent practice of collecting massive, internet-sourced datasets for training multimodal models, as these datasets may harbor backdoors. Various techniques have been proposed to mitigate the effects of backdooring in multimodal models, such as CleanCLIP, which is the current state-of-the-art approach. In this work, we demonstrate that the efficacy of CleanCLIP in mitigating backdoors is highly dependent on the particular objective used during model pre-training. We observe that stronger pre-training objectives that lead to higher zero-shot classification performance correlate with harder to remove backdoors behaviors. We show this by training multimodal models on two large datasets consisting of 3 million (CC3M) and 6 million (CC6M) datapoints, under various pre-training objectives, followed by poison removal using CleanCLIP. We find that CleanCLIP, even with extensive hyperparameter tuning, is ineffective in poison removal when stronger pre-training objectives are used. Our findings underscore critical considerations for ML practitioners who train models using large-scale web-curated data and are concerned about potential backdoor threats.

Sarkar Snigdha Sarathi Das, Chirag Shah, Mengting Wan et al.

The traditional Dialogue State Tracking (DST) problem aims to track user preferences and intents in user-agent conversations. While sufficient for task-oriented dialogue systems supporting narrow domain applications, the advent of Large Language Model (LLM)-based chat systems has introduced many real-world intricacies in open-domain dialogues. These intricacies manifest in the form of increased complexity in contextual interactions, extended dialogue sessions encompassing a diverse array of topics, and more frequent contextual shifts. To handle these intricacies arising from evolving LLM-based chat systems, we propose joint dialogue segmentation and state tracking per segment in open-domain dialogue systems. Assuming a zero-shot setting appropriate to a true open-domain dialogue system, we propose S3-DST, a structured prompting technique that harnesses Pre-Analytical Recollection, a novel grounding mechanism we designed for improving long context tracking. To demonstrate the efficacy of our proposed approach in joint segmentation and state tracking, we evaluate S3-DST on a proprietary anonymized open-domain dialogue dataset, as well as publicly available DST and segmentation datasets. Across all datasets and settings, S3-DST consistently outperforms the state-of-the-art, demonstrating its potency and robustness the next generation of LLM-based chat systems.

Bingbing Wen, Xiaoning Bu, Chirag Shah

Growing attention has been paid in Conversational Recommendation System (CRS), which works as a conversation-based and recommendation task-oriented tool to provide items of interest and explore user preference. However, existing work in CRS fails to explicitly show the reasoning logic to users and the whole CRS still remains a black box. Therefore we propose a novel end-to-end framework named Explanation Generation for Conversational Recommendation (EGCR) based on generating explanations for conversational agents to explain why they make the action. EGCR incorporates user reviews to enhance the item representation and increase the informativeness of the whole conversation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first framework for explainable conversational recommendation on real-world datasets. Moreover, we evaluate EGCR on one benchmark conversational recommendation datasets and achieve better performance on both recommendation accuracy and conversation quality than other state-of-the art models. Finally, extensive experiments demonstrate that generated explanations are not only having high quality and explainability, but also making CRS more trustworthy. We will make our code available to contribute to the CRS community

Michael Theologitis, Preetam Prabhu Srikar Dammu, Chirag Shah et al.

Despite substantial progress in fact-verification benchmarks, claims grounded in large-scale structured data remain underexplored. In this work, we introduce ClaimDB, the first fact-verification benchmark where the evidence for claims is derived from compositions of millions of records and multiple tables. ClaimDB consists of 80 unique real-life databases covering a wide range of domains, from governance and healthcare to media, education and the natural sciences. At this scale, verification approaches that rely on "reading" the evidence break down, forcing a timely shift toward reasoning in executable programs. We conduct extensive experiments with 30 state-of-the-art proprietary and open-source (below 70B) LLMs and find that none exceed 83% accuracy, with more than half below 55%. Our analysis also reveals that both closed- and open-source models struggle with abstention -- the ability to admit that there is no evidence to decide -- raising doubts about their reliability in high-stakes data analysis. We release the benchmark, code, and the LLM leaderboard at https://claimdb.github.io .

Muhammad Rahman, Sachi Figliolini, Joyce Kim et al.

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has led to various means of integration of AI aimed to provide efficiency in tasks, one of which is career counseling. A key part of getting a job is having a solid resume that passes through the first round of programs and recruiters. It is difficult to find good resources or schedule an appointment with a career counselor to help with editing a resume for a specific role. With the rise of ChatGPT, Bard, and several other AI chat programs it is possible to provide specific, automated feedback on various concerns to suggest places for improvement within the context of career counseling. This paper begins with a quick literature review on the ethical considerations and limitations of AI in career counseling. The authors also have created their own website service, called ResumAI, to test and review the functionality of an AI career counselor. The findings of this study will contribute to the understanding of chat AI ResumAI reviewer programs and sites. The implications of the findings for the field of career counseling, AI development, and ethical practice will be discussed.

Sahil Verma, Royi Rassin, Arnav Das et al. · uw

Text-to-image models are trained using large datasets collected by scraping image-text pairs from the internet. These datasets often include private, copyrighted, and licensed material. Training models on such datasets enables them to generate images with such content, which might violate copyright laws and individual privacy. This phenomenon is termed imitation -- generation of images with content that has recognizable similarity to its training images. In this work we study the relationship between a concept's frequency in the training dataset and the ability of a model to imitate it. We seek to determine the point at which a model was trained on enough instances to imitate a concept -- the imitation threshold. We posit this question as a new problem: Finding the Imitation Threshold (FIT) and propose an efficient approach that estimates the imitation threshold without incurring the colossal cost of training multiple models from scratch. We experiment with two domains -- human faces and art styles -- for which we create four datasets, and evaluate three text-to-image models which were trained on two pretraining datasets. Our results reveal that the imitation threshold of these models is in the range of 200-600 images, depending on the domain and the model. The imitation threshold can provide an empirical basis for copyright violation claims and acts as a guiding principle for text-to-image model developers that aim to comply with copyright and privacy laws. We release the code and data at \url{https://github.com/vsahil/MIMETIC-2.git} and the project's website is hosted at \url{https://how-many-van-goghs-does-it-take.github.io}.

Preetam Prabhu Srikar Dammu, Yunhe Feng, Chirag Shah

Machine learning (ML) technologies are known to be riddled with ethical and operational problems, however, we are witnessing an increasing thrust by businesses to deploy them in sensitive applications. One major issue among many is that ML models do not perform equally well for underrepresented groups. This puts vulnerable populations in an even disadvantaged and unfavorable position. We propose an approach that leverages the power of web search and generative models to alleviate some of the shortcomings of discriminative models. We demonstrate our method on an image classification problem using ImageNet's People Subtree subset, and show that it is effective in enhancing robustness and mitigating bias in certain classes that represent vulnerable populations (e.g., female doctor of color). Our new method is able to (1) identify weak decision boundaries for such classes; (2) construct search queries for Google as well as text for generating images through DALL-E 2 and Stable Diffusion; and (3) show how these newly captured training samples could alleviate population bias issue. While still improving the model's overall performance considerably, we achieve a significant reduction (77.30\%) in the model's gender accuracy disparity. In addition to these improvements, we observed a notable enhancement in the classifier's decision boundary, as it is characterized by fewer weakspots and an increased separation between classes. Although we showcase our method on vulnerable populations in this study, the proposed technique is extendable to a wide range of problems and domains.

Harshita Chopra, Kshitish Ghate, Aylin Caliskan et al.

Large Language Model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed in settings where they interact with a wide variety of people, including users who are unclear, impatient, or reluctant to share information. However, collecting real interaction data at scale remains expensive. The field has turned to LLM-based user simulators as stand-ins, but these simulators inherit the behavior of their underlying models: cooperative and homogeneous. As a result, agents that appear strong in simulation often fail under the unseen, diverse communication patterns of real users. To narrow this gap, we introduce Persona Policies (PPol), a plug-and-play control layer that induces realistic behavioral variation in user simulators while preserving the original task goals. Rather than hand-crafting personas, we cast persona generation as an LLM-driven evolutionary program search that optimizes a Python generator to discover behaviors and translate them into task-preserving roleplay policies. Candidate generators are guided by a multi-objective fitness score combining human-likeness with broad coverage of human behavioral patterns. Once optimized, the generator produces a diverse population of human-like personas for any task in the domain. Across tau^2-bench retail and airline domains, evolved PPol programs yield 33-62% absolute gains in fitness score over the baseline simulator. In a blinded evaluation, annotators rated PPol-conditioned users as human 80.4% of the time, close to real human traces and nearly twice as frequently as baseline simulators. Agents trained with PPol are more robust to challenging, out-of-distribution behaviors, improving task success by +17% relative to training only on existing simulated interactions. This offers a novel approach to strengthen simulator-based evaluation and training without changing tasks or rewards.

Harshita Chopra, Krishna Kant Chintalapudi, Suman Nath et al.

Long-horizon personalization requires dialogue assistants to retrieve user-specific facts from extended interaction histories. In practice, many relevant facts often have low semanticsimilarity to the query under dense retrieval. Standard Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and GraphRAG systems are still largely retrospective: they rely on embedding similarity to the query or on fixed graph traversals, so they often miss facts that matter for the user's needs but lie far from the query in embedding space. Inspired by prospection, the human ability to use imagined futures as cues for recall, we introduce Prospection-Guided Retrieval (PGR), which decouples retrieval from how memories are stored. Given a user query, PGR first expands the goal into a short Tree-of-Thought (ToT) or linear chain of plausible next steps, and uses these steps as retrieval probes rather than relying on the original query alone. The facts retrieved by these probes are then used to personalize the next round of prospection, enabling PGR to uncover additional memories that become relevant only after the simulation is grounded in the user's history. We also introduce MemoryQuest, a challenging multi-session benchmark in which each query is annotated with 3--5 dated reference facts subject to a low query-reference similarity constraint. Across 1,625 queries spanning 185 user profiles from 3 publicly available datasets, PGR-TOT substantially improves retrieval, including nearly 3x recall on MemoryQuest over the strongest baseline. In pairwise LLM-as-judge comparisons against baselines, PGR-generated responses are preferred on 89--98% of queries, with blinded human annotations on held-out subsets showing the same trend. Overall, the results demonstrate that explicit prospection yields large gains in long-horizon retrieval and response quality relative to similarity-only baselines.

Preetam Prabhu Srikar Dammu, Chirag Shah

Often machine learning models tend to automatically learn associations present in the training data without questioning their validity or appropriateness. This undesirable property is the root cause of the manifestation of spurious correlations, which render models unreliable and prone to failure in the presence of distribution shifts. Research shows that most methods attempting to remedy spurious correlations are only effective for a model's known spurious associations. Current spurious correlation detection algorithms either rely on extensive human annotations or are too restrictive in their formulation. Moreover, they rely on strict definitions of visual artifacts that may not apply to data produced by generative models, as they are known to hallucinate contents that do not conform to standard specifications. In this work, we introduce a general-purpose method that efficiently detects potential spurious correlations, and requires significantly less human interference in comparison to the prior art. Additionally, the proposed method provides intuitive explanations while eliminating the need for pixel-level annotations. We demonstrate the proposed method's tolerance to the peculiarity of AI-generated images, which is a considerably challenging task, one where most of the existing methods fall short. Consequently, our method is also suitable for detecting spurious correlations that may propagate to downstream applications originating from generative models.

Dean Light, Michael Theologitis, Kshitish Ghate et al.

Humans intuitively solve complex problems by flexibly shifting among reasoning modes: they plan, execute, revise intermediate goals, resolve ambiguity through associative judgment, and apply formal procedures to well-specified subproblems. Current LLM agents lack this flexibility, as their scaffolds hard-code such reasoning decisions in advance. These scaffolds are effective when their prescribed structure matches the task, but brittle when solving the task requires adapting the structure of reasoning itself. We introduce Deep Reasoning -- an inference-time approach for constructing task-specific scaffolds through structured meta-reasoning. Deep Reasoning uses a formal language that represents meta-reasoning as executable decompositions over associative inference, formal computation, and recursive subproblem solving, enabling decomposition principles to be encoded as in-context examples that guide test-time scaffold construction. We instantiate this approach in a general-purpose agent (DOLORES) that distributes complex tasks across more controlled reasoning threads. We evaluate it against state-of-the-art scaffolding methods across four hard benchmarks: multi-hop reasoning, long-chain question answering, long-context aggregation, and deep research-style information seeking. DOLORES outperforms all evaluated scaffolds across three model sizes and two model families, improving over the strongest evaluated scaffold baseline by 24.8% on average. DOLORES distributes cognition across structured, lower-load reasoning threads, thereby reducing premature termination and hallucinations. This advantage can even bridge the scaling gap, with an 8B version surpassing all evaluated 32B baselines from the same family in more than half the settings. These results point toward future agentic systems that treat scaffolding as adaptive reasoning, constructing the structure each task requires just-in-time.

Mengting Wan, Tara Safavi, Sujay Kumar Jauhar et al.

Transforming unstructured text into structured and meaningful forms, organized by useful category labels, is a fundamental step in text mining for downstream analysis and application. However, most existing methods for producing label taxonomies and building text-based label classifiers still rely heavily on domain expertise and manual curation, making the process expensive and time-consuming. This is particularly challenging when the label space is under-specified and large-scale data annotations are unavailable. In this paper, we address these challenges with Large Language Models (LLMs), whose prompt-based interface facilitates the induction and use of large-scale pseudo labels. We propose TnT-LLM, a two-phase framework that employs LLMs to automate the process of end-to-end label generation and assignment with minimal human effort for any given use-case. In the first phase, we introduce a zero-shot, multi-stage reasoning approach which enables LLMs to produce and refine a label taxonomy iteratively. In the second phase, LLMs are used as data labelers that yield training samples so that lightweight supervised classifiers can be reliably built, deployed, and served at scale. We apply TnT-LLM to the analysis of user intent and conversational domain for Bing Copilot (formerly Bing Chat), an open-domain chat-based search engine. Extensive experiments using both human and automatic evaluation metrics demonstrate that TnT-LLM generates more accurate and relevant label taxonomies when compared against state-of-the-art baselines, and achieves a favorable balance between accuracy and efficiency for classification at scale. We also share our practical experiences and insights on the challenges and opportunities of using LLMs for large-scale text mining in real-world applications.

Chirag Shah

As LLMs make their way into many aspects of our lives, one place that warrants increased scrutiny with LLM usage is scientific research. Using LLMs for generating or analyzing data for research purposes is gaining popularity. But when such application is marred with ad-hoc decisions and engineering solutions, we need to be concerned about how it may affect that research, its findings, or any future works based on that research. We need a more scientific approach to using LLMs in our research. While there are several active efforts to support more systematic construction of prompts, they are often focused more on achieving desirable outcomes rather than producing replicable and generalizable knowledge with sufficient transparency, objectivity, or rigor. This article presents a new methodology inspired by codebook construction through qualitative methods to address that. Using humans in the loop and a multi-phase verification processes, this methodology lays a foundation for more systematic, objective, and trustworthy way of applying LLMs for analyzing data. Specifically, we show how a set of researchers can work through a rigorous process of labeling, deliberating, and documenting to remove subjectivity and bring transparency and replicability to prompt generation process. A set of experiments are presented to show how this methodology can be put in practice.

Kirandeep Kaur, Xingda Lyu, Chirag Shah

Generative AI agents equate understanding with resolving explicit queries, an assumption that confines interaction to what users can articulate. This assumption breaks down when users themselves lack awareness of what is missing, risky, or worth considering. In such conditions, proactivity is not merely an efficiency enhancement, but an epistemic necessity. We refer to this condition as epistemic incompleteness: where progress depends on engaging with unknown unknowns for effective partnership. Existing approaches to proactivity remain narrowly anticipatory, extrapolating from past behavior and presuming that goals are already well defined, thereby failing to support users meaningfully. However, surfacing possibilities beyond a user's current awareness is not inherently beneficial. Unconstrained proactive interventions can misdirect attention, overwhelm users, or introduce harm. Proactive agents, therefore, require behavioral grounding: principled constraints on when, how, and to what extent an agent should intervene. We advance the position that generative proactivity must be grounded both epistemically and behaviorally. Drawing on the philosophy of ignorance and research on proactive behavior, we argue that these theories offer critical guidance for designing agents that can engage responsibly and foster meaningful partnerships.

Preetam Prabhu Srikar Dammu, Himanshu Naidu, Mouly Dewan et al.

In the midst of widespread misinformation and disinformation through social media and the proliferation of AI-generated texts, it has become increasingly difficult for people to validate and trust information they encounter. Many fact-checking approaches and tools have been developed, but they often lack appropriate explainability or granularity to be useful in various contexts. A text validation method that is easy to use, accessible, and can perform fine-grained evidence attribution has become crucial. More importantly, building user trust in such a method requires presenting the rationale behind each prediction, as research shows this significantly influences people's belief in automated systems. Localizing and bringing users' attention to the specific problematic content is also paramount, instead of providing simple blanket labels. In this paper, we present ClaimVer, a human-centric framework tailored to meet users' informational and verification needs by generating rich annotations and thereby reducing cognitive load. Designed to deliver comprehensive evaluations of texts, it highlights each claim, verifies it against a trusted knowledge graph (KG), presents the evidence, and provides succinct, clear explanations for each claim prediction. Finally, our framework introduces an attribution score, enhancing applicability across a wide range of downstream tasks.

Maryam Amirizaniani, Jihan Yao, Adrian Lavergne et al.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) become more pervasive across various users and scenarios, identifying potential issues when using these models becomes essential. Examples of such issues include: bias, inconsistencies, and hallucination. Although auditing the LLM for these problems is often warranted, such a process is neither easy nor accessible for most. An effective method is to probe the LLM using different versions of the same question. This could expose inconsistencies in its knowledge or operation, indicating potential for bias or hallucination. However, to operationalize this auditing method at scale, we need an approach to create those probes reliably and automatically. In this paper we propose the LLMAuditor framework which is an automatic, and scalable solution, where one uses a different LLM along with human-in-the-loop (HIL). This approach offers verifiability and transparency, while avoiding circular reliance on the same LLM, and increasing scientific rigor and generalizability. Specifically, LLMAuditor includes two phases of verification using humans: standardized evaluation criteria to verify responses, and a structured prompt template to generate desired probes. A case study using questions from the TruthfulQA dataset demonstrates that we can generate a reliable set of probes from one LLM that can be used to audit inconsistencies in a different LLM. This process is enhanced by our structured prompt template with HIL, which not only boosts the reliability of our approach in auditing but also yields the delivery of less hallucinated results. The novelty of our research stems from the development of a comprehensive, general-purpose framework that includes a HIL verified prompt template for auditing responses generated by LLMs.

Maryam Amirizaniani, Elias Martin, Tanya Roosta et al.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are integrated into various sectors, ensuring their reliability and safety is crucial. This necessitates rigorous probing and auditing to maintain their effectiveness and trustworthiness in practical applications. Subjecting LLMs to varied iterations of a single query can unveil potential inconsistencies in their knowledge base or functional capacity. However, a tool for performing such audits with a easy to execute workflow, and low technical threshold is lacking. In this demo, we introduce ``AuditLLM,'' a novel tool designed to audit the performance of various LLMs in a methodical way. AuditLLM's primary function is to audit a given LLM by deploying multiple probes derived from a single question, thus detecting any inconsistencies in the model's comprehension or performance. A robust, reliable, and consistent LLM is expected to generate semantically similar responses to variably phrased versions of the same question. Building on this premise, AuditLLM generates easily interpretable results that reflect the LLM's consistency based on a single input question provided by the user. A certain level of inconsistency has been shown to be an indicator of potential bias, hallucinations, and other issues. One could then use the output of AuditLLM to further investigate issues with the aforementioned LLM. To facilitate demonstration and practical uses, AuditLLM offers two key modes: (1) Live mode which allows instant auditing of LLMs by analyzing responses to real-time queries; and (2) Batch mode which facilitates comprehensive LLM auditing by processing multiple queries at once for in-depth analysis. This tool is beneficial for both researchers and general users, as it enhances our understanding of LLMs' capabilities in generating responses, using a standardized auditing platform.

Chirag Shah, Ryen W. White

In the midst of the growing integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into various aspects of our lives, agents are experiencing a resurgence. These autonomous programs that act on behalf of humans are neither new nor exclusive to the mainstream AI movement. By exploring past incarnations of agents, we can understand what has been done previously, what worked, and more importantly, what did not pan out and why. This understanding lets us to examine what distinguishes the current focus on agents. While generative AI is appealing, this technology alone is insufficient to make new generations of agents more successful. To make the current wave of agents effective and sustainable, we envision an ecosystem that includes not only agents but also Sims, which represent user preferences and behaviors, as well as Assistants, which directly interact with the user and coordinate the execution of user tasks with the help of the agents.

Kirandeep Kaur, Vinayak Gupta, Manya Chadha et al.

Conventional recommendation systems (RSs) are typically optimized to enhance performance metrics uniformly across all training samples, inadvertently overlooking the needs of diverse user populations. The performance disparity among various populations can harm the model's robustness to sub-populations due to the varying user properties. While large language models (LLMs) show promise in enhancing RS performance, their practical applicability is hindered by high costs, inference latency, and degraded performance on long user queries. To address these challenges, we propose a hybrid task allocation framework designed to promote social good by equitably serving all user groups. By adopting a two-phase approach, we promote a strategic assignment of tasks for efficient and responsible adaptation of LLMs. Our strategy works by first identifying the weak and inactive users that receive a suboptimal ranking performance by RSs. Next, we use an in-context learning approach for such users, wherein each user interaction history is contextualized as a distinct ranking task. We evaluate our hybrid framework by incorporating eight different recommendation algorithms and three different LLMs -- both open and close-sourced. Our results on three real-world datasets show a significant reduction in weak users and improved robustness to subpopulations without disproportionately escalating costs.

Preetam Prabhu Srikar Dammu, Himanshu Naidu, Chirag Shah

As question answering (QA) systems advance alongside the rapid evolution of foundation models, the need for robust, adaptable, and large-scale evaluation benchmarks becomes increasingly critical. Traditional QA benchmarks are often static and publicly available, making them susceptible to data contamination and memorization by large language models (LLMs). Consequently, static benchmarks may overestimate model generalization and hinder a reliable assessment of real-world performance. In this work, we introduce Dynamic-KGQA, a scalable framework for generating adaptive QA datasets from knowledge graphs (KGs), designed to mitigate memorization risks while maintaining statistical consistency across iterations. Unlike fixed benchmarks, Dynamic-KGQA generates a new dataset variant on every run while preserving the underlying distribution, enabling fair and reproducible evaluations. Furthermore, our framework provides fine-grained control over dataset characteristics, supporting domain-specific and topic-focused QA dataset generation. Additionally, Dynamic-KGQA produces compact, semantically coherent subgraphs that facilitate both training and evaluation of KGQA models, enhancing their ability to leverage structured knowledge effectively. To align with existing evaluation protocols, we also provide static large-scale train/test/validation splits, ensuring comparability with prior methods. By introducing a dynamic, customizable benchmarking paradigm, Dynamic-KGQA enables a more rigorous and adaptable evaluation of QA systems.

Harshita Chopra, Chirag Shah

Effective decision-making and problem-solving in conversational systems require the ability to identify and acquire missing information through targeted questioning. A key challenge lies in efficiently narrowing down a large space of possible outcomes by posing questions that minimize uncertainty. To address this, we introduce a novel framework that leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate information-seeking questions, with Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to strategically select questions that maximize information gain, as a part of inference-time planning. Our primary contribution includes a hierarchical feedback mechanism that exploits past interaction patterns to guide future strategy. Specifically, each new problem is mapped to a cluster based on semantic similarity, and our UCT (Upper Confidence bound for Trees) formulation employs a cluster-specific bonus reward to prioritize successful question trajectories that have proven effective for similar problems in the past. Extensive empirical evaluation across medical diagnosis and technical troubleshooting domains shows that our method achieves an average of 12% improvement in success rates and about 10x reduction in the number of LLM calls made for planning per conversation, compared to the state of the art. An additional 8% gain in success rate is observed on average when we start with a constrained set of possibilities. Our results underscore the efficacy of feedback-aware MCTS in enhancing information-seeking in goal-oriented dialogues.

Kirandeep Kaur, Preetam Prabhu Srikar Dammu, Hideo Joho et al.

Personalized AI agents are becoming central to modern information retrieval, yet most evaluation methodologies remain static, relying on fixed benchmarks and one-off metrics that fail to reflect how users' needs evolve over time. These limitations hinder our ability to assess whether agents can meaningfully adapt to individuals across dynamic, longitudinal interactions. In this perspective paper, we propose a conceptual lens for rethinking evaluation in adaptive personalization, shifting the focus from static performance snapshots to interaction-aware, evolving assessments. We organize this lens around three core components: (1) persona-based user simulation with temporally evolving preference models; (2) structured elicitation protocols inspired by reference interviews to extract preferences in context; and (3) adaptation-aware evaluation mechanisms that measure how agent behavior improves across sessions and tasks. While recent works have embraced LLM-driven user simulation, we situate this practice within a broader paradigm for evaluating agents over time. To illustrate our ideas, we conduct a case study in e-commerce search using the PersonalWAB dataset. Beyond presenting a framework, our work lays a conceptual foundation for understanding and evaluating personalization as a continuous, user-centric endeavor.

Julia Kharchenko, Tanya Roosta, Aman Chadha et al.

This paper introduces a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating how Large Language Models (LLMs) respond to linguistic shibboleths: subtle linguistic markers that can inadvertently reveal demographic attributes such as gender, social class, or regional background. Through carefully constructed interview simulations using 100 validated question-response pairs, we demonstrate how LLMs systematically penalize certain linguistic patterns, particularly hedging language, despite equivalent content quality. Our benchmark generates controlled linguistic variations that isolate specific phenomena while maintaining semantic equivalence, which enables the precise measurement of demographic bias in automated evaluation systems. We validate our approach along multiple linguistic dimensions, showing that hedged responses receive 25.6% lower ratings on average, and demonstrate the benchmark's effectiveness in identifying model-specific biases. This work establishes a foundational framework for detecting and measuring linguistic discrimination in AI systems, with broad applications to fairness in automated decision-making contexts.

Chirag Shah, Ryen W. White

The emergence of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is transforming information interaction. For decades, search engines such as Google and Bing have been the primary means of locating relevant information for the general population. They have provided search results in the same standard format (the so-called "10 blue links"). The recent ability to chat via natural language with AI-based agents and have GenAI automatically synthesize answers in real-time (grounded in top-ranked results) is changing how people interact with and consume information at massive scale. These two information interaction modalities (traditional search and AI-powered chat) coexist in current search engines, either loosely coupled (e.g., as separate options/tabs) or tightly coupled (e.g., integrated as a chat answer embedded directly within a traditional search result page). We believe that the existence of these two different modalities, and potentially many others, is creating an opportunity to re-imagine the search experience, capitalize on the strengths of many modalities, and develop systems and strategies to support seamless flow between them. We refer to these as panmodal experiences. Unlike monomodal experiences, where only one modality is available and/or used for the task at hand, panmodal experiences make multiple modalities available to users (multimodal), directly support transitions between modalities (crossmodal), and seamlessly combine modalities to tailor task assistance (transmodal). While our focus is search and chat, with learnings from insights from a survey of over 100 individuals who have recently performed common tasks on these two modalities, we also present a more general vision for the future of information interaction using multiple modalities and the emergent capabilities of GenAI.

Kirandeep Kaur, Vinayak Gupta, Aditya Gupta et al.

Most language-based assistants follow a reactive ask-and-respond paradigm, requiring users to explicitly state their needs. As a result, relevant but unexpressed needs often go unmet. Existing proactive agents attempt to address this gap either by eliciting further clarification, preserving this burden, or by extrapolating future needs from context, often leading to unnecessary or mistimed interventions. We introduce ProPer, Proactivity-driven Personalized agents, a novel two-agent architecture consisting of a Dimension Generating Agent (DGA) and a Response Generating Agent (RGA). DGA, a fine-tuned LLM agent, leverages explicit user data to generate multiple implicit dimensions (latent aspects relevant to the user's task but not considered by the user) or knowledge gaps. These dimensions are selectively filtered using a reranker based on quality, diversity, and task relevance. RGA then balances explicit and implicit dimensions to tailor personalized responses with timely and proactive interventions. We evaluate ProPer across multiple domains using a structured, gap-aware rubric that measures coverage, initiative appropriateness, and intent alignment. Our results show that ProPer improves quality scores and win rates across all domains, achieving up to 84% gains in single-turn evaluation and consistent dominance in multi-turn interactions.

Preetam Prabhu Srikar Dammu, Arnav Palkhiwala, Tanya Roosta et al.

With the emergence of search-enabled generative QA systems, users are increasingly turning to tools that browse, aggregate, and reconcile evidence across multiple sources on their behalf. Yet many widely used QA benchmarks remain answerable by retrieving a single relevant passage, making them poorly suited for measuring cross-source sensemaking, such as integrating evidence, tracking causal links, and resolving dependencies across facets of a topic. We present iAgentBench, a dynamic ODQA benchmark that targets these higher-level information needs while keeping questions natural and grounded in realistic information-seeking behavior. iAgentBench draws seed topics from real-world attention signals and uses common user intent patterns to construct user-like questions whose answers require combining evidence from multiple sources, not just extracting a single snippet. Each instance is released with traceable evidence and auditable intermediate artifacts that support contamination checks and enable fine-grained diagnosis of failures in retrieval versus synthesis. Experiments across multiple LLMs show that retrieval improves accuracy, but retrieval alone does not reliably resolve these questions, underscoring the need to evaluate evidence use, not just evidence access.

Chirag Shah, Hideo Joho, Kirandeep Kaur et al.

Recent advancements in generative AI have significantly increased interest in personalized agents. With increased personalization, there is also a greater need for being able to trust decision-making and action taking capabilities of these agents. However, the evaluation methods for these agents remain outdated and inadequate, often failing to capture the dynamic and evolving nature of user interactions. In this conceptual article, we argue for a paradigm shift in evaluating personalized and adaptive agents. We propose a comprehensive novel framework that models user personas with unique attributes and preferences. In this framework, agents interact with these simulated users through structured interviews to gather their preferences and offer customized recommendations. These recommendations are then assessed dynamically using simulations driven by Large Language Models (LLMs), enabling an adaptive and iterative evaluation process. Our flexible framework is designed to support a variety of agents and applications, ensuring a comprehensive and versatile evaluation of recommendation strategies that focus on proactive, personalized, and trustworthy aspects.

Julia Kharchenko, Tanya Roosta, Aman Chadha et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) attempt to imitate human behavior by responding to humans in a way that pleases them, including by adhering to their values. However, humans come from diverse cultures with different values. It is critical to understand whether LLMs showcase different values to the user based on the stereotypical values of a user's known country. We prompt different LLMs with a series of advice requests based on 5 Hofstede Cultural Dimensions -- a quantifiable way of representing the values of a country. Throughout each prompt, we incorporate personas representing 36 different countries and, separately, languages predominantly tied to each country to analyze the consistency in the LLMs' cultural understanding. Through our analysis of the responses, we found that LLMs can differentiate between one side of a value and another, as well as understand that countries have differing values, but will not always uphold the values when giving advice, and fail to understand the need to answer differently based on different cultural values. Rooted in these findings, we present recommendations for training value-aligned and culturally sensitive LLMs. More importantly, the methodology and the framework developed here can help further understand and mitigate culture and language alignment issues with LLMs.

Maryam Amirizaniani, Elias Martin, Maryna Sivachenko et al.

Theory of Mind (ToM) reasoning entails recognizing that other individuals possess their own intentions, emotions, and thoughts, which is vital for guiding one's own thought processes. Although large language models (LLMs) excel in tasks such as summarization, question answering, and translation, they still face challenges with ToM reasoning, especially in open-ended questions. Despite advancements, the extent to which LLMs truly understand ToM reasoning and how closely it aligns with human ToM reasoning remains inadequately explored in open-ended scenarios. Motivated by this gap, we assess the abilities of LLMs to perceive and integrate human intentions and emotions into their ToM reasoning processes within open-ended questions. Our study utilizes posts from Reddit's ChangeMyView platform, which demands nuanced social reasoning to craft persuasive responses. Our analysis, comparing semantic similarity and lexical overlap metrics between responses generated by humans and LLMs, reveals clear disparities in ToM reasoning capabilities in open-ended questions, with even the most advanced models showing notable limitations. To enhance LLM capabilities, we implement a prompt tuning method that incorporates human intentions and emotions, resulting in improvements in ToM reasoning performance. However, despite these improvements, the enhancement still falls short of fully achieving human-like reasoning. This research highlights the deficiencies in LLMs' social reasoning and demonstrates how integrating human intentions and emotions can boost their effectiveness.

Siddharth Suri, Scott Counts, Leijie Wang et al.

Until recently, search engines were the predominant method for people to access online information. The recent emergence of large language models (LLMs) has given machines new capabilities such as the ability to generate new digital artifacts like text, images, code etc., resulting in a new tool, a generative search engine, which combines the capabilities of LLMs with a traditional search engine. Through the empirical analysis of Bing Copilot (Bing Chat), one of the first publicly available generative search engines, we analyze the types and complexity of tasks that people use Bing Copilot for compared to Bing Search. Findings indicate that people use the generative search engine for more knowledge work tasks that are higher in cognitive complexity than were commonly done with a traditional search engine.

Ruoyuan Gao, Yingqiang Ge, Chirag Shah

With the emerging needs of creating fairness-aware solutions for search and recommendation systems, a daunting challenge exists of evaluating such solutions. While many of the traditional information retrieval (IR) metrics can capture the relevance, diversity, and novelty for the utility with respect to users, they are not suitable for inferring whether the presented results are fair from the perspective of responsible information exposure. On the other hand, existing fairness metrics do not account for user utility or do not measure it adequately. To address this problem, we propose a new metric called FAIR. By unifying standard IR metrics and fairness measures into an integrated metric, this metric offers a new perspective for evaluating fairness-aware ranking results. Based on this metric, we developed an effective ranking algorithm that jointly optimized user utility and fairness. The experimental results showed that our FAIR metric could highlight results with good user utility and fair information exposure. We showed how FAIR related to a set of existing utility and fairness metrics and demonstrated the effectiveness of our FAIR-based algorithm. We believe our work opens up a new direction of pursuing a metric for evaluating and implementing the FAIR systems.

Bin Han, Chirag Shah, Daniel Saelid

Search engines could consistently favor certain values over the others, which is considered as biased due to the built-in infrastructures. Many studies have been dedicated to detect, control, and mitigate the impacts of the biases from the perspectives of search engines themselves. In our study, we take the perspective from end-users to analyze their perceptions of search engine biases and their satisfaction when the biases are regulated. In the study, we paired a real search page from search engine Bing with a synthesized page that has more diversities in the results (i.e. less biased). Both pages show the top-10 search items given search queries and we asked participants which one do they prefer and why do they prefer the one selected. Statistical analyses revealed that overall, participants prefer the original Bing pages and the locations where the diversities are introduced are also associated with users' preferences. We found out that users prefer results that are more consistent and relevant to the search queries. Introducing diversities undermines the relevance of the search results and impairs users' satisfaction to some degree. Additionally, we confirmed that users tend to pay more attention to the top portion of the results than the bottom ones.

Yunhe Feng, Daniel Saelid, Ke Li et al.

InfoSeeking Lab's FATE (Fairness Accountability Transparency Ethics) group at University of Washington participated in 2020 TREC Fairness Ranking Track. This report describes that track, assigned data and tasks, our group definitions, and our results. Our approach to bringing fairness in retrieval and re-ranking tasks with Semantic Scholar data was to extract various dimensions of author identity. These dimensions included gender and location. We developed modules for these extractions in a way that allowed us to plug them in for either of the tasks as needed. After trying different combinations of relative weights assigned to relevance, gender, and location information, we chose five runs for retrieval and five runs for re-ranking tasks. The results showed that our runs performed below par for re-ranking task, but above average for retrieval.

Sahil Verma, Varich Boonsanong, Minh Hoang et al.

Machine learning plays a role in many deployed decision systems, often in ways that are difficult or impossible to understand by human stakeholders. Explaining, in a human-understandable way, the relationship between the input and output of machine learning models is essential to the development of trustworthy machine learning based systems. A burgeoning body of research seeks to define the goals and methods of explainability in machine learning. In this paper, we seek to review and categorize research on counterfactual explanations, a specific class of explanation that provides a link between what could have happened had input to a model been changed in a particular way. Modern approaches to counterfactual explainability in machine learning draw connections to the established legal doctrine in many countries, making them appealing to fielded systems in high-impact areas such as finance and healthcare. Thus, we design a rubric with desirable properties of counterfactual explanation algorithms and comprehensively evaluate all currently proposed algorithms against that rubric. Our rubric provides easy comparison and comprehension of the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches and serves as an introduction to major research themes in this field. We also identify gaps and discuss promising research directions in the space of counterfactual explainability.

Sahil Verma, Ruoyuan Gao, Chirag Shah

Several recent works have highlighted how search and recommender systems exhibit bias along different dimensions. Counteracting this bias and bringing a certain amount of fairness in search is crucial to not only creating a more balanced environment that considers relevance and diversity but also providing a more sustainable way forward for both content consumers and content producers. This short paper examines some of the recent works to define relevance, diversity, and related concepts. Then, it focuses on explaining the emerging concept of fairness in various recommendation settings. In doing so, this paper presents comparisons and highlights contracts among various measures, and gaps in our conceptual and evaluative frameworks.

Zuohui Fu, Yikun Xian, Ruoyuan Gao et al.

There has been growing attention on fairness considerations recently, especially in the context of intelligent decision making systems. Explainable recommendation systems, in particular, may suffer from both explanation bias and performance disparity. In this paper, we analyze different groups of users according to their level of activity, and find that bias exists in recommendation performance between different groups. We show that inactive users may be more susceptible to receiving unsatisfactory recommendations, due to insufficient training data for the inactive users, and that their recommendations may be biased by the training records of more active users, due to the nature of collaborative filtering, which leads to an unfair treatment by the system. We propose a fairness constrained approach via heuristic re-ranking to mitigate this unfairness problem in the context of explainable recommendation over knowledge graphs. We experiment on several real-world datasets with state-of-the-art knowledge graph-based explainable recommendation algorithms. The promising results show that our algorithm is not only able to provide high-quality explainable recommendations, but also reduces the recommendation unfairness in several respects.

Daniel Hienert, Dagmar Kern, Matthew Mitsui et al.

In Interactive Information Retrieval (IIR) experiments the user's gaze motion on web pages is often recorded with eye tracking. The data is used to analyze gaze behavior or to identify Areas of Interest (AOI) the user has looked at. So far, tools for analyzing eye tracking data have certain limitations in supporting the analysis of gaze behavior in IIR experiments. Experiments often consist of a huge number of different visited web pages. In existing analysis tools the data can only be analyzed in videos or images and AOIs for every single web page have to be specified by hand, in a very time consuming process. In this work, we propose the reading protocol software which breaks eye tracking data down to the textual level by considering the HTML structure of the web pages. This has a lot of advantages for the analyst. First and foremost, it can easily be identified on a large scale what has actually been viewed and read on the stimuli pages by the subjects. Second, the web page structure can be used to filter to AOIs. Third, gaze data of multiple users can be presented on the same page, and fourth, fixation times on text can be exported and further processed in other tools. We present the software, its validation, and example use cases with data from three existing IIR experiments.

Nicholas J. Belkin, Daniel Hienert, Philipp Mayr et al.

Two key, but usually ignored, issues for the evaluation of methods of personalization for information retrieval are: that such evaluation must be of a search session as a whole; and, that people, during the course of an information search session, engage in a variety of activities, intended to accomplish differ- ent goals or intentions. Taking serious account of these factors has major impli- cations for not only evaluation methods and metrics, but also for the nature of the data that is necessary both for understanding and modeling information search, and for evaluation of personalized support for information retrieval (IR). In this position paper, we: present a model of IR demonstrating why these fac- tors are important; identify some implications of accepting their validity; and, on the basis of a series of studies in interactive IR, identify some types of data concerning searcher and system behavior that we claim are, at least, necessary, if not necessarily sufficient, for meaningful evaluation of personalization of IR.

Daniel Hienert, Matthew Mitsui, Philipp Mayr et al.

When users are looking for information on the Web, they show different behavior for different task types, e.g., for fact finding vs. information gathering tasks. For example, related work in this area has investigated how this behavior can be measured and applied to distinguish between easy and difficult tasks. In this work, we look at the searcher's behavior in the domain of journalism for four different task types, and additionally, for two different topics in each task type. Search behavior is measured with a number of session variables and correlated to subjective measures such as task difficulty, task success and the usefulness of documents. We acknowledge prior results in this area that task difficulty is correlated to user effort and that easy and difficult tasks are distinguishable by session variables. However, in this work, we emphasize the role of the task topic - in and of itself - over parameters such as the search results and read content pages, dwell times, session variables and subjective measures such as task difficulty or task success. With this knowledge researchers should give more attention to the task topic as an important influence factor for user behavior.