Ambiguity

Satellite-ground localization estimates the planar position and yaw orientation of a ground camera within a geo-referenced satellite image. Most recent methods map ground and satellite features into a shared bird's-eye-view (BEV) space and establish spatial correspondences. However, insufficient depth constraints can assign one ground feature to different distances along a viewing direction, creating geometric ambiguity in BEV feature placement. Similar appearances at different locations can also create descriptor matching ambiguity, while existing descriptor learning lacks explicit semantic supervision to distinguish them. We propose GeoSem-BEV, a geometry-semantic constrained BEV representation learning method. Radial depth supervision constrains distance assignment, and vertical height supervision constrains height aggregation. Shared explicit semantic supervision promotes consistent semantic predictions across views and helps distinguish locations with similar semantics. These constraints improve feature placement and descriptor discriminability, enhancing state-of-the-art BEV localization models. On VIGOR with unknown orientation, GeoSem-BEV reduces mean orientation error by 37.2% and 38.1% in the cross-area and same-area settings, respectively. The corresponding errors are reduced by 10.8% and 15.6% on DReSS-D. On KITTI-CVL, it reduces same-area mean orientation error by 26.8% under 10 degree orientation noise.

Users of language-based assistive agents often make ambiguous requests. In response, an assistant can either directly act on its interpretation of the request --- risking misalignment with the user --- or ask a clarifying question. Which option is the most safe and helpful? A common approach is to ask questions that minimize uncertainty about the user's intent until a threshold is reached. However, this neglects the impact of uncertainty reduction on downstream performance, the costs of asking versus acting immediately, and the possibility that users may provide corrections without being asked. To navigate these trade-offs, we introduce Rational Enquiry via Value-of-Information Reasoning (REVOIR). REVOIR makes clarification decisions via inference-time reasoning about the value-of-information of a question, which captures the expected improvement in task reward due to the answer received. In two assistive tasks --- ambiguous question answering (CondAmbigQA) and preference-aligned household task planning (ADAPT) --- we show that REVOIR achieves greater success with fewer questions than approaches based on prompting, chain-of-thought, fine-tuning, or information gain, improving preference satisfaction on ADAPT by 13-15% over a fine-tuned clarification policy while requiring no training and asking five times fewer questions. Furthermore, when the assistant can receive cheap user corrections after acting, REVOIR naturally infers that asking questions is not always efficient, demonstrating the adaptivity of our approach. In contrast, we find that vanilla reasoning agents fail to adaptively clarify user requests, and request fewer clarifications as reasoning effort increases.

Cross-attention is a crucial component in learning-based image-to-point-cloud (I2P) registration. Although existing cross-attention mechanisms have achieved promising progress, attention ambiguity remains a fundamental challenge that hinders the learning of discriminative 2D-3D correspondences. To address this problem, we revisit cross-attention and establish ordinary differential equations (ODEs) to model the ideal I2P feature interaction. Based on this formulation, we develop an ODE-driven cross-attention (OCA) module that refines feature representations and attention matrices through ODEs. In practice, OCA can be seamlessly integrated into existing I2P registration frameworks. To validate its effectiveness, we incorporate OCA into five state-of-the-art baselines and evaluate on four public benchmark datasets. Experimental results demonstrate that OCA improves registration recall by up to 5%, 9%, and 15% under the standard, fine-tuning, and zero-shot settings, respectively.

We introduce GeoOutageBench, a benchmark for assessing LLM-based geospatiotemporal KGQA for multimodal outage and resilience analysis. Unlike existing KGQA benchmarks for Web knowledge, GeoOutageBench considers a spatiotemporal KG that integrates visual, textual, and structured data from outage records, remote sensing, weather observations, storm and power events, geographic entities, and domain ontologies. It provides a competency query taxonomy at different difficulty levels from spatiotemporal containment and proximity, spatiotemporal co-occurrence analysis, multimodal evidence, to hypothetical evaluation. Over multimodal KG and query classes, GeoOutageBench provides user-configurable evaluation of three important, highly coherent yet less studied tasks: (1) LLMs' understanding for ambiguous geospatiotemporal questions in terms of NL to SPARQL interpretation, (2) query-driven assessment of ontology utility, and (3) answer accuracy of multimodal KGQA retrieval. GeoOutageBench provides a design principle and foundation for assessing LLM-KG systems that support real-world infrastructure resilience analysis. Our benchmark, source code, data, results, and other documentation are available at https://github.com/UCF-SAGE/GeoOutageBench.

Multimodal data analysis, which answers questions over relational tables, text, and images, has attracted growing attention in the data management community. Large language models (LLMs) enable such analysis in natural language by generating analysis plans over relational and semantic operators. However, LLM-generated plans are error-prone: a plan may silently compute something other than what was asked, fail during execution, or return a result that misses the question. This paper presents WeaveData, a multimodal data analysis system with self-critiquing and self-evolving LLM plans. First, WeaveData generates a typed logical plan for each question and critiques it step by step before execution, and it checks the executed result against the question afterwards. Second, WeaveData evolves a plan that fails or misses the question: it diagnoses the failure with the actual data, reuses the results that remain valid, and accumulates planning experience for later questions. Third, WeaveData grounds planning in a metadata knowledge graph of all modalities, clarifies ambiguous questions with the user, and backs every model judgment with evidence in an interactive notebook. We demonstrate WeaveData on two public multimodal datasets.

Human-model alignment is critical for trustworthy AI-assisted decision-making systems. Yet, most work evaluates model predictions against single ground-truth labels, overlooking that humans themselves often disagree on labels, a signal of genuine ambiguity. We investigate whether models struggle on the same instances that humans find difficult. We measure this on two vision datasets (FER+ and CIFAR-10H) where multiple human annotations per image capture human disagreement patterns. We evaluate eight pretrained models across three architectures (ResNet, EfficientNet, MobileNetV3) in two parts: first, whether model uncertainty (softmax confidence, entropy) correlates with human disagreement, and second, whether predictive multiplicity measures (inter-model disagreement, Jensen-Shannon divergence) do. We find that it does not: alignment is weak in both dimensions. At the discrete label level, 50.4% of CIFAR-10H images and 33.5% of FER+ images receive multiple valid classifications from humans, while the models converge on only one. These instances represent a critical failure case where humans perceive ambiguity and would request expert review, yet models decide confidently. At the continuous score level, single-model uncertainty correlates weakly with human disagreement ($ρ= 0.24--0.55$), and predictive multiplicity provides only modest improvement. Widely-used uncertainty quantification methods do not reliably identify instances humans find ambiguous. Model uncertainty should not be treated as a trustworthy signal by default for decision-making in high-stakes scenarios.

Automatic speech recognition is typically trained assuming that the reference transcript is the only valid labeling of an utterance, yet even nominally verbatim transcripts contain localized differences in pronunciation, spelling, or lexical realization that the acoustics do not uniquely determine. Omni-temporal Classification (OTC) tolerates such noise by adding wildcard paths to the connectionist temporal classification (CTC) alignment graph, but its word-level arcs are too coarse, since bypassing one unsupported token discards supervision for the whole word. We move wildcard arcs to token granularity so unsupported tokens can be bypassed while the rest of the word stays supervised, and we combine token- and word-level arcs as complementary escape paths. Across 19 languages and three corpora, token-level OTC improves over CTC on all 25 tasks. We also replace epoch-indexed relaxation of the wildcard weights with a predictive-entropy-indexed schedule, which performs comparably while reducing dependence on training length. Combining this schedule with the hybrid graph gives the lowest mean word error rate (WER) on every corpus and a 9.45% average relative WER reduction over CTC. Independent validator transcriptions show that token-level models place significantly more wildcard-bypass probability than CTC on disputed characters, indicating that token-level tolerance targets localized transcript ambiguity.

Selective classification enables a model to abstain from predictions on uncertain instances, but existing approaches typically reject them through confidence scores, predefined coverage constraints or instance-level distance measures. These approaches may overlook the collective geometric structure of difficult samples in learned representation spaces. We propose Guided Clustering-based Uncertain Learning (GCUL), a geometric-guided selective classification framework that identifies misclassified and ambiguous instances as a potential confusion attractor in the representation space. GCUL uses a three-phase procedure to initialize, cluster, and explicitly relabel this uncertain region, allowing the rejection boundary to emerge from the underlying representation geometry rather than from a prescribed rejection rate. We further derive a selectivity score and a geometric sufficient condition that characterizes when rejection can provide positive operational utility, enabling pre-deployment feasibility assessment. GCUL improves DistilBERT accuracy from 89.37 percent to 94.98 percent with less than 9 percent rejection. Beyond accuracy, our selectivity score correctly pre-detects the only dataset (GoEmotion) where all baselines fail, and controlled simulations yield 6.1 percent Type-I and 0 percent Type-II errors, validating the sufficient condition's conservatism. These results suggest that collective representation geometry provides a useful alternative perspective for selective prediction.

Dialogue failures in language models are usually framed as memory failures: context too long, summaries lossy, a constraint forgotten. We argue this misses a deeper problem: in many conversations the model does not forget, it commits too early. An ambiguous early turn collapses into a single hidden interpretation, and later clarification is filtered through that commitment. We call this early posterior collapse: unresolved user intent collapsing into a committed task state before ambiguity is resolved. We study it with controlled dialogue tasks in writing, planning, and coding using Gemini-2.5-Pro and Gemini-2.5-Flash. Across thousands of trials, the same information in different orders yields different outcomes, even when the final dialogue contains equivalent task-relevant information. This order effect suggests later clarification is treated as extra context rather than a corrective signal: it refines a stale task state without invalidating it. Coding tasks are especially vulnerable, suggesting early assumptions get embedded in structured artifacts such as interfaces and control flow. Standard prompting and memory strategies do not reliably help: summaries can collapse ambiguity, and chain-of-thought can reduce explicit wrong commitment in reasoning traces without improving final task success. These findings motivate uncertainty-preserving state management. If assistants cannot let go of early interpretations, robustness cannot rely on post hoc correction alone; it must keep ambiguous early turns from hardening into one task state. Assistants should hold tentative hypotheses while ambiguity remains, ask before executing when high-impact ambiguity persists, and rebuild from a revised state when later evidence invalidates an earlier reading. Rather than one prompting fix, we aim to redirect research for interactive LLMs from retaining more context toward preserving uncertainty.

Federated learning trains a shared model from private client data. In practice, data-generating distributions may differ, and the true mixture across clients is often unknown, making the underlying group distribution difficult to specify. Existing approaches address cross-client mixture uncertainty by optimizing against the worst-case mixture, yet assume accurate client-wise distribution estimates. However, these estimates can be unreliable when based on finite samples. To handle both cross-client mixture uncertainty and within-client distributional ambiguity, we construct a global ambiguity set as the union of admissible mixtures of local ambiguity sets. The construction allows client-specific ambiguity radii and admits a client-wise separable reformulation. Leveraging this structure, we establish a high-probability out-of-sample performance guarantee. We further develop a federated algorithm for a penalty-based reformulation and prove its convergence under milder regularity conditions. Simulations validate the algorithm's effectiveness.

Draft-verify-revise is a common LLM orchestration pattern for scaling inference-time compute. One LLM drafts, a second critiques the draft and provides feedback, and a third uses that feedback to revise the draft into the final output. As context cascades between stages, LLMs at different stages can resolve a context-dependent expression such as "previous" differently. When that happens, the expression undergoes a deictic shift, a change in what it refers to. This phenomenon was studied with a synthetic dataset of 10 base examples, each rendered in three conditions. Holding the shared components constant, the conditions varied whether the draft stage LLM (the assistant) or the verify stage LLM (the grader) resolved the expression correctly, and how much independent reasoning the revise stage LLM (the meta-evaluator) needed to determine which reading was correct. Six models from three providers were tested across 21 reasoning effort configurations using e-values for sequential testing, in a primary experiment and an ablation experiment that removed error classification labels from the grader's feedback. A separate LLM analyzed the meta-evaluator's stated rationale for each wrong verdict. Balanced accuracy (the unweighted mean of sensitivity and specificity) ranged from 0.156, below chance, to near-perfect. GPT-5.2 rose from 0.156 without reasoning to 0.942 at its highest reasoning effort level, while Gemini 3 Pro stayed above 0.94 at every level. Gemini 3 Pro at low reasoning effort outscored GPT-5.2 at xhigh reasoning effort for roughly 5% of the cost per trial. When the meta-evaluator erred, it tended to rely on surface cues rather than operational reasoning. Context engineers implementing draft-verify-revise pipelines should be wary of deictic shifts and make the intended referent explicit at each stage.

Ambiguity is often treated as a bug for AI systems to resolve---but in human communication and culture, ambiguity can also be a generative resource. From humour to politics to art, people express themselves in words and images that are open enough to invite different interpretations, yet constrained enough to be interpretable. We operationalise this notion of calibrated ambiguity with a task drawn from the parlour game Dixit. We compare differences in clues generated by human vs multimodal language models, based on a novel coding rubric for calibrated ambiguity, and find that models consistently exhibit ambiguity collapse (i.e., their outputs are over-specified, leaving no room for multiple legitimate interpretations). Unlike human clues, AI-generated clues also exhibit cultural flattening; they almost never make reference to culturally-situated knowledge, even when prompted to use allusion and figurative language.

Speaker diarization evaluation is sensitive to ambiguity in pause annotation, which can inflate diarization error rate (DER) or obscure genuine model errors. We show that morphological closing, which has been used for pause-tolerant diarization evaluation, discards segment-level distinctions. Instead, we propose an exact, overlap-aware decomposition of standard DER into a pause-attributable component, consisting of errors compatible with pause filling, and a residual core component that can serve as a proxy for intrinsic diarization errors. The decomposition leaves DER unchanged, while the pause-attributable and core components vary monotonically with the pause threshold and eventually saturate. Experiments spanning synthetic transformations, annotation mismatch, cross-domain evaluation, and tight-boundary diarization show that the decomposition reveals error sources not apparent from standard DER.

Real-world detectors must often interpret functional or ambiguous prompts, yet conventional models such as YOLO remain restricted to fixed class lists. Even open-vocabulary models like YOLO-World frequently misalign vague language with the intended objects. Building on our prior work Commonsense-Guided Open-World Object Detection Using LLMs and Visual-Semantic Matching, we address YOLO-World's limitations in grounding task-driven queries. We propose Vague2Detect, a hybrid pipeline in which a fine-tuned Sentence-BERT retrieves candidates from a structured household Knowledge Base (KB), and YOLO-World verifies their presence in the image. For prompts outside the KB, a large language model (GPT-3.5-turbo) generates candidate descriptions, dynamically expanding the KB to cover novel concepts. On a benchmark of household scenes using custom images and an Open Images V7 subset, YOLO-World alone achieves only 32% Vague Prompt Success Rate (VPSR), the ability to map ambiguous queries to correct detections. In contrast, Vague2Detect improves performance to 61% VPSR with high precision, and up to 85% when augmented with GPT fallback.

Autonomous navigation in unstructured environments requires robust scene understanding, yet Vision-Language Models (VLMs) often suffer from semantic ambiguity, where conflicting predictions can lead to dangerous failures. To address this, we present a novel pipeline for vision-based traversability estimation that explicitly models contextual uncertainty. Our approach utilizes Conceptual Anchoring to ground open-vocabulary VLM predictions onto a continuous physical traversability scale. By formulating the model's responses as a Gaussian Context Distribution (GCD), we derive both a dense traversability map and a dense uncertainty map based on the statistical properties of the distribution. Experimental validation on the real-world GOOSE dataset demonstrates that our proposed uncertainty metric effectively correlates with sources of ambiguity, such as visual artifacts and mixed terrain overlap. The method exhibits competitive performance while offering the distinct advantage of providing statistical uncertainty estimates to address semantic ambiguity, enabling safer and more reliable autonomous behavior in complex outdoor settings.

We show that ordinary business language --- "maximize profitability" --- induces profit-oriented ambiguity resolution: LLMs systematically dismiss ambiguous signals of potential safety violations to serve business objectives. In 3,600 controlled trials across eight reasoning-capable LLMs, adding a profit mandate to otherwise identical prompts increases risk-dismissing judgments by 6.8 percentage points (p < 0.0001), suppresses board escalation recommendations by 13.9pp (p < 0.0001), and shifts severity assessments downward (p < 0.0001). The mandate never instructs models to downplay risks; instead, chain-of-thought traces reveal motivated reasoning: models acknowledge concerns, then invoke profit logic to justify dismissing them. We characterize these findings as the Profit Alignment Problem: when AI systems are given ordinary business objectives, they develop systematic strategies for suppressing inconvenient information that no designer intended or specified.

A key challenge in reliable LLM deployment is recognizing when uncertainty reflects irreducible variability in the task rather than limitations in the model's knowledge. In language tasks, a central source of such aleatoric uncertainty is input ambiguity or underspecification, where multiple interpretations remain plausible. Existing decomposition methods estimate aleatoric uncertainty by generating multiple clarifications of the input, querying the model for an answer under each clarification, and comparing the resulting answers. We argue that answers are not necessary for identifying ambiguity: they are often redundant, add avoidable cost, and can mislead through epistemic leakage. We support this claim theoretically, and propose a clarification-only approach that estimates this ambiguity-induced component directly from the space of plausible interpretations, without answers to the clarified inputs. Using ambiguity detection as an operational evaluation across three benchmarks, this direct approach improves AUROC (63.34 vs. 60.85), reduces computational cost by 4-26x in output tokens and 2.2-3.5x in API calls, and yields estimates with substantially lower correlation with epistemic uncertainty. Overall, our results suggest that ambiguity-induced aleatoric uncertainty is better estimated from the interpretation space than from the response space.

Depth can resolve appearance ambiguity in RGB-D salient object detection (SOD), yet sensor depth is not uniformly reliable. Missing regions, blurred boundaries, and structural artifacts can propagate through multimodal fusion and make an RGB-D detector less accurate than its RGB-only counterpart. Existing quality-aware approaches regulate observed depth but remain dependent on the same potentially defective modality. We propose \method, a reliability-aware geometry distillation framework developed for RGB-D SOD benchmarks without using dataset-provided depth during training or inference. A frozen Depth Anything V2 model serves only as a training-time teacher, transferring dense relative geometry, hierarchical spatial attention, and boundary structure to a compact edge-aware geometry branch. Pooled bidirectional interaction aligns geometry with appearance, and a pixel-wise reliability estimator selectively injects geometry that is compatible with the current RGB representation. The teacher is removed after training, leaving an RGB-only inference network. Trained on 2,985 RGB-mask pairs, \method{} achieves the best or tied-best result in 26 of 36 metric-dataset comparisons against ten recent RGB-D SOD methods, including a 13.4% relative MAE reduction on ReDWeb-S. When retrained on DUTS-TR, it also improves the strongest prior $F$-measure by 4.2% on PASCAL-S, showing that the distilled geometry transfers beyond a particular sensor or dataset domain. Code will be released upon publication.

Neural networks are increasingly employed to identify both well-defined and ambiguous concepts, yet output-level metrics reveal little about how those concepts are represented internally. Our study asks if these networks exhibit \textit{conceptual separation}: if examples of the same concept form coherent representations, and whether related concepts lie closer together in the representation space. We examine this conceptual organisation in Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) and Large Language Models (LLMs) through geometric and distributional analysis of their internal activations. In CNNs, familiar ImageNet concepts form coherent and semantically ordered representations, while this coherence weakens for unseen concepts and suffers within-class domain shift. In LLMs, clearly distinct domains remain well separated, related subdomains move closer together, and the distinction between ambiguous topics collapses at both the mean and covariance level. These results suggest that conceptual separation can reveal structure that output accuracy alone cannot, and may serve as a useful diagnostic of how robustly a model represents the concepts it is asked to identify. Code and data available on \href{https://github.com/JaeeRoshniCapstoneProject/Are-You-Thinking-What-I-m-Thinking-Examining-Conceptual-Separation-in-Neural-Architectures}{GitHub}.

Agreement among repeated samples of a language model is routinely read as evidence about answer reliability, yet wrong answers can agree just as strongly as right ones. This paper asks what information wrong-consensus agreement actually contains, and answers with a quantitative decomposition. A pluralistic agreement index Gamma, normalized by the reference scale d=(1-p)/(C-1), is split into a mechanical component (agreement delivered by a per-case answer preference alone) and a preference-unexplained residual. The mechanical reference is leak-free: each case's preference and accuracy are estimated from its other runs only. On public GPT-4.1 per-run data, coverage phi (the mechanical/empirical ratio) shows a benchmark-associated direction: 0.81-0.93 on multiple-choice GPQA-Diamond against 0.59-0.78 on open-domain AIME, where a residual of 1.54-2.80 Gamma units survives, more than absorbed by a calibrated run-level preference-heterogeneity reference. A controlled replication under one fixed protocol (four runs per question, K=32 votes) on five open-weights checkpoints (Qwen3.5-9B/122B, Qwen3.8-27B, Gemma4-26B/31B) finds near-complete mechanical coverage in all ten cells (phi approximately 1, with a small overshoot consistent with a quantified finite-donor plug-in bias), robust to a two-run design; the largest cell (qwen3.5-122b, p=0.222) sits inside the GPT-4.1 AIME accuracy range and still saturates (phi=1.041). A cross-system contrast at comparable aggregate accuracy contrasts near-complete mechanical agreement in the open-weights models against a larger preference-unexplained residual in the frontier family. This contrast is confounded with sampling protocol by design. Agreement is graded evidence, not certification. No new voting method is proposed; code and evidence are committed.

Contemporary online assessment systems rely primarily on browser lockdown, webcam monitoring, and behavioural analytics, yet remain vulnerable to attacks that extract the assessment content itself through screenshots, screen sharing, optical character recognition, and automated scraping. This paper extends the Multi-dimensional Spatio-Temporal Context Camouflaging Model (MSCCM) within the MARS (Multi-modal Assessment Resilience Suite) by introducing the Multi-Layer Context Camouflaging Theory (MCCT), a mathematical framework that protects rendered assessment content through semantic superposition. Authentic assessment content and synthetically generated camouflage are represented as a unified rendering while remaining recoverable only by legitimate candidates. The framework models the adversarial extraction process through an explicit extraction-channel operator and develops six coupled constructs: the Context Inversion Operator, Contextual Lamination Operator, Separation Channel, Human Readability Functional, Computational Ambiguity Functional, and Context Camouflage Tensor. Computational ambiguity is formulated using conditional entropy, yielding a closed-form expression that quantifies uncertainty during unauthorized extraction, while legitimate recovery is guaranteed through an exact filtering identity. We further establish theoretical properties governing ambiguity, camouflage density, semantic preservation, multi-observation leakage, and temporal multiplexing, and present a rendering algorithm with computational complexity and a pre-registered evaluation protocol. MCCT provides a mathematically rigorous foundation for behaviorally adaptive, accessibility-aware, and computationally resilient digital assessment by securing rendered assessment content while preserving readability for legitimate users.

Pairwise constrained clustering typically relies on hard must-link/cannot-link labels, whereas realistic pairwise supervision may be real-valued and entangle intrinsic ambiguity, expert judgment, and stochastic corruption. Existing deep constrained clustering (DCC) methods mainly target hard, expert-agnostic constraints, treating soft labels mostly numerically rather than semantically. We formalize this setting as uncertainty-aware probabilistic constrained clustering (UPCC), defining a canonical aleatoric target through a heterogeneous observation process and analyzing its conditional identifiability. We introduce ProbPair, an angular pairwise objective for probabilistic relations, and build ECI-PP, an estimator--corrector--integrator framework that refines imperfect supervision via belief estimation, correction, and reliability-aware integration. Across challenging probabilistic supervision settings, experiments on diverse benchmarks show that ECI-PP outperforms state-of-the-art DCC methods and remains robust with a shared default configuration.

Machine learning models should be robust, in the sense of remaining predictively consistent under permissible variations. A model's predictions should ideally remain unchanged when it is replaced by a functionally equivalent one, or when its inputs are subject to minor, admissible perturbations. If such changes alter a prediction significantly, then the prediction is "ambiguous" with respect to the model. Models should abstain from making such ambiguous predictions and/or should flag them for human inspection, especially in high-stakes decision-making scenarios. However, in practice, such ambiguity is not easy to identify once a model is deployed. Here, the Robust Ambiguity Detection (RAD) framework is advanced for quantifying predictive ambiguity using two complementary metrics: Model-Space Consistency and Feature-Space Consistency. These two scores, the RAD Score-Pair, visualised through the RAD Plot, provide an interpretable characterisation of the sources of ambiguity and the actions a user may consider in response. RAD is evaluated on synthetic datasets with systematically controlled overlap, as well as several real-world datasets where the level of ambiguity cannot be directly inspected. Finally, we demonstrate a downstream application of RAD where samples are ranked by their RAD Pareto-Rank and the most ambiguous are abstained from prediction, achieving performance comparable to existing rejection-based approaches.

ReRound (Reconstructive Rounding) is a post-training quantization method that addresses the midpoint ambiguity inherent in standard round-to-nearest (RTN) schemes when quantizing weights near the centers of quantization intervals. Starting from a pretrained LLM, ReRound trains a conditional diffusion model to produce continuous reconstructions of low-bit weights for the LLM. These reconstructed weights act as a guidance signal to disambiguate the rounding direction of weights located close to interval midpoints. To integrate this reconstruction-guided rounding with conventional RTN, ReRound introduces a tolerance metric measuring how far the quantized weight (not the final quantized integer) is away from the midpoint: quantized weights within a tolerance region around midpoints are quantized using diffusion-based reconstructions, whereas weights closer to quantization boundaries are quantized with RTN. By sweeping the tolerance parameter, ReRound generates multiple candidate quantized integer weight matrices and selects the de-quantized weight matrix candidate whose leading singular values most closely match those of the original full-precision weights. This selected candidate determines the tolerance parameter ReRound uses. ReRound is particularly effective for smaller LLMs. Across a range of such models, it consistently outperforms standard RTN for 3-bit and 4-bit weight quantization. ReRound achieves superior accuracy compared to an extensive set of calibration-free methods, remains competitive with calibration-dependent approaches, and operates entirely offline, introducing no additional overhead during low-bit inference. The ReRound strategy represents a new approach for low-bit quantization. The method applies to AI models beyond LLMs. This paper focuses on its applications to small LLMs.

Control policies optimized in simulation can perform poorly in the real system when the parameters $x$ of the simulator are estimated from limited data but the resulting parameter uncertainty is not represented inside the simulation. A common way to incorporate such ambiguity is to simulate each trajectory of the system under a randomly drawn value for $x$. Since the policy cannot observe the drawn value, it must initially choose controls that perform well across many possible parameter values. However, if the policy progressively observes the system, it can often gradually infer the value of $x$, so that ambiguity vanishes. Over time, the policy then specializes to its estimate of $x$ and loses its robustness. This is undesirable in many real systems, where latent factors are expected to shift. In financial markets, for example, a policy hedging a derivative payoff should remain robust to changes in the volatility regime. To induce such continual robustness, we propose training policies in simulators where ambiguity varies with the system's state but does not systematically decay over time. We formalize this requirement as stationary ambiguity: the simulator should induce a stationary filter process over the latent state. We show how to construct such simulators and demonstrate, on hedging problems, that policies trained under stationary ambiguity preserve robustness to latent factors over time, leading to strong performance on real market data. As a modeling principle, stationary ambiguity informs many simulator design decisions: which models make realistic simulators, how their parameters should be randomized, and how simulator and policy should be initialized. While our experiments focus on hedging, stationary ambiguity may also be useful for other sequential control problems driven by exogenous stochastic processes with shifting latent structure.

Zero-shot 3D visual grounding aims to localize specific objects based on textual descriptions and 3D visual input. However, the effectiveness of existing methods is significantly hindered by the ambiguous query text and deficient viewpoints. To address these issues, we propose TDVR, a training-free reasoning framework that disambiguates the input text and infers accurate viewpoints for zero-shot 3D visual grounding. First, we construct semantic 3D scene graph from the detected instances in the 3D point cloud. Subsequently, we put the original query, appearance and spatial relationship descriptions into the LLM for fusion, thereby disambiguating the initial input. We leverage chain-of-thought reasoning to generate the structured representation of disambiguated query. Then taking the scene graph and structured query as input, we get the optimal view via viewpoint reasoning to solve the problem of missing viewpoints during grounding. Based on the obtained optimal viewpoint, we further discriminate the distracting objects, enabling the model with the ability to distinguish similar instances. After that, we match the category text and appearance images with the query by computing the similarity of feature vectors. Finally, the target object was identified by integrating the viewpoint score, confusion score, category score, and appearance score. Compared with previous methods, our TDVR has stronger capabilities in viewpoint reasoning, similar object discrimination, and ambiguous query understanding. Experimental results on the public ScanRefer dataset show that our method outperforms the existing state-of-the-art methods by 15.25% and 14.46% in Acc@0.25 and Acc@0.5 respectively, demonstrating the effectiveness of our TDVR in addressing ambiguous query text and deficient viewpoints.

How can question answering (QA) systems determine whether a query is ambiguous? Ambiguity detection is essential in open-domain QA, as misclassification leads to answering the wrong interpretation or unnecessary clarification. However, existing methods conflate answer diversity with ambiguity, leading to inaccurate predictions. They also process queries uniformly, resulting in wasteful computation. We propose ARCHIVE (Ambiguity Recognition via Cascaded Hypothesis Inspection and Conflict Verification), an accurate and efficient framework that detects ambiguity via logical conflict: a query is ambiguous when its valid answers cannot all be true under a single interpretation. ARCHIVE combines a lightweight early-exit encoder for surface-detectable cases with a conflict reasoning module that models logical relations among answers, reinforced by an invariance objective for robustness to noisy answer sets. We present QuireQA, a 4,703-query benchmark spanning factoid, non-factoid, and ill-formed queries. Experiments show ARCHIVE outperforms competitors, improving F1-amb by up to 10.4% and F1-unamb by up to 21.6%, while operating 16$\times$ faster than the best competitor.

A natural language interface can be used to make cancer genomics databases easier to use, but even if a question is perfectly fluent, its scientific meaning can be ambiguous. We propose CLARA, a framework that represents a question as a typed scientific query specification, considers a few possible interpretations, executes them, and asks for clarification when the estimates diverge. CLARA was assessed on mutation-prevalence contrasts among eight TCGA PanCancer Atlas cohorts and a 30-gene panel. This benchmark consisted of 330 unique executable contrasts varying in mutation scope, assay denominator, and sample context; 115 contrasts were result-sensitive and 215 were result-stable, per the preregistered definition of relative divergence greater than 0.10 or absolute divergence greater than 5 percentage points. An independently implemented pandas execution engine perfectly replicated all 660 results from the SQLite engine. In a separate 120-question LLM-generated, manually vetted language stress test, CLARA recognized all 60 result-sensitive contrasts and needlessly clarified 13 of 60 stable contrasts (accuracy 89.2%, sensitivity/recall 100%, specificity 78.3%). Standalone machine learning had superior overall accuracy (97.5%) but missed one critical contrast. This demonstrates that downstream execution can distinguish consequential from inconsequential ambiguity and reveal an explicit trade-off between safety and burden.

In this work we investigate how decoder-only transformers resolve lexical ambiguity through layer-by-layer analysis of three models spanning three parameter sizes (GPT-2-Small-117M, Llama-3.2-3B, Qwen2.5-32B). For both homonyms and polysemes, we find that representations become maximally distinct in middle layers, then partially reconverge in late layers, while the KL divergence between their next-token predictions reaches its maximum in the final layers. The activation patching experiment provides causal evidence that late-layer representational differences directly determine outputs despite apparent increased similarity in embedding space. Our single-layer ablation experiment indicates that models achieve equivalent disambiguation despite qualitatively different layer-wise vulnerabilities. These findings offer a mechanism for recent observations where models' internal embedding similarities show low correlation with their behavioural outputs despite strong performance. The semantic distinctions therefore remain present but become increasingly invisible to similarity measures over the embeddings, with implications for embedding-based methods such as semantic search, retrieval, and clustering that rely on late-layer cosine similarity.

Human language is highly polysemous. Many common words (e.g., 'bank' or 'palm') carry several distinct meanings that shape what humans communicate and imagine. Large language models (LLMs) have been shown to understand this multiplicity of meaning, but much less is known about how polysemy surfaces in other modalities such as images. We study this across 17 text-to-image and 15 text-generation models by giving each a polysemous word with no context to fix its meaning and measuring which senses are produced over many samples. We find a clear multimodal gap, where within every model family, generated images settle on far fewer senses than generated sentences (normalized entropy 0.10 vs. 0.25), and both are far less varied than what people imagine for the same words (normalized entropy 0.47). However, when we instead ask a model to list how often it would generate outputs corresponding to each possible meaning of a word, it predicts distributions that are more diverse than the actual space of outputs. These results reveal a multimodal gap in how foundation models express meaning, and how their understanding may not transfer faithfully nor equally across modalities.

Existing farmland remote sensing image (FRSI) segmentation follows a "Think with Intra-Image" paradigm, assuming that the current image contains sufficient visual evidence for reliable segmentation. Yet farmland appearance varies with phenology and spatial context and is often confused with other land-cover, making instantaneous, local observations inadequate. Thus, segmentation ambiguity stems not only from limited model representation, but more fundamentally from the required spatio-temporal information lying beyond the current image. Based on this insight, we redefine FRSI segmentation from an information bottleneck perspective as a dynamic decision process driven by task-relevant extra spatio-temporal information gain. We further propose FarmSeeker, a dynamic FRSI segmentation agent that identifies ambiguous regions, reasons about their causes, and queries extra spatio-temporal information on demand for accurate segmentation. To evaluate FarmSeeker, we construct GSFS-Bench, the first global-scale, high-resolution FRSI segmentation benchmark that supports reasoning-querying. Experiments show that FarmSeeker achieves more stable segmentation performance than existing methods. The project is publicly available at: https://withoutocean.github.io/FarmSeeker/

LLM-based agents excel at software engineering tasks where an existing codebase provides context, but constructing a program from scratch remains fundamentally harder. Recent benchmarks such as ProgramBench quantify this gap: given only natural-language documentation and an execute-only binary as a behavioral oracle, even frontier models solve fewer than 1% of instances. Existing frameworks conflate documentation reading, behavioral exploration, and code synthesis into a single pass, causing agents to probe insufficiently, lose behavioral intent as context drifts, and propagate early misinterpretations into the final implementation. Inspired by classical requirements engineering, we argue that behavioral specification elicitation should be a first-class phase that precedes implementation. We present SpecFirst, a two-stage framework that forces the specification elicitation before code synthesis. A dedicated spec agent first probes the binary and combines observations with documentation into a structured specification. Next, a code synthesis agent then uses this specification to drive implementation. This decomposition resolves documentation ambiguities before coding begins and provides a stable behavioral reference throughout synthesis. We evaluate SpecFirst on all 200 ProgramBench instances across four models spanning two families and an order of magnitude of capability. SpecFirst consistently outperforms the single-loop baseline, improving test pass rates by 6.9%-21.3% and binary exploration coverage by 9.4%-18.5%, all statistically significant. Behavioral analysis on code synthesis further shows that a prior specification enables earlier and more sustained code construction. Our results demonstrate that an explicit requirements-engineering phase is an effective paradigm for from-scratch program construction.

AI-assisted coding increasingly translates informal user intent into executable software, yet coding requests often contain ambiguities that recur in user-specific ways across tasks and sessions. Existing disambiguation methods typically address each ambiguous request in isolation within the current coding session, often through eliciting additional clarification. However, whether resolved session history from the same user can serve as memory for resolving recurring personalized ambiguity in a newly opened session remains underexplored. We formulate personalized ambiguity adaptation as a new task: given a user's previously resolved coding sessions and a new ambiguous request, an assistant should identify the recurring ambiguity pattern, produce the intended executable solution, and minimize clarification. To benchmark this task, we introduce CAPA, which characterizes personalized coding ambiguity through six mechanisms and injects these mechanisms into unambiguous executable tasks using a controlled three-stage generation pipeline. CAPA contains 600 coding sessions across 60 balanced user--ambiguity cells, including 300 held-out evaluation sessions. We evaluate 12 recent LLMs under no-history and same-user-history conditions using executable success, first-turn success, and turns-to-completion. Our analyses examine task difficulty, user identity, and memory-based history use, and we further propose same-user history gating as a lightweight inference-time method. CAPA provides a foundation for developing long-term coding assistants that better align generated code with user intent while reducing repeated clarification.

Universal person re-identification (ReID) aims to retrieve pedestrian identities across diverse real-world scenarios, including severe occlusions, clothing changes, and cross-modality shifts, within a unified model. However, existing 2D representations fundamentally struggle with spatial ambiguities due to a lack of depth and topological awareness, while naively introducing monocular 3D priors often causes severe negative transfer due to geometric estimation noise under extreme visual degradation. To safely harness the clothing-invariant and canonical structural properties of 3D geometry, we propose UniGeo, a Universal Monocular 3D-Enhanced ReID framework driven by a Consistency-Aware Reliability Gate and Dual-Stream Residual Fusion. Specifically, the processing of 3D information is strategically decoupled into geometric extraction and dynamic utilization. To provide pure structural compensation, we project monocular 3D parameters into kinematic joint representations, explicitly capturing instance-level geometric topology to resolve appearance-based ambiguities. To robustly incorporate these cues without perturbing the reliable 2D feature space, we isolate the 3D prior as a late-stage structural residual; modulated by the consistency-aware gate, this mechanism adaptively filters geometric noise and enables controlled fallback to the pure 2D baseline. Extensive experiments show that our method improves challenging, structure-sensitive scenarios while preserving competitive performance on clean domains. Code is available at https://github.com/BohanSu/UniGeo.

Sign Language Retrieval (SLRet) enables efficient access to sign language content but remains fragile in fine-grained scenarios where visually similar signs must be distinguished. We show that this limitation does not stem from model capacity, but from ineffective hard negative supervision. Specifically, we formulate fine-grained retrieval failures as a negative distribution mismatch: semantically distinct yet visually confusable signs are rarely treated as hard negatives, while existing text-based mining strategies fail to capture such visual ambiguity. To address this issue, we propose Sign-Aware Hard Negative Mining (SAN), which constructs hard negatives based on visual confusability in the sign embedding space rather than linguistic similarity. Experiments on PHOENIX-2014T demonstrate that SAN substantially improves fine-grained retrieval performance while preserving coarse-grained accuracy, highlighting the importance of aligning negative supervision with visual ambiguity in sign language retrieval.

Predict-then-optimize systems usually compress uncertainty into a point forecast and then solve a downstream optimization problem as if the forecast were reliable. Distributionally robust optimization (DRO) offers protection against misspecification, but the ambiguity set is often centered at historical samples and uses a fixed radius. We propose \emph{learned predictive ambiguity sets} (LPAS): a deep contextual model outputs a finite nominal scenario distribution, a state-dependent Wasserstein radius, and optionally an anisotropic ground metric. These outputs define a contextual ambiguity set that feeds a DRO decision layer. The radius is trained by a combination of conditional quantile calibration, size regularization, and downstream decision loss, so that robustness is adaptive rather than globally fixed. We derive the finite dual form used by the decision layer, present a staged training algorithm, and evaluate the method on distributionally robust portfolio optimization with 20 S&P 500 constituents from 2018--2026. The proposed method substantially improves over equal-weight, predict-then-optimize, and historical Wasserstein DRO baselines, achieving 26.28% annualized return, Sharpe ratio 1.30, final wealth 1.61, and lower tail loss than a deep fixed-radius DRO baseline while using a smaller average radius. The results show that learned ambiguity radii can recover most of the performance of strong fixed-radius DRO while reducing unnecessary conservatism and improving regime adaptivity.

Large language models increasingly provide labels, evaluations, and feedback for tasks specified in natural language. When a specification admits multiple readings but the supervision channel does not reveal which is operative, additional labels reduce sampling error without resolving the resulting identification problem. We introduce Natural Language PAC (NL-PAC), a framework that uses a fixed model's thresholded decoding law to define admissible labels and candidate targets. The probability that multiple labels are admissible equals the diameter of the pointwise-admissible target class, and under target-blind supervision every learner incurs worst-case risk of at least half this diameter, at every sample size; the exact randomized minimax risk over this class is attained by a data-independent strategy. Finite-sample confidence bounds make these quantities certifiable from held-out unlabeled inputs. In a frozen Qwen~2.5--3B audit, one prespecified prompt yields a positive model-relative certificate, whereas a paraphrase and exact-rule controls yield zero. A held-out bridge audit finds that supplied candidate reading clauses fail the admissibility condition needed to transfer the certificate to coherent readings. The guarantee is specific to the audited model, prompt, threshold, and input distribution; extending it to human interpretations requires external validation.

When data sources are integrated through a shared interface, a downstream query may or may not be determined by what the interface exposes: two globally consistent worlds can agree on every shared attribute yet disagree on the query answer. This ambiguity is structural -- a property of the interface design, not the data volume -- and cannot be resolved by collecting more records or training a larger model. We formalize query identifiability for data integration under interface laws (functional dependencies that hold uniformly across all legal worlds rather than within a single instance) and prove three results. (i) A polynomial-time certificate (CheckCert) decides identifiability via attribute closure, and is exact on instances that expose any residual ambiguity (closure-separable). (ii) Non-identifiable queries face an irreducible 1/2 minimax error floor for any estimator using only interface evidence, bounding multi-view pretraining systems from below. (iii) A minimum-augmentation algorithm (Greedy-MinAug) finds the smallest set of interface additions to certify a query, reducing to Set Cover (logarithmic approximation). Experiments on synthetic benchmarks, real integration datasets spanning three domains (scholarly, product, restaurant), and schemas up to 10^3 attributes confirm CheckCert is exact, both algorithms run in single-digit milliseconds, and ML classifiers exhibit the predicted error floor and abrupt capability gains.

Natural language requirements (NLRs) are essential for bridging communication gaps among diverse stakeholders in software development. However, the inherent ambiguity in NLRs can pose significant challenges. In particular, some requirements may be misinterpreted due to varying contextual knowledge and domain-specific expectations of the stakeholders, a phenomenon known as pragmatic ambiguity. This paper presents an approach for detecting and resolving pragmatic ambiguities in NLRs. The approach leverages retrieval-augmented generation techniques with novice, intermediate, and expert domain knowledge bases to simulate stakeholders with varying domain expertise and detect discrepancies in requirement interpretation. Candidate disambiguated requirements are generated using the expert domain knowledge base, with final validation by a requirements analyst required to ensure alignment with the intended functionality. We evaluate the approach on two requirements specification documents from the PUblic REquirements dataset, using four large language models: GPT-4o-mini, Mistral-7B, Llama-3.1-8B, and Qwen2.5-7B. Detection performance is assessed using macro-averaged accuracy, precision, recall, F1, and F2 scores. The resolution quality of the candidate disambiguated requirements is measured through human evaluation of relevance, clarity, and consistency. In this initial evaluation, results show that the proposed approach can detect pragmatic ambiguities and produce candidate disambiguated requirements that are relevant, clear, and consistent with the intended system functionality. Among the evaluated models, GPT-4o-mini achieved the highest macro-averaged recall (0.75) and F2 score (0.75) for pragmatic ambiguity detection. In the resolution task, GPT-4o-mini received the highest relevance scores from human evaluators, while Mistral-7B achieved the highest scores for clarity and consistency.

Monocular 3D lane detection plays a critical role in autonomous driving, yet recovering reliable 3D geometry from a single image remains challenging due to inherent depth ambiguity. Prior methods project image features into Bird's-Eye-View (BEV) space under a flat-ground assumption, causing geometric distortion on real-world roads. Recent methods instead predict explicit height maps to capture non-planar surfaces, but still rely on sparse anchor-based regression and exploit the recovered geometry merely for spatial transformation rather than semantic understanding. To overcome these limitations, we propose HSDF-Lane, which implicitly models the road surface as a Height-aligned Signed Distance Field (HSDF) over a densely sampled 3D feature volume. Through differentiable rendering, the HSDF jointly produces an accurate height map and surface-aligned features. We further introduce Lane-aware Semantic Positional Encoding (LSPE), which injects a lane-existence prior derived from the surface-aligned features into the transformer queries, coupling geometric structure with semantic guidance. Extensive experiments on the OpenLane benchmark show that HSDF-Lane achieves state-of-the-art performance in both 3D lane detection and height map estimation.

With rapidly improving capabilities, Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in many complex real-world tasks. Beyond requiring in-depth knowledge and reasoning skills, many of these tasks exhibit a high degree of subjectivity and require that the outputs of the model can be trusted. While a lot of progress has been made to train better models, decision-making algorithms have received less attention. In this work, we present and evaluate various uncertainty-aware decision-making algorithms based on Bayesian decision theory and risk-averse decision making on the tasks of tutoring and automatic peer reviewing. Concretely, we take uncertainty over tutoring strategies and review scores into account when generating a tutor response or review and use conformal prediction to provide guarantees over strategy and score. We find empirically that these algorithms can improve the utility of the generations but need to be carefully implemented when ambiguity is high. For example, risk-averse rules can degrade performance by optimizing for generic outputs, while Bayesian methods tend to perform better. Our work uses techniques from decision theory to improve LLM-based decision-making and outlines open challenges for the community.

Latent Action Models (LAMs) learn action-like proxies from observation transitions. However, in multi-object or distractor-rich scenes, these visual effects mix agent motion with distractors, camera dynamics, and background changes, making the underlying action source ambiguous without supervision. Structuring this mixture as reusable transition effects provides an intermediate representation from which action-like latents can be more robustly formed. We introduce Observed Transition Factorization (OTF), which decomposes each transition into a sparse set of observed transition primitives. Using these primitives as the transition interface, we propose OTF-LAM, which abstracts motion primitives into action-like latents within the standard inverse-forward dynamics framework, and OTF-LAM-Dino, a decoder-free variant that predicts future states in a frozen DINOv2 representation space. Empirically, OTF primitives transfer zeroshot across controlled carrier and morphology shifts, showing reusability. Furthermore, downstream policy learning results match or outperform baselines under complex transition ambiguity.

A faithful 3D world representation should account for layered geometry, where a single camera ray may contain multiple visible and geometrically valid surfaces. Monocular depth estimation, however, reduces this structure to one scalar depth per pixel. Transparent scenes make this ambiguity measurable: the same ray can pass through foreground glass and observe the background, turning the supervised target into a convention of annotation, data, and training rather than a scene-intrinsic truth. A learned predictor exposes this convention as its depth-layer preference. We introduce MultiDepth-3k (MD-3k), a sparse two-layer ordinal benchmark for measuring depth-layer preference and multi-layer spatial relationship accuracy (ML-SRA). On MD-3k, leading depth foundation models exhibit diverse layer preferences under standard RGB input, showing that the same layered geometry can be resolved differently across models. We further find that Laplacian Visual Prompting (LVP), a training-free spectral input transformation, can substantially change the reported layer for certain frozen models. The strongest RGB/LVP pair, DAv2-L, reaches 75.5% ML-SRA. These results suggest that depth foundation models may express complementary geometric hypotheses that standard RGB inference leaves unexpressed. We invite the community to rethink depth supervision and evaluation through an ambiguity-aware lens, where multiple valid 3D interpretations are treated as geometric structure to be measured, preserved, and expressed.

We present RefineSplat, a systematic framework that effectively constructs transient masks to identify diverse ambiguous distractors. To do this, we qualitatively and quantitatively analyze issues and propose a novel entropy-aware adaptive masking method. Unlike existing approaches that struggle to distinguish transient elements from static scenes due to color or semantic ambiguity, RefineSplat captures ambiguous distractors leveraging entropy and instance masks. Furthermore, we propose a simple yet effective entropy-aware density control to align Gaussians in ambiguous scenarios considering Entropy-aware positional gradients. Additionally, to rigorously validate our method, we first create and release the Ambiguous wild dataset, including 18 scenes where distractors and static scenes are hard to distinguish due to color or semantic resemblances. Experimental results on various datasets demonstrate that RefineSplat shows state-of-the-art performance, showing distractor-free novel view synthesis.

Search agents powered by large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to solve complex information-seeking tasks, requiring multi-step retrieval and reasoning to fulfill user goals. However, existing benchmarks often assume that user queries are complete and explicit, overlooking the fact that real-world search requests are frequently vague, underspecified, or even factually incorrect. In deep search scenarios, such ambiguity can propagate along multi-step reasoning chains and lead agents toward incorrect search trajectories. To address this gap, we introduce DiscoBench, a benchmark for clarification-aware deep search, designed to evaluate whether search agents can proactively identify ambiguity, ask effective clarification questions, and recover correct reasoning paths through user interaction. DiscoBench contains 211 samples and 463 ambiguity instances across 11 real-world domains, covering four ambiguity types. We further design a user simulator for multi-turn interaction and evaluate model performance from four perspectives: task utility, ambiguity detection, interaction strategy, and cost efficiency. Experiments on representative LLMs show that ambiguity detection and effective clarification are distinct capabilities, and that repeatedly searching instead of asking for clarification often performs worse than direct guessing, highlighting a critical gap between retrieval ability and interactive problem-solving in current search agents.

Speech emotion recognition (SER) often relies on hard consensus labels that collapse annotator disagreement. We study distribution-based supervision for 9-class SER on MSP-Podcast 2.0 using a WavLM-Base multitask model for categorical emotion and dimensional VAD. Hard-label training is compared with targets from primary and merged primary--secondary annotator vote distributions. Distributional objectives improve alignment with human vote distributions, reducing JSD/KLD relative to hard-label training. Analysis shows that hard supervision partly benefits from assigning ambiguous utterances to the residual Other class, whereas distributional supervision redistributes uncertainty across emotion categories. Entropy-stratified evaluation shows that high-ambiguity utterances remain challenging, but distribution-based supervision better captures perceptual uncertainty. These findings support moving beyond hard labels toward targets that reflect listener disagreement.

Structural ambiguity arises when a single sentence admits multiple valid interpretations due to its syntactic structure, posing a fundamental challenge for language understanding. Visual scenes serve as useful cues for resolving such ambiguity, and Vision and Language Models (VLMs) need to be capable of deriving possible semantic interpretations from visual scenes. We introduce Language and Vision Structural Ambiguity (LaViSA), a benchmark designed to evaluate the ability of VLMs to resolve structural ambiguity leveraging visual scenes. LaViSA consists of ambiguous sentences, their disambiguated sentences, and corresponding images of these disambiguated sentences across seven ambiguity categories. Using LaViSA, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation of diverse VLMs, including both proprietary and open-source models with varying parameter scales and reasoning capabilities. Experimental results show that although recent VLMs can leverage visual scenes to resolve structural ambiguity to a some extent, they still struggle with certain ambiguity types and visually subtle semantic distinctions, indicating remaining limitations in resolving structural ambiguity using visual scenes.

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have empowered home assistants with natural language interaction capabilities. However, current assistants overlook the progressive omission that occurs in human dialogue as shared context accumulates, leading to more elliptical expressions for efficient communication. Thus, current assistants still struggle to interpret such elliptical expressions accurately, which limits their effectiveness in real-world applications. In practical smart home scenarios, assistants face two major challenges caused by elliptical commands: (1) referential ambiguity caused by different environmental expectations among multiple users; and (2) intention ambiguity resulting from user preferences that evolve over time or change with the environment. To address these challenges, we introduce PEC-Home, the first simulated home dataset specifically designed for interpreting progressively elliptical commands in smart homes. Extensive experiments on various LLMs, including GPT-4o, show that existing home assistants struggle to execute user-intended operations based solely on elliptical commands. Even when equipped with tools for storing and retrieving user dialogue history, execution accuracy remains below that achieved with complete commands.}.

When a bacterial sample is exposed to several antibiotics, not every applied drug necessarily acts: if the organism is resistant to one of them, that drug leaves no morphological trace. The clinically meaningful quantity is therefore not which antibiotics were applied, but which ones were active. We show that these two are sharply decoupled in real E. coli microscopy - naively assuming the applied combination equals the active one is correct only about 37% of the time - yet existing computational tools are ill-suited to recovering the active set. Forward perturbation models such as scGen, CPA, and IMPA are designed to predict appearance from treatment, not the reverse, and inverting them degrades sharply; discriminative image classifiers tend to memorise strain- and batch-specific texture and fail to transfer across experimental replicates. We introduce AURA, which reframes the task as constrained, energy-based inverse attribution. Its central inductive bias is that the active set must be a subset of the applied set; this collapses the candidate space and lets AURA infer the active subset of applied antibiotics by decomposing residual morphology into antibiotic response atoms and selecting the subset with the lowest reconstruction energy, using no strain label at test time. AURA-E adds evidence-aware abstention, withholding a prediction when candidate explanations remain near-equally plausible. On cross-replicate transfer in an E. coli cytological profiling dataset, AURA recovers the active antibiotic combination with 95.47% exact-match accuracy.

Pairwise comparison is the gold standard for subjective ranking tasks; however, exhaustive annotation requires a massive number of human comparisons ($O(n^2)$). While sorting-based methods have reduced this burden to $O(n\log n)$, they still require expensive human judgment for every single comparison. To further improve annotation efficiency, we propose leveraging a Vision-Language Model (VLM) not as an annotator replacement, but as a \emph{question prioritizer} to identify which comparisons genuinely require human judgment. The proposed \textbf{Surprise-Guided MergeSort (SGS)} framework achieves this through three integrated components: (1) a bottom-up MergeSort scheduler that structures comparisons and exploits transitivity, (2) a composite Surprise Scorer -- combining position-bias-cancelled VLM confidence, Elo gap, and vote entropy -- to quantify comparison ambiguity, and (3) an adaptive budget allocator that routes high-surprise pairs to humans while automating low-surprise pairs via transitivity inference. Validation was conducted on six diverse benchmarks spanning text similarity (STS-B, BIOSSES, SICKR-STS) and image quality assessment (KonIQ-10k, TID2013, LIVE Challenge). SGS effectively identified and skipped up to 535 non-informative comparisons per session. Consequently, it achieved Kendall's $τ{\times}100$ improvements of $+6$ to $+12$ over Active Elo under the same total budget. These results demonstrate that combining VLM-guided surprise metrics with algorithmic sorting provides a generally consistent accuracy-efficiency trade-off across diverse domains.

This paper proposes a novel loss concept for supervised classification tasks. Rather than enforcing a direct mapping from each input sample to a single assigned label, we define an optimization objective over all classifier outputs as a bimodal Gaussian distribution. This softer target formulation implicitly captures class ambiguity, mitigates overfitting, and encourages the learning of more robust decision boundaries, all without requiring additional label information. Experimental results demonstrate consistent improvements in robustness, with particularly pronounced gains in low-data regimes, while requiring only minimal modifications to standard training pipelines.

Natural language interfaces to databases aim to translate user questions into executable SQL, yet remain brittle in real-world settings where questions are underspecified and schemas are large and ambiguous. Ambiguity across user questions, database schemas, and model interpretations are central failure modes in NL2SQL, leading to misaligned intent, incorrect schema grounding, and erroneous SQL generation. Existing approaches rely on human clarification or treat ambiguity as a schema representation problem, but these do not scale nor resolve ambiguity autonomously. We propose SOMA-SQL to automatically resolve ambiguity via targeted synthetic query log and ambiguity-driven probing. SOMA-SQL constructs synthetic query log to ground schema interpretation and guide candidate SQL generation; it then executes targeted probing queries, driven by a structured ambiguity taxonomy and candidate disagreements, to produce disambiguation evidence for final SQL selection and repair. This active approach to ambiguity discovery and resolution generalizes across unseen schemas and query distributions without human-in-the-loop. Experiments on six public benchmarks demonstrate that SOMA-SQL improves execution accuracy by 13.0% on average over state-of-the-art baselines, with gains of up to 16.7% on ambiguous questions.

A common assumption in strategic classification is that the classifier is public knowledge. However, it remains unclear whether, and why, a system would choose to commit to full disclosure. We study a setting in which regulation requires the system to disclose some, but not all, of the information. This induces a learning task in which the learner must jointly optimize the classifier and the uncertainty surrounding it. To this end, we adopt from robust mechanism design the notion of ambiguity, which in our setting allows the learner to reveal a set or range of possible classifiers, while privately choosing which of them to ultimately realize. We investigate how ambiguity affects the learning task, develop efficient algorithms for computing best-responses and training, and empirically explore strategic learning and its outcomes in this novel setting and using our approach.

A new fractional ambiguity function (NFrAF) derived from the fractional Fourier transform is introduced as a generalization of the classical ambiguity function. The fundamental analytical properties of the NFrAF, including symmetry, marginality, and Moyal type identities, are rigorously established. After verifying its ability to detect and localize monocomponent and multicomponent linear frequency modulated (LFM) signals, the NFrAF is integrated into a convolutional neural network based machine learning framework for signal classification. Owing to its superior time frequency resolution and localization, the NFrAF provides a more informative input representation than conventional methods such as the spectrogram and classical ambiguity function. Experimental results on simulated datasets demonstrate consistent improvements in classification accuracy, highlighting the effectiveness of the proposed representation for data driven signal analysis.

Prompt ambiguity is a common source of failure in large language models, but is difficult to localize because it is a latent property of the prompt, while existing attribution methods are designed to explain observable outputs such as logits or generated tokens. We introduce PRIG, a gradient attribution method that uses a probe logit to attribute latent ambiguity to token positions. Specifically, PRIG trains a linear probe to distinguish clear prompts from ambiguous prompts and attributes the probe score to earlier token representations in the residual stream. To enable token-level evaluation, we construct synthetic ambiguity datasets across coding, math, and writing by rewriting one task-critical sentence per prompt, and complement them with a human-written gold benchmark. In this setting, PRIG localizes ambiguous spans substantially better than gradient attribution baselines, achieving 0.840 AUROC on the combined synthetic benchmark and 0.891 AUROC on the gold set. It also outperforms GPT-5.4 on sentence-level ambiguity identification and retains useful signal out-of-domain. These results establish PRIG as a practical tool for identifying which parts of a prompt are ambiguous. More broadly, they suggest that latent prompt properties can be localized through intermediate representations, rather than through output-level attribution.

Many human-centered tasks, including natural language inference (NLI) and emotion recognition (ER), have multiple plausible interpretations, leading to label ambiguity and challenging disagreements across human annotators. As LLMs are increasingly deployed in real-world settings, faithfully modeling such ambiguity is essential to identify contested inputs, preserve variability in ambiguous cases, and capture the full distribution of human judgments. Yet, existing LLM alignment approaches have predominantly assumed a single correct label, excluding annotator disagreement during optimization. Instead of treating this ambiguity as noise, we show how to treat it as information that improves model behavior through a new algorithm called SMARTLY HANDLING AMBIGUOUS LABELS IN ALIGNING LLMS (SHALA-LLM). This reinforcement learning framework provides a new way for LLMs to learn directly from annotator distributions while dynamically prioritizing highly ambiguous samples during optimization. Experiments on ambiguity-sensitive NLI and ER benchmarks, including ChaosNLI, GoEmotions, and MSP-Podcast, demonstrate that SHALA-LLM improves agreement with annotator label distributions, e.g. on ChaosNLI, it reduces Jensen-Shannon Distance by up to 62.1%. At the same time, SHALA-LLM improves F1 by up to 16.7%, showing that modeling annotator disagreement can also strengthen classification performance.

Large Language Model (LLM) agents often operate under underspecified user instructions, where latent uncertainty over user intent leads to erroneous tool actions. To address this challenge, we propose a goal-oriented clarification framework that aligns clarification behavior with ambiguity resolution. Central to our approach is the Information Gain Reward, a metric that quantifies the utility of clarification questions by measuring the Bayesian belief update towards the ground-truth goal induced by the clarification exchange. We train the clarifier (LLM) using this reward to optimize for high information gain, ensuring that clarifications effectively reduce uncertainty and improve task completion within the agent-tool-user environment. We validate our framework within a clarification-enhanced $τ$-Bench environment, conducting cross-agent evaluations across five heterogeneous backbones. Empirical results demonstrate that our method consistently improves the success rate by 3.7% over the no-clarification baseline, while adding only 0.3 total interaction steps on average.

The task of Error Prediction, namely predicting whether a model output is correct, is commonly tackled with Uncertainty Quantification (UQ). However, while uncertainty metrics capture when models lack knowledge or capacity to make a prediction, they also reflect aleatoric uncertainty, which is inherent in the model input and context. This paper presents a method for improving error prediction for Large Language Models (LLMs), by disentangling input ambiguity from UQ signal. We conduct experiments on the task of Question Answering (QA) with six UQ metrics and show that UQ metrics are more predictive of errors on unambiguous instances than on questions with multiple plausible answers. We use Gated Experts and Selective Prediction to incorporate gold and predicted ambiguity labels into the error prediction pipeline. We find that ambiguity information improves error prediction scores across model families, training and evaluation paradigms, datasets (including allegedly unambiguous ones), and sources of aleatoric uncertainty, yielding improvements of over 10 points of PRR for individual UQ metrics on standard datasets.

Large language models (LLMs) excel in reasoning and knowledge-intensive tasks but remain vulnerable to prompt-level adversarial attacks that preserve intent while triggering commonsense hallucinations. This vulnerability is urgent, as LLMs are rapidly integrated into safety-critical domains where factual reliability is non-negotiable. Existing attack methods either lack efficiency or fail to capture the adaptive strategies of real-world adversaries. We propose an A*-inspired Factual Error Induction Framework, a framework for generating semantically aligned yet obfuscated prompts. At its core is a Hierarchical Rewrite Strategy guided by a dynamic semantic dispersion coefficient $γ$ that balances conservative edits early with aggressive obfuscations later, following a reverse simulated annealing schedule. To enhance interpretability, we further introduce Agentic Mechanism Labeling, which discovers and refines adversarial mechanisms, offering interpretable reverse optimization. Theoretically, we prove that prompt rewriting follows a contractive recurrence, leading to semantic collapse as $γ$ decreases. Empirically, across diverse LLMs, our method achieves higher attack success rates than exhaustive exploration while requiring fewer attempts, demonstrating both efficiency and effectiveness.

We argue that many Anthropomorphic Misalignment Research (AMR) studies need stronger evidence to ensure that they can provide a robust foundation for critical safety decisions, such as model deployment and regulation. By evaluating failure modes across different misalignment concepts, such as deception, emergent misalignment, and sycophancy, we show how conceptual ambiguity, non-robust datasets, experimental design, and insufficient causal interventions can lead to overinterpretation of model behaviors. This position paper aims to offer guidance on evidentiary considerations that can help improve methodological rigor in AMR. To achieve this, we provide a clear call to action through a proposed framework of evidence levels and a diagnostic checklist. These shared standards will enable more productive scientific discourse and ensure that claims about AI risks rest on solid empirical foundations.