Advice

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Momentum

8 papers in the last four weeks, against 1 the four weeks before. 0.1% of all new papers.

Jul 6Week of Sep 21

Latest papers 27

Sep 28, 2026cs.AI

ThuRunel: Dynamic Decoupling for Structured Advisory Dialogue

High-stakes advisory domains such as medical aesthetics, legal consultation, and educational planning exhibit a two-phase structure. The early phase requires empathetic elicitation and emotional support, and the late phase requires authoritative specialist judgment. Neither fully automated agents nor human junior consultants adequately address this structure at scale. We formalize the core design challenge as dynamic decoupling, asking how an AI advisory agent should decide what to ask, when to stop, what to resolve autonomously, and what to forward to the specialist. We present ThuRunel, an advisory agent combining a finite-state belief management framework, a chain-of-thought teacher synthesis protocol, and learned generation adapters. Against eleven baselines, ThuRunel achieves consistent improvements in elicitation completeness and specialist brief quality. ThuRunel is publicly deployed as a bilingual web application in which the same decoupling decisions operate from the client's side, grounded in a curated knowledge base that cites its sources in every answer.

Yuyan Chen

ModelsLive Inc.

Advice Empathy Decoupling Chain-of-Thought Reasoning

Sep 20, 2026cs.CL

XYEval: Agents say yes to bad advice

Effective communication between users and AI agents is essential for human-AI collaboration. The XY problem is a well-known communication pitfall where a person asks about their attempted solution rather than their actual problem. We extend prior sycophancy evaluation to the XY problem in agentic settings, evaluating whether agents can resist plausible but misleading suggestions from users and communicate their reasoning. We introduce XYEval, a meta-evaluation framework that can transform an existing benchmark into an XY problem evaluation. We evaluate five models across six diverse benchmark suites. Agents suffer large XY drops under XY mutation across benchmarks, with relative drops reaching up to 46.7%. With

τ^2

-bench, we further show that agent performance drops more when encountering a pedantic user who requires detailed explanations before approving a better solution. Our findings suggest that current agents lack the ability to effectively reason and communicate when facing misleading suggestions. A simple system instruction baseline that encourages awareness of XY problems only offers partial mitigation. Extensive trace analyses provide behavioral insights into how and why these XY drops occur across execution trajectories. Our results show that mitigating the XY problem remains challenging, requiring agents to both recognize user misdirection and clearly communicate the underlying problem.

Zhengxuan Wu, Yuxuan Li, Oyvind Tafjord +1

Google DeepMind

Artificial Intelligence Agents Advice Bad

Sep 17, 2026cs.HC

Trustworthy FinAInce: Unpacking How AI-Mediated Financial Advice is Judged

As generative AI is increasingly used as a source of personal financial guidance, understanding how people appraise such advice is important for supporting appropriate reliance. We conducted a randomized vignette experiment with 285 U.S. adults across eight financial decisions, independently varying three advice styles---AI, expert, and online community---and displayed source labels while holding the underlying recommendation consistent. Advice style most strongly shaped message and safety appraisals, Expert labels selectively increased perceived source knowledge, and decision context primarily shaped risk and safety appraisals. These appraisals were associated with downstream judgments, with models explaining 69.2% of overall quality, 75.9% of trust, and 82.9% of intended reliance. Expert-style advice also remained most preferred when shown without source labels. Our findings have implications for understanding financial advice evaluation, distinguishing the roles of advice style and source labels, and designing financial AI that supports grounded evaluation rather than simply maximizing trust.

Aryan Ramchandra Kapadia, Eshwar Chandrasekharan, Koustuv Saha

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA

Advice Financial Strategy Research Artificial Intelligence Evaluation Human Judgment Controlled Study

Sep 16, 2026quant-ph

Securing quantum error correction against misleading advice from AI agents

Can an attacker turn influence over an artificial intelligence (AI) adviser into a harmful quantum error-correction update? We identify an ambiguity in passive syndrome records that obstructs recovery selection, then show how additional calibration measurements support certified recovery updates under uncertainty and drift. In an odd-distance square toric code with error-free preparation, syndrome measurements, and recovery operations, opposite coherent

X

rotations produce identical passive syndrome-history distributions. Yet a fixed phase correction can help at one sign and harm at the other. A terminal logical measurement on known encoded calibration states supplies the missing sign information. A separate evaluator accepts an update only when calibration uncertainty and a justified drift bound certify improvement over the current recovery, without assuming that the adviser recommends correctly. In simulated advice attacks, calibration-confidence checks reject harmful proposals while retaining beneficial updates under honest advice. We derive sufficient limits on calibration age that require improvement through deployment. In matched simulations, a validated channel-specific bound retains more beneficial updates than the general bound after accounting for evaluation time, while preventing the tested harmful activations under the stated drift assumption. A separate surface-code experiment includes stochastic circuit faults and noise changing during acquisition. Deterministic controllers achieve at least as many beneficial updates with the same observations. Violating the drift assumption permits harmful acceptance in the toric experiment. The results identify information required for recovery selection, establish conditional guarantees against harmful updates, and quantify the recovery improvements forgone through conservative acceptance.

A. Barış Özgüler

Quantum Error Correction Error Correction Artificial Intelligence Agents Advice Passive

Sep 14, 2026econ.TH

Robust Trust

An agent chooses an action based on her private information and a recommendation from an informed but potentially misaligned adviser. With a known probability, the adviser truthfully reports his signal; with the remaining probability, he can send any message. We characterize optimal robust decision rules that maximize the agent's worst-case expected payoff. Every optimal rule is equivalent to a trust-region policy in belief space: the adviser's reported beliefs are taken at face value if they fall within the trust region but are otherwise clipped to the trust region's boundary. We derive alignment thresholds above which advice is strictly valuable and fully characterize the solution in both binary-state and binary-action environments.

Piotr Dworczak, Alex Smolin

Toulouse School of Economics

AI Trustworthiness Trust Region Advice Strategic Agents

Sep 14, 2026cs.LG

Robust Policy Optimization via Adversarial Importance Sampling

Significant progress has been made in safeguarding deep reinforcement learning (DRL) policies against input perturbations. Developing robust DRL involves three main stages: algorithm design, implementation, and evaluation. In this work, we identify and address a key limitation at each stage. First, we introduce Adversarial Importance Sampling (Advis), a method that uses importance sampling over trajectories from standard training to estimate and optimize verifiable worst-case returns. Advis satisfies three desirable criteria not jointly achieved by prior work: it requires no additional environment interactions, no auxiliary networks, and captures long-term robustness. Second, we introduce advrl, a modular PyTorch library that provides clean, single-file implementations of existing robustness methods and adversarial attacks, facilitating rapid prototyping and enabling reproducible and traceable evaluations. Third, we revisit evaluation under learned adversaries and show that optimal adversarial hyperparameters do not transfer across agents, which can lead to an overestimation of robustness when using a limited set of attacker configurations. Accordingly, we evaluate policies against a large and diverse set of attackers, using 6-14x more configurations than prior work. Finally, we evaluate our approach on continuous control environments, demonstrating its effectiveness relative to existing baselines. The code is available at: https://github.com/AmineAndam04/advrl

Amine Andam, Jamal Bentahar, Mustapha Hedabou

Mohammed VI Polytechnic University · Khalifa University · Concordia University

Offline Reinforcement Learning Adversarial Training Importance Advice

Sep 13, 2026cs.CY

A latent dimension of Condorcet's jury theorem for multiple AI advisers

When the same question is asked of multiple AI advisers, as in self-consistency and LLM-as-a-judge panels, Condorcet's jury theorem predicts that adding independent, competent advisers makes the majority more reliable. The theorem, however, has a latent dimension when viewed from the user's vantage: adding advisers also makes disagreement more visible. A binomial model reveals that this ``visible dissent'' becomes nearly inevitable as the number of advisers grows, and that reliability and disagreement approach certainty at rates that cross at an adviser accuracy of 4/5 (0.8); below it, visible dissent eventually becomes more likely than a correct majority. Even ideal panels of independent and competent advisers can be correct in aggregate but appear divided; such disagreement does not by itself indicate aggregation failure. The way advisers split also provides a common basis for predictive multiplicity, reconciliation load, and reliance miscalibration. These results separate aggregation from disclosure and turn the latter into testable questions about how disagreement should be presented and interpreted.

Kazutoshi Sasahara, Aoi Naito, Ryo Fujie

Institute of Science Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan · Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Disagreement Advice

Sep 10, 2026cs.AI

PRAGMA: Evaluating Personalized Guidance with Memory Alignment in Lifelong Conversations

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as personalized assistants that interact with users over extended periods of time. As conversations grow longer, relying on full interaction histories becomes increasingly inefficient and unreliable: long contexts introduce substantial computational overhead, making it difficult for models to consistently identify and utilize the most relevant information for the current request. These challenges have motivated memory systems that structure and retrieve user-specific information. In realistic interactions, users often seek practical guidance such as recommendations, planning, and decision support. Unlike factual recall tasks, personalized guidance requires models to integrate information across multiple past conversations and reason about changing user preferences and experiences. However, existing conversational memory evaluations mainly focus on retrieval and factual recall. To study this challenge, we introduce PRAGMA, a benchmark for evaluating personalized guidance in long-term conversations. PRGAMA contains curated longitudinal conversation histories, evidence annotations, and guidance scenarios grounded in evolving user contexts and incorrect user assumptions. Experiments across retrieval systems, memory systems, and long-context models reveal that current systems struggle both to recover the appropriate conversational evidence and to effectively use it for personalized guidance. Our results highlight the need for memory architectures that support robust conversational retrieval and memory-grounded reasoning beyond evidence recall.

Hyojeong Yu, Hyukhun Koh, Minsung Kim +2

Dept. of ECE, Seoul National University · IPAI, Seoul National University

Conversational Memory Interaction History Efficient Long-Context Inference Tool-Grounded Reasoning Advice

Aug 31, 2026cs.CL

Personas Differ from Native-Language Generation: Language Pathways Shape LLM Interpersonal Advice

LLMs are increasingly used for interpersonal advice and as tools for studying social behavior across languages and cultures. A common shortcut for eliciting language- or culture-related variation is to ask a model to answer as a native speaker. We test whether this native-speaker persona reproduces the outputs obtained when models instead generate advice in the target language and translate the response back into English. Using 600 interpersonal advice questions across 13 languages and eight LLMs, we compare native-language generation followed by translation (NL) with native-speaker persona prompting (NP), measuring linguistic style, behavioral scaffolding, and forced-choice action recommendations. We find that NP and NL are not interchangeable. Compared to NL, NP often increases lexical social cues, including affiliation and positive tone, while reducing qualities such as concreteness and social attunement; NP also provides less actionable scaffolding in open-ended advice. In forced-choice scenarios, NP changes which action the model selects, favoring confrontation over redirection, with effect sizes varying across languages, topics, and models. Our results show that cross-lingual elicitation strategy is a consequential methodological choice that can change both how advice is framed and which actions models recommend.

Jinhee Won, Xinlan Emily Hu

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Advice Scaffolds

Aug 10, 2026cs.HC

How People Evaluate AI-, Expert-, and Peer-Style Financial Advice

As generative AI increasingly becomes a common source of daily decision-making, including financial choices, it is critical to understand how people evaluate AI-generated financial advice. We conducted a preregistered vignette experiment (N = 285) in which substantive financial content---including facts, numerical values, recommendation direction, and core reasoning---was held constant while communication style varied across AI Financial Assistant (AI), Certified Financial Planner (Expert), and Online Community Forum (OC) advice. Displayed source attribution was independently manipulated through correctly labeled, unlabeled, and mislabeled conditions, allowing us to separate attribution effects from source-specific communication cues. Expert advice was rated more favorably than AI advice on 9 of 10 outcomes (|d|=0.20--0.47), and this advantage remained visible without source labels, where Expert advice outperformed AI advice on 8 of 10 outcomes (up to d=0.60). Correct labels added limited differentiation, whereas mislabeling increased ratings of AI advice for situational fit and overall quality (d=0.42 for each) and attenuated the Expert advantage in situational fit (d=-0.36). Descriptive analyses further showed that AI advice was most responsive to displayed attribution and, conversely, that advice-style differences were most visible under an AI label. These findings show that financial-advice evaluations are shaped jointly by displayed attribution and message-level communication cues. We position disclosure not as a neutral transparency mechanism, but as an interpretive frame whose accuracy and interaction with message cues can shape trust and reliance.

Aryan Ramchandra Kapadia, Eshwar Chandrasekharan, Koustuv Saha

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, USA

Advice Financial Strategy Research Artificial Intelligence Evaluation Experts

Aug 1, 2026cs.SE

Distilling Reasoning Traces into Advisory Prompts for Software Engineering Tasks

Language models are widely used for generating and otherwise processing code (e.g., identifying code hallucinations, possible inputs, or predicting outputs); however, LLMs can make mistakes, which can be serious. One key issue is that models are trained on (still) largely human-written, and thus imperfect, code; it's not easy to find sufficiently large code corpora that are entirely free of bugs. Thus, other inference-time ways of reducing LLM errors, without additional training, are desirable. "Reasoning" or "thinking" modes, exposed as a togglable feature by hybrid reasoning models, do reduce errors; however, reasoning consumes additional resources. This paper asks if better performance can be achieved without always incurring the cost of reasoning. Human students of programming learn to avoid mistakes by (a) identifying them, (b) reflecting upon the cognitive lapses that led to them (essentially, "thinking through" the errors), (c) inferring general rules or lessons from these reflections, and (d) internalizing these lessons into rules. In tutorial sessions with an instructor, this is a common Socratic interaction. Examples of such internalizable rules might include the nugget "Before coding, restate the requirements to clarify them." Inspired by this process, this paper describes an approach where we first identify examples in which "thinking mode" in a (low-resource) LLM avoids errors. These errors, and their avoidance via "thinking" in the same LLM, are then examined by a bigger LLM to generate summary explanations; these are then summarized by a large LLM into brief advisory prompts. This approach works on many modest-sized models; in some cases, the "advisory prompts" thus learned can also be gainfully transferred to other models. We also present investigations into the nature of coding errors that language models make, and a characterization of when this approach can be helpful.

Faizan Faisal, Prem Devanbu, Toufique Ahmed

University of California, Davis · IBM

Ai-Assisted Programming Tasks Software Engineering Advice Explainable AI Methods Cognitive Load Text Corpora

Jul 26, 2026cs.CL

Guiding Language Models to Be More Empathetic: Culturally Sensitive Mental Health Advice Generation Through Human-LLM Collaboration

Despite recent advances in large language models (LLMs), their ability to generate empathetic mental health counseling responses in low-resource languages remains largely unexplored. To address this gap, we curate 625 authentic mental health cases from three complementary sources: (1) publicly available Facebook posts discussing mental health concerns, (2) transcripts from the Bangladeshi television program "Ami Akhon Ki Korbo", and (3) anonymized student questionnaire responses covering diverse emotional and psychological challenges. Based on these cases, we build an evaluation corpus comprising advice written by licensed clinical psychologists and responses generated by three modern proprietary LLMs: GPT-4o Mini, Claude 4.5 Haiku, and Gemini 2.5 Pro. We further propose the Role-Playing Reflective Chain-of-Thought Advisory Framework (RP-RCAF), a task-specific prompting strategy that combines expert-authored few-shot examples with structured self-reflection to produce supportive, culturally aware, and ethically aligned counseling through a compassionate advisor persona. We also introduce the Grok 4-Based Response Evaluation and Scoring Framework (G-REFS), which integrates automated assessment with expert psychologist validation across emotional sensitivity, cultural appropriateness, linguistic clarity, and ethical soundness. Experimental results show that RP-RCAF consistently outperforms conventional prompting across all evaluated models and produces responses that more closely align with professional psychological counseling.

Fatema Tuj Johora Faria, Mukaffi Bin Moin, Md. Mahfuzur Rahman +3

Ahsanullah University of Science and Technology · Bangladesh University of Business and Technology · The University of New South Wales +2

Counseling Empathy Advice Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Grokking

Jul 15, 2026cs.AI

AI advice suppresses people's willingness to say "I don't know", even when the advice is wrong and accuracy is incentivized

Knowing when to say "I don't know" is fundamental to human judgment, yet AI assistants offer a fluent answer to almost any question. In five experiments (N = 3,132; four preregistered, one direct replication), participants answered difficult questions and could always decline to respond. We engineered the questions so that AI advice was wrong, separating AI use from its accuracy. Merely having access to AI nearly eliminated participants' willingness to suspend judgment, and this held whether the advice was actively requested or simply displayed. Consequently, participants answered more questions but were correct about a third as often as when AI was unavailable-yet their confidence nearly doubled. Incentivizing accuracy and penalizing inaccuracy led participants to seek and follow AI advice less, answer more accurately, and suspend judgment more often, though still far less than when AI was unavailable. As AI suggestions grow ubiquitous and unsolicited, they may not simply affect answer accuracy; they may even alter the metacognitive threshold at which people decide whether they know enough to answer.

Chiara Marcoccia, Walter Quattrociocchi, Valerio Capraro

Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, France · University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Rome, Italy · University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy

Advice Student Misconceptions Human Judgment Artificial Intelligence Assistants Metacognition Reasoning Gaps+2

Jun 16, 2026cs.AI

DiagFlowBench: Evaluating How Language Models Handle Off-Procedure Inputs in Grounded Diagnostic Dialogue

Language models increasingly serve as advisory systems in maintenance operations. To prevent hallucination, recent systems ground these models in procedural documentation to constrain them to approved steps. In practice, however, operator queries frequently stray from this path, requiring models to recognise out-of-scope inputs mid-conversation, a dynamic that current benchmarks rarely prioritise. We introduce DiagFlowBench, a dataset of 50 industrial diagnostic flowcharts from a consumer manufacturer converted into 1,676 multi-turn conversations that contrast compliant with out-of-scope utterances. Evaluating a panel of ten commercial and open-weight models reveals high variability in abstention rates, with models commonly selecting a real but contextually inadequate step rather than fabricating facts. The inherent plausibility and authority of this mapped but wrong advice exposes a challenging vulnerability for grounding systems.

Guillermo Gil de Avalle, Laura Maruster, Shaina Raza +1

University of Groningen, PO Box 72, 9700 AB Groningen, The Netherlands · Vector Institute for Artificial Intelligence, MaRS Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada

Diagnosis Large Language Models Fail Tool-Grounded Reasoning Advice

Jun 11, 2026cs.IR

Carolina Guide: A Multi-Agent RAG System with Institutional Guardrails for Academic Policy Assistance

University students often struggle to navigate complex academic policies, leading to advising bottlenecks and delayed access to critical information. Although large language models (LLMs) offer promise for automated assistance, their tendency toward hallucination and inability to enforce institutional constraints make them unsuitable for high-stakes policy guidance without careful architectural design. We present Carolina Guide, a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) system for academic policy assistance at the University of South Carolina (USC). The system employs a modular multi-agent pipeline with institutional guardrails to provide citation-supported, policy-grounded answers to student queries while refusing unsafe requests such as course recommendations or personalized advising. We evaluate the system on a 90 query test set across 6 departments, achieving 98.9% retrieval success at the >= 2 threshold (genuinely relevant results) with the first relevant chunk at rank-1 for 98.9% of queries (MRR at 10 for rel >= 2 = 0.989). Through systematic baseline comparisons and ablation studies, we show that each architectural component-MMR reranking, adequate retrieval context (k=20), and citation enforcement-contributes measurable practical value despite limited statistical power at 90 queries. The evaluation of the guardrail on 30 adversarial queries demonstrates Safety F1 of 0.89, correctly refusing 86% of unsafe queries while maintaining 93% coverage of benign queries. These results show that production-ready LLM systems for institutional policy guidance require rethinking standard RAG patterns to prioritize safety, transparency, and departmental autonomy over conversational sophistication.

Ben Torsion, Jun Zhou

University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, USA · University of South Carolina, Columbia, USA

Academic Integrity Agentic Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems Streaming Guardrails Large Language Model Policy Optimization Advice

May 28, 2026cs.AI

Uncertainty-Aware and Temporally Regulated Expert Advice in Reinforcement Learning for Autonomous Driving

Exploration in reinforcement learning for autonomous driving is inherently unsafe: agents must experience novel behaviors to learn, yet exploration can lead to collisions or off-road driving. We propose an uncertainty-aware framework that leverages expert advice to guide exploration while avoiding long-term dependence. Advice is triggered when epistemic or aleatoric uncertainty exceeds adaptive thresholds derived from rolling buffers, ensuring advice evolves with the agent's confidence. A commitment-cooldown strategy with a stochastic early-stop heuristic regulates the duration and frequency of guidance, exposing the agent to coherent maneuvers without exhausting the advice budget. Expert and agent experiences are combined in a shared replay buffer within an off-policy implicit quantile network (IQN) backbone, enabling efficient reuse of expert trajectories. Experiments in CARLA show that our method outperforms the IQN baseline, improving success by 5-7% and reducing failures, demonstrating that risk-sensitive uncertainty coupled with regulated expert integration enables safer and more efficient exploration for sensor-based RL policy learning in unsignalized intersection navigation.

Ahmed Abouelazm, Felix Klingebiel, Philip Schörner +1

FZI Research Center for Information Technology, Germany · Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany

Autonomous Driving Efficient Exploration Expert Demonstrations Advice

May 28, 2026cs.CL

Dial HEALTHDIAL for Advice: A Multilingual and Multi-Parallel Spoken Dialogue Dataset for Knowledge-Grounded Information Seeking

Creating spoken dialogue datasets is methodologically challenging, and these challenges are amplified when the goal is to build multilingual, multi-parallel datasets at scale. This work introduces HEALTHDIAL, a large-scale, multilingual, and multi-parallel dataset for developing and evaluating retrieval-augmented generation (RAG)-based spoken dialogue systems. The dataset comprises 6,000 information-seeking dialogues (1,500 per language) grounded in trusted content from the World Health Organization (WHO) and 163 hours of user speech recorded from native speakers of diverse dialects across four official WHO languages: Arabic, Chinese, English, and Spanish. Each speaker is annotated with demographic (e.g., gender, age) and sociolinguistic (e.g., primary language, region of origin) variables. We report benchmark results across key dialogue tasks, which reveal consistent performance disparities across languages, even among high-resource ones. To support future research, we release the dataset, a prototype system, and a toolkit for data collection and system evaluation.

Songbo Hu, Yinhong Liu, Ej Zhou +5

Language Technology Lab, University of Cambridge, UK · Independent Researcher · School of Computation, Information and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Germany

Conversational Datasets Multilingual Healthcare Q&A Multilingual Automatic Speech Recognition Dial Advice

May 26, 2026cs.CL

Quality Without Usefulness: LLM-Generated XAI Narratives as Trust Heuristics Rather Than Decision Aids

Prior work shows that Large Language Models (LLMs) can transform Explainable AI (XAI) outputs into Natural Language Explanations (NLEs) that score highly on quality metrics such as plausibility, coherence, and comprehensibility. But does explanation quality translate to practical usefulness? We investigate this question in a time-series energy forecasting domain through five controlled experiments (2,730 judgments across 60 test instances), each operationalising a distinct facet of usefulness studied in the XAI literature. Holding NLE quality constant at the high levels established by a prior factorial study, we find that NLEs do not improve task accuracy on any of the five tasks, while inflating self-reported confidence. A placebic control shows that this confidence boost is driven by text presence rather than content. In an out-of-distribution detection task, NLEs reduce the LLM judge's ability to flag unreliable predictions, providing false reassurance that masks model failure. We characterise these findings as the Quality-Usefulness Gap and argue that evaluation of the XAI-to-NLE pipeline must extend beyond text-quality metrics to downstream task performance.

Fabian Lukassen, Jan Herrmann, Christoph Weisser +3

University of Göttingen · BASF SE · Hochschule Bielefeld +1

Xai Explainable Artificial Intelligence Explainable AI Methods AI Trustworthiness Narratives Advice

May 13, 2026cs.CL

Good Agentic Friends Do Not Just Give Verbal Advice: They Can Update Your Weights

Multi-agent LLM systems usually collaborate by exchanging natural-language messages. This interface is simple and interpretable, but it forces each sender's intermediate computation to be serialized into tokens and then reprocessed by the receiver, thereby increasing the generated-token cost, prefill overhead, and KV-cache memory. We study an alternative communication interface: instead of appending a sender's message to the receiver's context, compile the sender's hidden states into a transient, receiver-specific weight perturbation. We introduce TFlow (Thought Flow), a weight-space communication framework for a known and fixed receiver architecture. For each query, frozen role-prompted sender agents process the input, and a learned parameter generator maps their internal activations into low-rank LoRA perturbations targeting the receiver's modules. These perturbations are fused and applied only during the receiver's generation, enabling instance-level adaptation without permanently changing the model or enlarging the receiver's text context. With three Qwen3-4B agents, TFlow improves over a standalone receiver by up to 8.5 accuracy points across five benchmarks while reducing processed tokens by up to 32.69%. Compared with a text-based three-agent baseline, it reduces total processed tokens by up to 83.27% and the wall-clock inference time by up to 4.6

\times

, while maintaining competitive accuracy on four of five benchmarks. These results suggest that transient low-rank weight perturbations can serve as an executable communication medium for efficient multi-agent LLM collaboration.

Wenrui Bao, Huan Wang, Jian Wang +3

University of Central Florida · Westlake University · Snap Inc. +2

Multi-Agent Large Language Model Systems Advice

Apr 30, 2026cs.LG

Smart Profit-Aware Crop Advisory System: Kisan AI

Modern crop advisory systems exhibit a critical limitation termed \textit{economic blindness}. These systems primarily optimize for biological yield, often overlooking market price, which can lead farmers toward agronomically sound yet financially unviable decisions. In this paper, we develop Kisan AI, a smart profit-aware crop advisory system that resolves the above-mentioned limitation through a research-driven, full-stack application. We train the Random Forest(RF) classifier model on a nine-feature benchmark dataset, the standard seven agronomic attributes augmented with a \textit{market_price} variable, and evaluated against eight baseline models, considering the evaluation matrices, such as, accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and Log Loss. The RF model achieves the highest accuracy of 99.3% and the lowest Log Loss, confirming that the inclusion of market price as a predictive feature is both valid and impactful. We then implement the RF model within a multilingual progressive Web App alongside a Facebook Prophet six-month price forecasting engine and a MobileNetV2 disease detection module. A nine-language AI chatbot powered by the Anthropic Claude API unifies all modules into a single, mobile-installable platform accessible to farmers across India.

Debasis Dwibedy, Avyay Nishtala, Pranathi Mukku +1

School of Computer Science and Engineering, VIT-AP University, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh, India

Agricultural Prediction Agricultural Monitoring Artificial Intelligence Systems Advice Biological

Apr 26, 2026cs.CL

One Size Fits None: Heuristic Collapse in LLM Investment Advice

Large language models are increasingly deployed as advisors in high-stakes domains -- answering medical questions, interpreting legal documents, recommending financial products -- where good advice requires integrating a user's full context rather than responding to salient surface features. We investigate whether frontier LLMs actually do this, or whether they instead exhibit heuristic collapse: a systematic reduction of complex, multi-factor decisions to a small number of dominant inputs. We study the phenomenon in investment advice, where legal standards explicitly require individualized reasoning over a client's full circumstances. Applying interpretable surrogate models to LLM outputs, we find systematic heuristic collapse: investment allocation decisions are largely determined by self-reported risk tolerance, while other relevant factors contribute minimally. We further find that web search partially attenuates heuristic collapse but does not resolve it. These findings suggest that heuristic collapse is not resolved by web search augmentation or model scale alone, and that deploying LLMs as advisors requires auditing input sensitivity, not just output quality.

Jillian Ross, Andrew W. Lo

Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory · Massachusetts Institute of Technology · Cambridge, MA, USA +1

Financial Strategy Research Advice Collapse

Apr 24, 2026cs.CL

When AI Speaks, Whose Values Does It Express? A Cross-Cultural Audit of Individualism-Collectivism Bias in Large Language Models

When you ask an AI assistant for advice about your career, your marriage, or a conflict with your family, does it give you the same answer regardless of where you are from? We tested this systematically by presenting three leading AI systems (Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5.4, and Gemini 2.5 Flash) with ten real-life personal dilemmas, framed for users from 10 countries across 5 continents in 7 languages (n=840 scored responses). We compared AI advice against World Values Survey Wave 7 data measuring what people in each country actually believe. All three AI systems consistently gave Western-style, individualist advice even to users from societies that prioritize family, community, and authority, significantly more so than local values would predict (mean gap +0.76 on a 1-5 scale; t=15.65, p<0.001). The gap is largest for Nigeria (+1.85) and India (+0.82). Japan is the sole exception: AI systems treated Japanese users as more group-oriented than surveys show, revealing that AI encodes outdated stereotypes. Claude and GPT-5.4 show nearly identical bias magnitude, while Gemini is lower but still significant. The models diverge in mechanism: Claude shifts further collectivist in the user's native language; Gemini shifts more individualist; GPT-5.4 responds only to stated country identity. These findings point to a systemic homogenization of values across frontier AI. Data, code, and scoring pipeline are openly released.

Pruthvinath Jeripity Venkata

Independent Researcher

Large Language Model Bias Human Values Advice Value

Apr 24, 2026cs.CY

Recognition Without Authorization: LLMs and the Moral Order of Online Advice

Large language models are increasingly used to mediate everyday interpersonal dilemmas, yet how their advisory defaults interact with the concentrated moral orders of specific communities remains poorly understood. This article compares four assistant-style LLMs with community-endorsed advice on 11,565 posts from r/relationship_advice, using the subreddit as a concentrated, vote-ratified moral formation whose prescriptive clarity makes divergence measurable. Across models, LLMs identify many of the same dynamics as human commenters, but are markedly less likely to convert that recognition into directive authorization for action. The gap is sharpest where community consensus is strongest: on high-consensus posts involving abuse or safety threats, models recommend exit at roughly half the human rate while maintaining elevated levels of hedging, validation, and therapeutic framing. The article describes this pattern as recognition without authorization: the capacity to register harm while withholding socially ratified permission for consequential action. This divergence is not incidental but structural: a portable advisory style that remains validating, risk-averse, and weakly directive across contexts. Safety alignment is one plausible contributor to this pattern, alongside training-data averaging and broader assistant design. The article argues that model divergence can be reframed from a technical error to a way of seeing what standardized assistant norms flatten when they encounter situated moral worlds.

Tom van Nuenen

Social Sciences Data Lab UC Berkeley

Moral Reasoning Large Language Model Decisions Advice Refusals Authorization Divergence

Apr 22, 2026cs.AI

Large Language Models Outperform Humans in Fraud Detection and Resistance to Motivated Investor Pressure

Large language models trained on human feedback may suppress fraud warnings when investors arrive already persuaded of a fraudulent opportunity. We tested this in a preregistered experiment across seven leading LLMs and twelve investment scenarios covering legitimate, high-risk, and objectively fraudulent opportunities, combining 3,360 AI advisory conversations with a 1,201-participant human benchmark. Contrary to predictions, motivated investor framing did not suppress AI fraud warnings; if anything, it marginally increased them. Endorsement reversal occurred in fewer than 3 in 1,000 observations. Human advisors endorsed fraudulent investments at baseline rates of 13-14%, versus 0% across all LLMs, and suppressed warnings under pressure at two to four times the AI rate. AI systems currently provide more consistent fraud warnings than lay humans in an identical advisory role.

Nattavudh Powdthavee

Nanyang Technological University

Fraud Detection Advice

Mar 2, 2026cs.LG

Strategic Advice in the Age of Personal AI

Personal AI assistants are changing how individuals use advice. We study how an advisor should design its recommendation in anticipation of stochastic consultation with personal AI whose recommendation is predictable. Personal AI enters through two dimensions: consultation probability and relative trust, which captures the relative influence personal AI receives when consulted. In the baseline model, the advisor optimally counteracts the personal AI signal. Counteraction increases with consultation probability but is hump-shaped in relative trust. The advisor's minimized loss is hump-shaped in consultation probability, vanishing when personal AI is never or always consulted. Greater relative trust in personal AI increases the irreducible loss arising from stochastic consultation. We extend the analysis to partial predictability and costly recommendation adjustment, characterizing their effects on optimal recommendations and minimized loss. The framework also accommodates richer information structures, including settings in which personal AI is perceived as having access to private information relevant to the task. We introduce an online forecasting experiment that examines how participants obtain personal AI advice and combine it with an advisor's recommendation and their initial judgments. Participants place weight on all three inputs. When access requires an additional action, some participants do not seek personal AI advice, while some others attempt to obtain it without success. Together, these findings highlight two distinct aspects of personal AI use: whether advice is obtained and how much weight it receives when available.

Yueyang Liu, Wichinpong Park Sinchaisri

1Jones Graduate School of Business, Rice University · 2Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley

Advice Strategic Reasoning Artificial Intelligence Systems Data-Driven Forecasting Age

Feb 11, 2026cs.CL

Evaluating Alignment of Behavioral Dispositions in LLMs

As people turn to LLMs for social advice, understanding their behavior in such contexts becomes essential. In this work, we focus on behavioral dispositions: the underlying tendencies that shape responses in social contexts. We introduce STAR, a framework for studying how closely the dispositions expressed by LLMs align with those of humans. STAR builds on established psychological questionnaires, adapting their items into realistic advice-seeking scenarios, as self-report may not transfer to actual advisory behavior. Using STAR, we construct a dataset of 23k scenarios, each validated by 3 raters and annotated with preferences from 10 participants. Across 25 LLMs, we find that (1) when human consensus is high, frontier models can fail to reflect it in 15-20% of cases, and smaller models fail at substantially higher rates; (2) when humans disagree, LLM recommendations are substantially less diverse than human choices, both within individual models and even across models from different providers, potentially narrowing the range of options users are guided toward; (3) LLMs' self-reported values are poor predictors of their recommendations. To support future research we make our dataset and code publicly available.

Amir Taubenfeld, Zorik Gekhman, Lior Nezry +8

Google Research · Hebrew University · University of Cambridge

Social Reasoning Advice Human Agency

Dec 20, 2024cs.CL

Learning Personalized Prompts for Healthcare Guidance

The rapid development of large language models (LLMs) has transformed many industries, including healthcare. In practice, hospitals and patients increasingly seek LLM-based systems capable of interpreting personal health records and providing healthcare guidance. However, existing approaches mainly rely on general medical knowledge and often fail to account for individual variability, limiting their ability to provide personalized guidance. To address this, we propose personalized prompt learning (PPL), a framework that learns individualized prompts to guide LLMs in generating personalized healthcare recommendations. PPL constructs initial personalized prompts by leveraging both self-informed patient information and peer-informed signals derived from clinically similar cases. These prompts are then refined using reinforcement learning (RL) to better align the generated responses with physician recommendations written for each patient. PPL operates with hard prompts, enabling seamless integration with proprietary LLMs without modifying the underlying models. We evaluate PPL on real-world obstetrics and gynecology data. The results show that our approach produces more personalized healthcare guidance and wins 97 out of 100 comparisons in expert evaluation, demonstrating its potential for broader healthcare applications. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/CGCL-codes/PPL.

Ruize Shi, Hong Huang, Wei Zhou +3

Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China · 1Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China · 2Tongji Medical College +1

Healthcare Prompt Engineering Advice