Annotations

Reliable generative AI models critically rely on expert human annotations to evaluate output quality, yet these "gold" labels are expensive to collect and limited in quantity. Organizations thus often turn to collecting vast but noisy "silver" labels from crowdsourced workers or vendor annotators as proxies for gold labels. Because gold remains the evaluation target, naively aggregating noisy silver labels may introduce bias, and estimators built on sparsely observed gold labels may have high variance to resolve the model performance gaps that guide practical decisions. Model evaluation has become an ongoing operational practice rather than a one-time exercise, with evaluation rounds repeating across model versions, releases, and content domains. A natural question is whether the previous historical evaluation data can be used to improve each new round of evaluation. We introduce HERO (History Enhanced RObust model evaluation), a novel framework that uses historical data to suppress bias (improve reliability) and reduce variance (improve sensitivity) in model performance evaluation. HERO calibrates silver labelers' performance learned from historical gold annotations, and stabilizes the resulting estimator by anchoring it to covariate information measured with high precision in the historical data. HERO can be broadly applied across multiple common evaluation tasks, and remains valid when only a subset of historical labelers appears in the current round. We establish conditions under which the bias and variance reductions hold, showcase HERO's performance in simulation studies, and demonstrate its effectiveness on real-world model evaluation benchmarking datasets.

The materials science literature encodes decades of experimental knowledge in figures, yet this visual record remains locked away and inaccessible to AI at scale. The core difficulty is structural: most scientific figures are compound, with a single caption describing multiple sub-panels simultaneously, making direct image-text pairing unreliable. We present MatMMExtract, an end-to-end open-source pipeline that resolves this by decomposing compound figures into individual sub-panels and generating structured, grounded annotations using a large language model guided by a curated materials science taxonomy. Applied to 14,810 open-access articles, MatMMExtract produces MatSciFig; 391,606 panel-level image-text pairs from 180,571 figures, each annotated with a sub-caption, a two-level visualisation category spanning 19 classes and over 100 subtypes, and a scientific summary. To enable accurate panel localisation, we introduce MaterialScope, a domain-specific detection dataset of 2,811 manually annotated materials science figures, on which a fine-tuned YOLO12-m detector achieves mAP_50 of 0.9227. Among six benchmarked language models, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite delivers the best cost-quality trade-off for annotation generation, with 82% of outputs rated good and a hallucination rate of 4.8%. A dual-encoder retrieval baseline on MatSciFig achieves a 4.4 times improvement in R@1 over zero-shot CLIP, demonstrating the dataset's immediate utility for vision-language learning. All resources are released openly to the community.

Computer-aided design (CAD) plays a fundamental role in modern manufacturing by providing the high precision required for industrial production. Recent large language model based approaches formulate CAD generation as a sequence prediction problem and have achieved promising results. However, existing methods and evaluation protocols primarily emphasize visual similarity, while overlooking precise geometric parameters and correct metric scale. Small numerical deviations that are negligible at the shape-level may still violate industrial tolerance requirements, a problem further compounded by current autoregressive paradigms that utilize command sequence representations, aggressively quantize numerical parameters to ease LLM prediction. In this work, we present Pointer-CAD v2. Compared with v1 (arXiv:2603.04337), this version directly predicts continuous values, bypassing the need for quantized numerical parameters and thereby eliminating quantization errors. Specifically, we propose a unified framework that decouples parameter reasoning from geometric construction through a Plan-Then-Construct paradigm. Our method first produces a structured design plan with explicit metric scale parameters. These parameters are organized into a dictionary and directly referenced during sequence generation via a pointer mechanism, eliminating discretization errors and ensuring dimensionally consistent execution. In addition, we construct a new large-scale dataset with plan-level annotation and introduce three hierarchical geometry accuracy metrics to evaluate parametric fidelity at the vertex, edge, and face levels. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Pointer-CAD v2 consistently outperforms existing baselines and achieves substantial improvements in geometric accuracy, enabling reliable CAD generation for precision-critical engineering applications.

Emotion recognition of song lyrics is a challenging task since lyrics may not necessarily align with the overall emotion of a song. As a result, lyrics annotation remains largely underexplored. Drawing inspiration from research in large language model (LLM) assisted annotation, we examine the alignment between humans and LLMs for annotation of lyrics by creating a new sentence-level dataset of lyrics. Our observations highlight the subjectivity of the task and the inherent challenges. Following this, we present a hybrid annotation framework that optimizes human and LLM annotation by predicting potential misalignment in annotation.

Automated image recognition is increasingly used to scale ecological monitoring beyond manual annotation, yet ecologists lack evidence-based guidance on how much labelling effort reliable deployment at new sites requires. We present a decision framework quantifying the trade-off between labelling effort and recognition accuracy when transferring vision systems across marine habitats. The benchmark spans five datasets, three oceans, and three taxonomic groups (fish, corals, invertebrates), from tropical reefs in the Great Barrier Reef and French Polynesia to a temperate Danish fjord. We evaluated four recognition models (DINOv2, CLIP, ResNet-50, EfficientNet-B4) under four adaptation strategies (linear probing, LoRA, Visual Prompt Tuning, full fine-tuning) across three protocols: within-habitat transfer across 20 reef sites (240 runs), cross-dataset geographic transfer along a difficulty gradient (40 runs), and few-shot adaptation curves with 0-100 labelled samples per class (648 runs). Frozen self-supervised foundation features (DINOv2 + linear classifier, 1,538 trainable parameters) generalised to unseen reef sites at least as well as fully fine-tuned convolutional baselines four orders of magnitude larger; they learned species-diagnostic, habitat-invariant representations, whereas baselines encoded habitat-specific shortcuts that fail at new sites. As few as 10-20 labelled images per species sufficed to deploy reliable recognition at a new site, cutting annotation effort by roughly an order of magnitude. Solution. Programmes expanding to new sites can deploy reliable recognition by pairing a frozen, open foundation model (DINOv2) with a simple linear classifier and annotating only 10-20 images per species - roughly 1-4 hours per site. The framework lets programmes budget labelling effort against expected accuracy across sites, ecosystems, and platforms.

Hate speech annotation pipelines routinely collapse annotator disagreement into majority vote labels before training. We show that this aggregation is not neutral: 42.6% of all annotator disagreement in HateXplain concentrates specifically at the hate/offensive boundary, a pattern consistent with annotators applying different thresholds for where hate begins (chi-squared = 135.199, df = 2, p < 0.0001). Both a hard-label BERT model (Model A) and a soft-label model (Model B) drop 22 percentage points in accuracy from agreed posts (~80%) to disagreement posts (~58%), confirmed at p < 0.0001. A per-annotator multi-head model (Model C) widens this gap further to 28 points while collapsing offensive disagreement accuracy to 0.245. Critically, Model A expresses significantly higher confidence on boundary case errors than Model C (0.710 vs. 0.495, p < 0.0001), meaning standard evaluation metrics will not detect the failure. Three downstream interventions of increasing sophistication all fail to recover boundary accuracy. We argue the problem is structural. Majority vote presents a contested judgment as ground truth, and models inherit that false certainty. The intervention must be upstream in annotation design.

When a large language model (LLM) codes a construct in text as a human annotator would, that agreement makes the LLM a reliable coder. Yet reliability leaves construct validity untouched. The instrument may be theory-naive, reaching the code through a correlate that meets none of the demands the construct's theory makes, and no current method tells that apart from genuine measurement. We propose grain calibration as a method that closes the gap. It decomposes a construct into clause-level components, tests each against the text with extractive evidence, and combines the results through an explicit, theory-derived rule. Because the rule is stated rather than lodged in one opaque pass, its structure is evidence about the process rather than the output. It shows which components settled a code, and, when the code is wrong, whether a component was missed or an adjacent construct mistaken for it. Validation shifts from scoring an instrument's outputs against an annotator to showing that the instrument runs on the construct its theory specifies.

Symbolic music alignment links notes in a symbolic performance to their counterparts in a score. While existing alignment encoding formats provide unique correspondences between these notes, there are various musical practices and forms such as practice repetitions in rehearsal and improvised realizations in basso continuo that require a more flexible approach to encoding their alignments. In this paper, we propose a minimal, backward-compatible extension to the Match file format to support such non-unique and semantically complex alignments. We introduce two virtual pointer notes - virtual score notes and virtual performance notes - which allow to encode multiple links between performance and score notes. In addition we expand the Match file's 'section' line to include semantically meaningful annotations of performance regions beyond score-indicated musical repetitions. We further demonstrate the utility of these extensions through two representative use-cases in piano rehearsal and basso continuo.

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.

Labeling speaker diarization data is costly, yet annotation tools rarely measure that cost. We present voxmap-studio, an open-source, React-based diarization annotation tool integrated with the pyannote-based diarization ecosystem. Its canvas is initialized by a fast stride-accelerated diarization engine so that the annotator corrects a hypothesis rather than drawing every speaker turn by hand, and the tool records annotation cost - typed edit-operation counts and time - as a first-class output, enabling quantitative comparison of how much different forms of assistance actually help. Export is gated on per-segment human confirmation and guarded by injected "phantom" attention checks, which prevent unverified automatic output from being released as ground truth. In a preliminary study on nine AMI audio files, unassisted manual annotation was the costliest and least accurate, and automatic initialization shifted the work from creating turns to correcting them; highlighting uncertain segments gave the lowest cost in our small sample. The tool and its instrumentation are open source.

Transforming foundation segmentation models from human-prompted tools into auto-promptable annotators is critical for scalable medical data annotation. Current methods commonly depend on external feature matchers or auxiliary networks to automate geometric prompting, but introducing architectural overhead and limiting performance scalability. Although SAM3 natively supports concept segmentation via reusable text prompts, its direct use in medical imaging is hindered by a lack of fine-grained clinical knowledge and the ambiguity of human-written descriptions. In this work, we propose Mask to Concept (M2C), an efficient framework that adapts SAM3 for medical few-shot annotation without external modules, parameter retraining, or manual text engineering. Using only a few labeled images, M2C enables SAM3 to automatically search for transferable visual concepts entirely within its frozen architecture: it initializes a learnable concept embedding, uses it to prompt segmentation, and updates the embedding by gradients of minimizing the concept segmentation error. We further introduce a Hybrid Uncertainty Estimation (HUE) module that calculates the prediction entropy and maps concept predictions back to the box prompts, measuring concept-geometry prompting inconsistency. Highly uncertain samples are flagged actively for human correction, and the corrected masks are then fed back to M2C to continuously search for more precise concept embeddings, forming a self-enhancing annotation loop with minimal expert effort. Experiments on medical segmentation benchmarks show that our method achieves SOTA few-shot segmentation performance and outstanding annotation efficiency, offering a practical and efficient pathway toward scalable medical image labeling. Codes are at https://github.com/Huster-Hq/M2C.

Effective multi-task learning for surgical scene understanding is fundamentally hindered by annotation granularity mismatch; temporal workflow tasks such as phase recognition, step recognition and anticipation benefit from dense frame-level supervision, whereas pixel-level spatial tasks including instrument segmentation and action recognition are only sparsely annotated on selected keyframes due to prohibitive labeling costs. This supervision imbalance undermines shared representation learning and limits joint optimization across heterogeneous surgical tasks. To address this, we propose Flow-guided Annotation for Robust Operating Scenes (FAROS), a flow-guided label interpolation framework, that combines zero-shot segmentation-based mask propagation with optical flow estimation to overcome the limitations of appearance-based propagation under challenging surgical conditions such as occlusion, smoke, and motion blur, generating temporally consistent dense pseudo labels from sparse keyframe annotations. The densified instrument masks and action labels are integrated into a unified Transformer-based multi-task framework that jointly learns surgical phase recognition, step recognition, anticipation, instrument segmentation, and action recognition, enabling balanced optimization between dense temporal supervision and sparse spatial supervision. The label interpolation quality of FAROS is first validated on the DAVIS 2017 benchmark under a sparse ground-truth protocol, confirming robust propagation beyond the surgical domain. Extensive experiments on GraSP, MISAW, and AutoLaparo benchmarks further demonstrate that FAROS significantly improves cross-task representation learning and enhances holistic surgical scene understanding performance across spatio-temporal tasks.

How can we generate high-quality relevance annotations at scale without the cost and delays of human labeling? Relevance annotations are the backbone of search ranking systems which is needed for training data preparation, NDCG evaluation, and root cause analysis. However, human annotation is slow and off-the-shelf LLMs suffer from accuracy on domain-specific tasks. We propose a calibrated model cascade, a systematic approach for cost-efficient offline relevance annotation by routing queries through progressively larger fine-tuned classifiers. Our central insight is that accuracy and cost are orthogonal optimizations: domain-specific fine-tuning drives accuracy, cascading drives cost, and per-class isotonic calibration adds a small but reliable gain on top. Our contribution is threefold: (a) we decompose the gains and show that fine-tuning contributes 20 accuracy points while cascading is approximately accuracy-neutral but halves compute cost, (b) we introduce per-class isotonic calibration as one component of the cascade, contributing a small but statistically significant gain (+0.6 points over the strongest calibration baseline), and (c) we validate the system in production across six offline use cases, processing 150M+ annotations and enabling faster experimentation cycles. Our work is a building block for scalable, high-quality offline annotation pipelines in search and advertising systems.

High-quality annotations of structured representations are expensive to collect over large corpora. Manual annotation of structure is laborious, and model-based annotation, although cheaper to generate, requires expensive validation and potentially significant supervision to ensure that the annotation quality is strong enough to be useful downstream. In traditional annotation workflows, annotation of each complete example is performed end-to-end by a single annotator. However, structured annotation is complex, and each aspect of the task represents a unique challenge with an associated inferential load for a given annotator. Modern annotation projects can incorporate heterogeneous groups of annotators, including both models and human annotators with varying domain and linguistic expertise. It remains unclear, however, how to redesign annotation tasks in this setting, where efforts are discriminately allocated across heterogeneous annotators with respect to distinct annotation challenges. We propose to decompose annotation tasks into sub-tasks in order to reduce the aggregate inferential load of annotation projects. Inspired by the notion of centers from centering theory, we introduce a formal model of inferential load based on the degrees of freedom in the space of valid annotations. Using this model, we show that identifying these centers (i.e. salient anchor entities realized by annotation sub-tasks) constrains the output space complexity, and decompositions which isolate and advance center identification reduce the aggregate inferential load. We provide guidelines for decomposing complex structured annotation tasks, supported by examples demonstrating improved cost-efficiency from our prior work. Finally, we present a procedure for allocating sub-tasks across annotators to maximize quality under a fixed budget.

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) are increasingly used to extract interpretable concepts from vision and vision language models, yet existing evaluation methods largely rely on proxy metrics or qualitative inspection rather than measuring semantic correspondence. We present a human-grounded evaluation framework that quantifies alignment between SAE latents and human-annotated concepts, without requiring user studies, and validate this matching through targeted attribute perturbations. To enable this intervention-style evaluation in vision, we construct synCUB and synCOCO, synthetic benchmarks of paired images that differ in exactly one attribute. We introduce Fully-Binary Matching Pursuit (FBMP), a coalition-based matching procedure that supports many-to-one mappings between SAE latents and annotated concepts, and consistently outperforms one-to-one baselines. For functional validation, we propose a Targeted Attribute Perturbation Alignment Score (TAPAScore), which tests whether matched concepts respond selectively and in the expected direction under targeted image-level attribute perturbations. Under sanity checks, our matching and TAPAScore are the only evaluated metrics that reliably distinguish trained SAEs from untrained ones. Across SAEs trained on CLIP and DINOv2 embeddings, we find that increased overcompleteness can reduce perturbation alignment, indicating a reduction in interpretability. Our evaluation framework suggests that moderate dictionary sizes provide the best trade-off, yielding the most interpretable SAEs. Code and datasets are available at https://github.com/JonasKlotz/sae-concept-eval.

The Prague Dependency Treebank framework is unique in its attempt to systematically include and link different layers of language, including a meaning representation with several types of inter-sentential phenomena, especially coreference and discourse relations. We present its second consolidated version (PDT-C 2.0), which concludes almost 30-years long project of sustained development of the resource to a uniformly and coherently annotated, genre-diversified, almost 4 million token language resource of Czech language, with accompanying fully compatible lexicons. In addition to continuous linguistic research, the richly linguistically annotated corpus is also widely used in international comparisons of the development of traditional and novel NLP tools as well as in conversions into other formalisms. The corpus and the trained parsers are available under the CC BY-NC-SA licence.

Mechanistic interpretability has made substantial progress in automatically localizing circuits, but explaining what localized components do remains labor-intensive and difficult to standardize. In this work, we study whether language model (LM) agents can assist with this explanation problem once a circuit has already been identified. We introduce AgenticInterpBench, a benchmark for circuit explanation built from 84 semi-synthetic transformer circuits with 163 component-level annotations. We propose HyVE (Hypothesize, Validate, Explain), an agentic explainer that analyzes each component through an iterative loop of observation, hypothesis generation, and causal validation, eventually producing a component-level explanation and a circuit-level task description. Across four LM backbones, HyVE recovers useful component- and task-level explanations, but no backbone is uniformly best. Our analysis shows that strong backbones usually form observation-grounded hypotheses, while failures more often arise later in the validation loop, through incomplete validation plans, code execution errors, or unresolved hypotheses. A case study on an arithmetic circuit in Llama-3-8B shows that the same formulation can extend beyond semi-synthetic benchmarks to naturally trained models. Overall, LM agents are promising circuit explainers, but reliable validation remains the key obstacle.

Deep learning-based medical image segmentation models are trained using annotations that exhibit systematic bias and variability across raters. While probabilistic multi-rater approaches can emulate annotator-specific delineations, annotator characteristics are typically encoded implicitly in deep latent feature space, making direct analysis of their influence on predictive distributions less straightforward. We propose a logit-space probabilistic segmentation framework based on stochastic variational Gaussian Process that explicitly decomposes predictions into an image-dependent reference logit distribution and annotator specific perturbations parameterised by bias and variance. This formulation enables more explicit analysis on how intra- and inter-rater variability propagate to predictive distributions. We evaluate the method on a multi-annotator medical image dataset, which shows that explicitly modelling annotator specific perturbations improves uncertainty calibration while maintaining comparable segmentation accuracy, compared with state-of-the-art multi-rater probabilistic segmentation method. The learned bias and variance parameters quantitatively reflect annotator-specific behaviour. Furthermore, controlled perturbation experiments over bias and variance demonstrate how changes in annotator parameters systematically influence predictive performance. The code used in this paper is made publicly available at https://github.com/QiLi111/GPS-Var.

Multi-turn tool-using agents must coordinate long-horizon tool sequences while tracking dialogue state and policy constraints. Existing approaches often separate inference-time orchestration from parameter-level learning, leaving tool selection weakly structured and preference updates vulnerable to train--deployment prompt mismatch. For within-benchmark self-improvement, ToolGraph combines schema-derived topology, transition weights estimated from successful rollouts, and history-aware controls for write prerequisites and repeated-search loops. We then construct 161 preference pairs by locating divergence points via state-based matching and prefix-based alignment, filtered through action-correctness annotations, and train DPO under the same ToolGraph context used at inference. Across 375 tau2-bench tasks, ToolGraph raises the weighted average reward from 0.304 to 0.338 (+11.2% relative), while ToolGraph+DPO reaches 0.355 (+16.8% over the baseline), with the DPO gain concentrated in airline and retail. Fine-grained diagnostics further show that roughly half of telecom trajectories exhaust the step budget before action execution and that chosen reward positivity is the most useful checkpoint signal across our 16 evaluated DPO configurations.

Understanding moral values in social media text offers insight into moral judgement formation, and supervised NLP models trained on crowdsourced data have achieved strong classification performance. However, most approaches simplify the problem by aggregating multiple annotators' labels into a single "ground truth", overlooking the inherent subjectivity of the task. In practice, there are disagreements between annotators caused by personal viewpoint or inherent ambiguities, particularly for short tweets. Here, we extend a pretrained language model with a layer that learns annotator-specific features. Our model improves predictions of individual annotations and yields representations that reveal meaningful insights into annotators' moral perspectives. We show that models trained on aggregated labels may hide variation and give a misleading impression of performance. Overall, we demonstrate that disagreement reflects the inherent subjectivity of the task and that modelling individual perspectives creates benefits for moral classification of texts.

In-context learning (ICL) with large language models (LLMs) has emerged as a powerful alternative to fine-tuning for Named Entity Recognition (NER), achieving strong performance with minimal annotation and no additional training. However, prior work has shown that despite their adaptability, LLMs still lag behind fully supervised models such as fine-tuned BERT in structured tasks like NER. While existing studies on ICL for NER have mainly explored few-shot settings, the potential of scaling to hundreds of demonstrations has not been thoroughly investigated. To address this gap, we conduct a comprehensive investigation of many-shot ICL for NER and further explore its effectiveness in annotating and refining data for low-resource NER tasks. Specifically, we evaluate various LLMs across multiple domains using hundreds of ICL examples and then assess the feasibility of using many-shot ICL as a data annotation framework. Our experiments demonstrate that: (1) scaling to hundreds of in-context examples enables LLMs to match or even surpass the performance of fully supervised BERT models; and (2) using about one hundred human-labeled examples as demonstrations, many-shot in-context annotation can generate high-quality labeled data, leading to approximately 10% absolute F1 improvement over existing state-of-the-art approaches when used to fine-tune BERT on low-resource NER.

Current evaluations of Large Language Models (LLMs) on logical fallacy detection focus on predicted labels, but do not establish whether those labels are supported by the reasoning the models provide. We propose ForEx (Formal Verification for Explainable Reasoning), a framework that translates LLM-generated explanations into Lean4 and verifies whether the translated rationale is derivable under encoded premises, not the logical validity of the original natural language argument. To distinguish prediction outcomes from the formal status of the supporting reasoning, we introduce the LLM Argument Verification Matrix, which separates label consistency from formal verification status. Experiments on LOGIC-Climate show that over 90% of LLM outputs can be translated into formal reasoning chains that pass verification, while agreement with human annotations remains around 20%. These results expose a systematic gap between formal derivability and label agreement, a distinction invisible to prediction-based metrics. ForEx moves LLM evaluation beyond label correctness toward machine-checkable analysis of formalized reasoning chains.

Memory safety errors account for a large proportion of security bugs in systems written in C; modern languages such as Java and Rust prevent such bugs because they are memory-safe by design. To migrate systems to safer languages or identify memory errors, we must first determine how legacy code manipulates memory. This information is only represented implicitly in such code. In many cases, memory usage patterns are merely tedious for humans to figure out, rather than truly difficult. In this work, we ask if large language models (LLMs) can perform this task by having them synthesize annotations representing memory usage as specifications in CN, a hybrid testing/verification tool. Our tool, CNnotator, uses LLMs to automatically generate and test CN specifications. We find that current models are able to generate CN specifications for small-to-medium C programs, with the OpenAI o3 reasoning model achieving a 90% success rate on first attempts and 97% overall success, while the chat model GPT-4o correctly annotates 65% of first attempts. These results suggest AI-assisted annotation is becoming practical for real-world C codebases.

AI agents acting on behalf of users are constantly making decisions, and for users to trust their agents, those decisions must align with what they actually want. Privacy is an important alignment problem for agents: every message, post, or tool call an agent makes is a contextual judgment about what is appropriate to share, with whom, and under which conditions. Because such judgments depend on social expectations and norms, human judgment does not merely label privacy violations but also helps define them. While existing work relies on unreliable proxies for both training and evaluation, we place human judgment at the center of agentic privacy alignment. We introduce PrivacyAlign, a dataset of 1,350 samples with 3,516 detailed annotations from 599 unique annotators across diverse scenarios where current LLMs actually leak, and use it to ground both alignment training and automated evaluation in human privacy norms. Building on these annotations, we first show that conditioning LLM judges on human annotations and explanations for reference responses to the same prompt makes their judgments more reliable. We then introduce annotation-conditioned reward modeling, which uses these annotations to score new responses during RL, and show that small open-weight agents trained with this reward better align with human privacy norms, with strong gains on PrivacyAlign and existing privacy benchmarks for agents.

As agentic systems tackle increasingly complex multi-step tasks, evaluating their trajectories presents a major bottleneck - human annotation of a single trajectory on popular agentic benchmarks can take hours, making it difficult to scale evaluations for measuring performance or curating training data. This has driven widespread reliance on automated approaches such as LLM-as-a-judge (LLMJ) to critique agents at the process and outcome-levels at scale, however, the soundness of LLMJ critiques often goes unmeasured. Here, we introduce Counsel, the first public dataset of meta-evaluations for agentic tasks. Counsel consists of process-level critiques from open-weight LLMJs on two agent benchmarks: tau-bench (customer support agents) and DA-Code (coding agents), and human meta-evaluations of these critiques. Human annotators label critiques on each flagged error as "spot on", "correct location but poor reasoning", or "should not have flagged", achieving reliable inter-annotator agreement (Krippendorff's alpha of 0.78). The resulting dataset stratifies LLMJ critiques by human alignment across both error location within a trajectory and reasoning quality, serving as valuable data to calibrate, improve, or train LLMJs for agents. Comparing open-weight judges, we find that more capable judge models and more reasoning effort both enabled improved human agreement, with the strongest judge reaching ~88% agreement on location and ~65% on reasoning. Counsel is generated using open-weight models and is permissively licensed for broad community use, which we hope will enable rigorous study and improved alignment of LLM-based evaluators for agentic systems.

Vision foundation models have substantially advanced computer vision, enabling state-of-the-art performance in zero- and few-shot settings. They have been successfully applied to biomedical imaging tasks ranging from organ segmentation in computed tomography to cell segmentation in light microscopy. Electron microscopy (EM) is a central modality for analyzing cellular ultrastructure due to its nanometer-scale resolution. However, the application of foundation models in EM has so far been limited to specific organelles, such as mitochondria, largely due to the diversity of segmentation tasks and the scarcity of comprehensively annotated data. As a result, EM segmentation still predominantly relies on supervised learning, requiring extensive manual annotation and limiting ultrastructural analysis. To address this gap, we propose $μ$Match, a framework for semi-supervised learning and domain adaptation that leverages foundation models. We implement state-of-the-art student-teacher-based methods and evaluate multiple foundation models (SAM, SAM2, $μ$SAM, DINOv2/v3) on challenging EM tasks, including mitochondrion, nucleus, and neurite segmentation. Our results demonstrate consistent improvements over strong baselines and highlight a path toward substantially reducing the annotation effort in EM.

Reliable evaluation of phrase break annotations is crucial, as subtle variations in prosodic boundaries directly affect the clarity and naturalness of speech. However, existing approaches exhibit major limitations: single-reference evaluation assumes a unique gold phrasing for an utterance despite multiple valid phrasings, while human judgment, though flexible, is labor-intensive and unscalable. To address these, we propose LLM-based Multi-Reference Evaluation (LMRE) for phrase break annotations that models the one-to-many nature of prosodic phrasing and generates multiple valid phrasings from minimal demonstrations. On a Korean testbed of 1,356 annotations covering five strategies, LMRE shows stronger alignment with human judgment than single-reference evaluation in both acceptance behavior and score correlation. Our findings demonstrate that LMRE effectively achieves both scalability and multi-reference support, highlighting the potential of LLMs for evaluation in the speech domain.

Emotion annotation is inherently subjective, yet most NLP pipelines still assume "gold" labels, typically produced by majority voting, and treat annotator variation as noise. In this paper, we present a multilabel emotion annotation case study and use it to examine how annotator behavior and aggregation choices affect both agreement estimates and downstream emotion classifiers. Rather than collapsing disagreement into a single label, we represent targets as soft vote-share labels (including an intensity-weighted variant) and evaluate models using both thresholded metrics (macro-/micro-F1) and probabilistic alignment (Bernoulli cross-entropy SoftBCE), alongside data-derived disagreement diagnostics. Across annotation regimes, we show that disagreement is structured and leaves measurable traces in model behavior: hard labels may maximize F1 metrics, while soft supervision yields predictions that better reflect empirical annotator variance and uncertainty. Our results provide practical guidance for designing, aggregating, and evaluating multilabel emotion datasets when multiple interpretations are plausible.

Recent online video instance segmentation (VIS) methods have achieved impressive results, thus becoming the preferred approach to segment instances in videos. Despite the resurgence of impressive single image models, the online (or semi-online) VIS approaches outperform single-image models (e.g., based on SAM) by using long sequences of densely annotated frames during training. However,such a training setup of VIS is expensive in the sense of compute as well as dense annotations required. In order to solve these major flaws, we argue that the effective modeling of the instances and their evolution in videos do not require densely annotated frames. To that end, we propose a simple and effective module, called Past-frames Feature Propagation (PFP) which aggregates low-dimensional features from the image encoder of multiple frames. This simple low-compute module provides tremendous learning capability in using sparse video frame labels for end-to-end training. Combined with a light-weight frame-specific Instance Queries, our Sparse frame Annotation VIS (SA-VIS) significantly improves performance over its baseline. Most interestingly, our simple design that avoids complexities effectively bridges the gap in accuracy between training on sparsely and densely annotated video sequences. This translates to a mere 0.4% drop in performance of SA-VIS when using annotations for only 1/5 of the images in the dataset. Empirically, SA-VIS shows strong improvements over the baseline on YouTube-VIS 2019/2021/2022 and Occluded VIS (OVIS) and an over 1% improvement in AP on the state-of-the-art in a limited annotations scenario.

Current machine learning models commonly require large and well-annotated datasets. However, the annotation process often becomes a bottleneck, with increased complexity leading to higher chances of human errors. Within this context, our goal in this paper is to leverage unsupervised algorithms to improve data annotation efficiency for complex semantic segmentation problems in industrial materials science. Previous research has quantified labeling time and others explored unsupervised methods. However, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to quantify how much unsupervised algorithms accelerate the labeling process. We aim to validate the extent to which this laborious process can be accelerated, focusing on semantic segmentation tasks that involve annotating each pixel of high-resolution images, such as the microstructure characterization challenge in materials science. Specifically, we demonstrate that by using unsupervised computer vision algorithms, the time required for the labeling process can be reduced from 170 hours to 37 hours, achieving an approximate reduction of 78%. The dataset we work with includes large images of dimensions 1280x959 and 960x703, which further increases the complexity of the annotation task. Despite these challenges, we create and share the largest public steel microstructure segmentation dataset to date, available under MIT License with permanent DOI, contributing a fully annotated, high-resolution dataset to the field. Additionally, this is the first work to compare the labeling time from scratch (a common approach in previous studies) to the labeling time when using these unsupervised algorithms as a pre-annotation step. Furthermore, we provide a Deep Learning model trained on this dataset, validated by field experts, and deployed in an industrial setting, serving as an initial benchmark for this public dataset.

Benchmark infrastructure for personally identifiable information (PII) detection remains limited: existing corpora cover few entity types, use ad hoc generation conditions, and do not show which surface conditions cause detector failures. We present REDACT, a systematically controlled multilingual PII benchmark with 13,427 records, 324,078 entity annotations, 51 entity types, 4,127 surface-form patterns, and 25 languages across 9 scripts. A strength-2 covering-array sampler controls nine generation axes: domain, format, difficulty, length, density, code-switching, language, adjacency, and co-occurrence. Three entity-level metadata fields (disclosure status, disclosure form, and a GDPR-aligned sensitivity tier) enable stratified evaluation beyond aggregate or per-type F1. From the full benchmark, we evaluate five detectors (Presidio, GLiNER, the OpenAI Privacy Filter, GPT-4.1, and Claude Sonnet 4.6) on a locked, language-stratified sample of 1,000 records. Aggregate F1 masks an architecture-dependent failure structure: the rule-based detector performs poorly on the highest-stakes data, including HIGH-sensitivity categories (recall 0.07) and non-verbatim disclosure forms, while the LLM detectors remain more robust, with the HIGH tier as their strongest sensitivity slice. A three-model reference-free LLM-as-judge assessment corroborates that sensitivity-tier assignment is the task's hardest axis. We release the benchmark, schema, prompts, and stratified evaluation harness.

Clinician-centered evaluation is critical for validating medical AI systems, especially in ultrasound imaging where quantitative metrics do not always capture clinical usability. Existing medical image platforms primarily focus on dataset labeling. They lack integrated support for blinded model comparison and reproducible evaluation workflows. We present a clinician-centered pipeline for remote annotation and evaluation in ultrasound AI studies. The proposed pipeline uses a centralized server and lightweight browser interfaces to enable clinicians to perform annotation, blinded ranking, and review without local dataset downloads. The pipeline also supports multi-rater participation, centralized result aggregation, and automated statistical analysis. We validate the pipeline in a fetal ultrasound segmentation study with six raters spanning expert, generalist, and non-expert experience levels. The system automatically generated Spearman correlation, Kendall's $τ$, and top-1 selection statistics. Results indicated moderate to strong agreement across experts and other groups. The blinded evaluation results showed a tendency for later active learning models to be preferred. These outcomes suggest that the pipeline can support clinician-centered annotation and reproducible human-\ac{AI} evaluation studies in ultrasound imaging. The proposed pipeline is available on \href{https://github.com/13204942/SonoRate}{GitHub}.

Figurative language and negation are two areas that challenge current language models, however, both are widely used throughout written and spoken language. Large language models (LLMs) are also widely used in everyday contexts where they cannot necessarily be tuned for a specific dataset. It is therefore essential to understand the ability of LLMs to correctly interpret text that includes both negation and figurative language. To investigate this, we develop a set of new annotations to an existing dataset of figurative language, and test a range of language models on the dataset. We find that the combination of negation and figurativeness can present a particular challenge, and that performance overall and across different negation types is particularly dependent on the prompt style used.

Large instruction-following models are powerful but costly to deploy, particularly in finance, where labelled data are limited by confidentiality and expert annotation cost. We present an efficient framework for financial sentiment analysis through distillation with synthetic data, transferring knowledge from a large instruction-tuned teacher to compact student models. The framework is designed for low-resource conditions, where a small set of real examples are collected and labelled by hand. The framework then clusters the examples and uses the clusters to select seeds for generating synthetic examples via structured few-shot prompting. Experiments show that clustering-based seed selection yields more representative synthetic data than random sampling, enabling compact models to achieve strong performance with minimal supervision. Notably, on a more complex and noisy text domain, the compact model trained on the complete synthetic-seed corpus even outperforms the teacher model, while remaining competitive on formal text. The framework provides a practical route toward resource-efficient domain adaptation in financial NLP with minimal human labelling effort.

Vision-language models (VLMs) are rapidly advancing toward sophisticated grounded structured visual reasoning. Training models for such advanced capabilities demands a new genre of data that seamlessly unifies spatial coordinates, open-vocabulary descriptions, structured attributes, and topological relationships into a singular representation. However, existing data annotation tools fundamentally fail to meet these intricate demands, suffering from three systematic bottlenecks: limited expressiveness, severe annotation-training decoupling, and poor data reusability. To bridge this infrastructure gap, we introduce an open-source annotation tool, ScreenAnnotator. First, we define a unified annotation atom schema that binds spatial, semantic, and structural primitives into a single unit. Second, we implement an on-policy annotation loop embedded with a Bayesian Annotation Verifier (BAV). Finally, we design a template-driven multi-task data synthesis process dynamically transforms static atoms into diverse multi-dimensional reasoning tasks, eliminating redundant re-annotation. The on-policy loop drives the annotation accept rate to nearly 100% on flowcharts and 77% on GUI screenshots, while steadily reducing per-image annotation time as labeled data accumulate. In the flowchart scenario, fine-tuning a VLM yields 76.1% average accuracy, which is a 35.1% point absolute gain. Our code is available at: https://github.com/WnQinm/Annotator.

Production LLM assistants route user requests to growing libraries of specialized tools, but how does routing accuracy degrade as the catalog scales? We study single-step routing on a 110-agent, 584-tool catalog from a deployed enterprise productivity assistant, evaluating three frontier models from 10 to 110 agents. Routing F1 on under-specified requests drops 16--23 percentage points across models. An oracle analysis decomposes the degradation into a \emph{retrieval} gap (the model cannot surface the right tool) and a \emph{confusion} gap (even with perfect retrieval, the oracle ceiling drops 10pp). Embedding-based shortlisting recovers +10--11pp F1 at full scale across all three models and two providers. A production annotation study (1,435 human-labeled utterances, three annotators) confirms the recovery on real traffic at +10--17pp despite 10--15pp lower absolute performance.

Simulation enables scalable robot data collection, but raw 3D assets provide only geometry, lacking the semantic, interactive, and physical knowledge needed to specify where and how robots should act. In this work, we present AnnotateAnything, a general automatic annotation framework that converts passive 3D assets into manipulation-ready assets with structured, diverse, and executable manipulation labels. AnnotateAnything is built around two complementary pipelines. First, a unified visual-language annotation pipeline using vision-language reasoning to infer object semantics, interaction constraints, and 3D-grounded cues, providing human-prior guidance for identifying meaningful interaction regions. Second, a fully automatic and massively parallel physics annotation pipeline grounds these priors in each asset's geometry and physical constraints through candidate generation, geometry optimization and trajectory generation. This pipeline produces diverse and executable action annotations, including grasp poses, dexterous contacts, articulation waypoints, insertion directions, hanging affordances, and navigation targets. Using the generated annotations, we further build an asynchronous parallel simulation data-collection system across diverse objects, tasks, and robot embodiments. Experiments demonstrate that AnnotateAnything achieves superior annotation efficiency, data-collection efficiency, and task success rates over existing annotation and data-generation pipelines, while also supporting downstream tasks such as affordance detection, robotic VQA, and visual instruction finetuning. We provide project materials on the project page and plan to release the full code, annotations, and benchmark to facilitate future research. Videos, code, demo assets, and annotations are provided in supplementary materials Project page: https://tourmaline-caramel-169490.netlify.app.

IMPACTeen is a dataset of textual social influence scenarios spanning interpersonal, media-based, and digital settings in an adolescent context. It contains 1,021 texts, 5,100 individual annotation records, and gold labels for social influence techniques, with each text annotated from five distinct perspectives: teenagers, parents, psychologists, communication experts, and teachers. The resource was constructed through constrained LLM generation, followed by a two-step human editing and validation phase aimed at ensuring youth-context realism. A multi-dimensional annotation covered influence presence, techniques, intentions, consequences, resistance, reactions, and annotation confidence. The dataset supports research on social influence detection, annotator disagreement, cross-lingual modeling, and the training and evaluation of language models. The dataset was created in Polish and is accompanied by a corresponding English version.

Few-shot medical image segmentation methods typically assume a single ground-truth annotation, overlooking systematic variability across expert raters commonly observed in clinical datasets. We propose an attention-based prototype calibration framework for few-shot multi-rater segmentation that models rater-specific deviations from a consensus representation in prototype space. A lightweight yet principled attention operator directly refines rater prototypes without modifying the backbone feature extractor, making the approach fully compatible with existing prototype-based few-shot segmentation methods. This design preserves semantic consistency while enabling personalized segmentation outputs with minimal computational overhead. Experiments on multi-rater medical imaging datasets demonstrate consistent improvements over baseline prototype approaches, highlighting the effectiveness of structured prototype calibration for modeling annotation variability.

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.

Qualitative coding is central to social science, but expert annotation is difficult to scale. LLMs offer a possible extension, yet require careful validation when the target construct is interpretive, theoretically loaded, and only indirectly expressed. We study this problem in a difficult case: detecting whether authors treat Bayesian models as descriptions of mental and neural mechanisms (realism) or as useful mathematical tools (instrumentalism). Our method combines a theory-driven codebook, expert-coded reference annotations, a diagnostic-gated prompt-optimization search yielding a shared zero-shot prompt for three frontier LLMs (GPT-5.1, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Gemini 3 Pro Preview), and multi-rater reliability analysis. The final prompt achieved a held-out combined reliability score of 0.76 (harmonic mean of ICC = 0.79 and $α$ = 0.74), with all diagnostics satisfied. Deployed on 6,858 quotes from 210 articles, the three LLMs reached substantial quote-level agreement (ICC = 0.80; $α$ = 0.76; combined = 0.78) and near-perfect article-level rank stability ($r$ = 0.96-0.97 across rater pairs). The corpus was predominantly weakly realist, but article-level stances were rarely uniform: only 1.4% of articles used a single band, while 59.5% spanned four or more. Low-level perception/motor articles scored 8.8 Realism points higher than high-level cognition articles ($p < .001$, $d = 0.60$), quantifying a long-held qualitative intuition. We present this as an expert-led case study; the framework is intended to generalize to similar theoretically demanding tasks, not to all qualitative analysis.

Automated cheque processing requires localising key fields (date, legal amount, IFSC code, account number, signature, and payee name) before any recognition step. The IDRBT Cheque Image Dataset is, to our knowledge, the only public collection of Indian bank cheques, but it ships without field annotations and with no stated licence, so its redistribution terms are unclear. We address both limitations. First, we release six-field bounding-box annotations for all 112 cheques in the dataset, distributed annotations-only and keyed to the original filenames so that the IDRBT redistribution terms are respected. Second, we release 295 fully redistributable synthetic cheque images produced by a cut-paste pipeline that composites annotated field regions from real cheques onto content-erased, bank-specific canvas templates; because patches are pasted at their source coordinates, annotations carry forward unchanged. Third, we provide a ResNet-50 direct-regression baseline that predicts all six fields in a single forward pass, and use it for a controlled test of the synthetic data. The test is sobering: because cheque layouts are rigid, a no-learning baseline that simply predicts each field's mean training box already reaches 0.691 mean IoU and 80% accuracy at IoU >= 0.5, and once seed variance and training compute are accounted for, the cut-paste synthetic data yields no measurable improvement over real data alone (an equal-compute real-only model matches or beats the synthetic-augmented model on every aggregate metric). We report this negative result in full, since it cautions against assuming appearance-only augmentation helps fixed-layout documents and points instead to layout-varying synthesis. The annotations and synthetic images are released as reusable resources on the Hugging Face Hub under permissive licences.

Multiple Instance Learning (MIL) is a standard paradigm for Whole-Slide Image (WSI) analysis and has achieved strong results in computational pathology. However, most MIL pipelines assume a single "gold" label per slide, which conflicts with clinical practice where substantial inter-pathologist variability is common. Existing multi-annotator learning and label-refinement methods typically estimate global annotator reliability or rely on single-instance assumptions, making them poorly suited to MIL and to localized diagnostic contexts where experts disagree. We propose RaLMPH (Reliability-aware Learning for Multi-Pathologist Harmonization), a MIL-based label reconciliation framework for WSIs annotated by multiple pathologists. RaLMPH introduces a reliability field that jointly models (i) local neighborhood structure in WSI feature space and (ii) expert uncertainty (entropy), enabling per-sample identification of trustworthy reference neighborhoods. Leveraging this field, RaLMPH performs sample-wise local annotator ranking to select reliable opinions per slide and applies an adaptive gating mechanism to fuse labels conditioned on local reliability. Experiments on a clinical WSI dataset with labels from six pathologists, as well as controlled simulated benchmarks, show that RaLMPH consistently outperforms existing approaches. Further analyses clarify how our reliability-aware mechanism improves label reconciliation and downstream MIL performance.

LLM judges are used to reduce the need for costly human labor in evaluating open-ended text generation. However, the reliability of these judges depends critically on their alignment with human raters -- a property that itself depends on costly human annotations. In this work, we develop a method (Metric Match) for estimating correlation-based reliability metrics of LLM judges from limited annotations. Metric Match selects a subset of samples for human annotation such that the subset matches the population reliability metric with respect to acquired synthetic labels. We empirically show that Metric Match achieves a win-rate of 0.838 against random subset selection across four different correlation metrics and 15 datasets, with an 18.7% decrease in average estimation error and reduces annotation needs by 32.5%. We provide a cost model and highlight a medical case study where our method saves $1,041.67 compared to random selection for expert annotation. Further, we shift our task from reliability estimation to reliability classification of whether a given judge is above a deployment threshold, outperforming random selection with Metric Match. All project code is publicly available, and we additionally provide an installable package for ease of use.

MLLM-as-a-Judge is conventionally validated by agreement with human annotations, but this metric is undefined when the human pool is culturally heterogeneous. We introduce VOIR DIRE, a multimodal benchmark of 626 culturally paired image--prompt artifacts spanning U.S. and mainland Chinese contexts across food, fashion, and architecture, with annotator pools that are within-pool reliable (a = 0.86/0.74) but cross-pool divergent on evaluation (Q1 r = -0.12). Across six MLLMs, the bias decomposes into two failures: a positivity-floor calibration failure (compressed scale use) and an orientation failure (default to one cultural norm). On this corpus, where contested items are sampled to split the two pools, the floor mechanically validates the more-permissive Chinese reading; persona prompting partially recovers calibration, but the orientation residual survives, evidence the tilt is not reducible to scale compression. Reference-pool in-context demonstrations deepen the orientation residual and inflate the high end rather than restoring use of the low end. Model origin adds a small additive tilt (~0.10 MAE) that is approximately invariant under demonstration. We recommend reporting alignment against each reference pool separately and treating cross-pool divergence as a judge property.

Evaluating new large language models typically requires costly human annotation campaigns at scale. LLM-as-a-judge offers a cheaper alternative, but judge scores carry systematic errors - such as position bias, self-preference, or intransitivity - that can strongly miscalibrate the resulting rankings. We quantify the resulting judge-human disagreement at two complementary levels. At the local level, we estimate per-battle uncertainty from the judge's own score differences by propagating calibrated win probabilities rather than hard labels into the Bradley-Terry procedure. This alone provides a drastic improvement to Elo estimation accuracy, bringing LLM-derived ratings within 17.9 Elo MAE of human-derived ones when averaged over 55 held-out models on LMArena. At the global level, we apply split conformal prediction to the residual gap between LLM-derived and human-derived Elo ratings across held-out models, producing prediction intervals with distribution-free marginal coverage guarantees that account for irreducible LLM-human disagreement. Together, these two layers yield a low-cost evaluation tool that provides developers with calibrated Elo estimates and honest uncertainty bounds, without access to large-scale human annotations. To facilitate reproducibility, we release our code at https://github.com/kargibora/SoftElo .

We present eCREAM-MedCorpus, a new and unique large-scale dataset of clinical notes produced in Emergency Departments of Italian hospitals. The corpus, in its current version, is composed of approximately 4 million clinical notes fully anonymized, covering diverse phases of patient care during the stay in the emergency department. In addition, a subset of about six thousand notes has been manually annotated by clinical experts through a structured Case Report Form (CRF) containing 132 items relevant for two patient situations in emergency departments, dyspnea and loss of consciousness. Items may assume numerical values (e.g., for blood saturation), categorical (e.g., for level of consciousness ), binary (e.g., for presence of traumas), and mixed value types. The annotation process involved multiple clinicians and underwent iterative revision to resolve ambiguities in item formulation, resulting in a richly structured (although high imbalanced) resource. The dataset aims to fill a relevant gap of data able to support both the development and the use of Large Language Models in concrete medical applications. We describe the data collection protocol, the on-site anonymisation pipeline, corpus statistics, and the annotation scheme. Finally, we propose CRF-filling as a novel structured information extraction benchmark, and provide zero-shot baseline resulting from Gemma-27B and MedGemma-27B. To the best of our knowledge, eCREAM-MedCorpus is the largest freely available dataset of clinical notes existing for the Italian language.

This overview paper presents the results of the shared task for the second workshop on Multimodal Augmented Generation via Multimodal Retrieval (MAGMaR). In this shared task participants submitted systems focused on either (i) video retrieval or (ii) grounded generation of articles given retrieved videos. Teams could submit to either task. For the retrieval task, we had 2 participating teams that submitted a total of 17 systems -- all of which beat a baseline derived from the winner of last year's shared task. On the generation side, we had 4 teams submit 16 systems. All teams had at least one generated report that was labeled the best by a human annotator.

Enthymemes, arguments with unstated premises or conclusions, are pervasive in persuasive discourse, yet their annotation remains notoriously subjective. We present a resource of 1,482 tweets from politically controversial discourse, annotated by five annotators for the presence of enthymemes and their argument structure, designed to study label variation. We first revisit the definition of enthymemes and propose annotation guidelines anchored in Walton's argumentation schemes, offering a structured and constrained approach that nonetheless preserves room for the interpretive nature of the task. This contrasts with past resources, which tend to eliminate disagreement, obscuring its sources and preventing investigation of its potential benefits for model performance. We further propose a complexity analysis of the task, identifying where annotation imposes high cognitive load and may give rise to inconsistent annotation. Our preliminary experiments show that models trained on annotator disagreement outperform models trained on hard majority-vote labels. We close by reflecting on how structural openness in enthymeme definitions and guidelines enables the study of variation in subjective inferential processes for future resources and downstream NLP applications concerned with human inference.

A global shortage of trained sonographers limits prenatal ultrasound screening in low- and middle-income countries, where over half of pregnant women receive no skilled sonography. Current deep learning approaches address detection, segmentation, or classification in isolation, each demanding a separate model and expert-specified labels at inference. We present FADA, a unified vision-language model built on Qwen3.5-VL that performs clinical interpretation, classification, detection, and segmentation through a single interpretation-first pipeline without external labels. FADA distills knowledge from four domain-specific foundation models (FetalCLIP, UltraSAM, USF-MAE, UltraFedFM) via offline pre-computed feature caching. Selective distillation, which applies feature alignment only to annotation tasks while interpretation relies on standard fine-tuning, consistently outperforms full distillation across most evaluation axes. The recommended variant, FADA-SKD, achieves 0.8820 mean Dice for segmentation, 0.7671 mAP@0.50 for detection, and 100% structured interpretation compliance. Expert sonographer validation across 237 images confirms clinically acceptable outputs in both autonomous and human-in-the-loop modes, with 73.5% of interpretations scoring perfectly under clinician guidance. The system is trainable on a single consumer GPU and deployable without cloud connectivity. We validate edge deployment by running the compressed 0.8B model on a commodity smartphone (Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 1, 12 GB RAM) using llama.cpp with GGUF quantization, completing the full 5-phase pipeline in approximately 60 seconds entirely offline. This establishes a practical pathway for integrating AI-assisted fetal assessment with portable ultrasound devices, directly addressing diagnostic access gaps in resource-constrained settings. Code, models, and data are available at https://github.com/mahmoodphd/FADA.

Measuring subjective constructs in naturally occurring social media text requires annotation procedures that are theoretically grounded, empirically validated, and transferable to an encoder model for scalable prediction. Using non-English social media posts annotated according to Schwartz's theory of basic human values, we investigate how different LLMs, prompts, and instruction languages operationalize the expression of values in text. We argue that although texts may permit multiple plausible interpretations, theory-based value definitions can constrain interpretations and reduce spurious value attributions. Beyond precision, recall, and F1, we evaluate structural alignment between values, error structure, confidence-ambiguity relations, and annotation stability. We show that different LLMs produce different value interpretations. Iterative prompt calibration through error analysis reduces misattributions and improves alignment with expert annotations. We also derive targeted expert verification rules from recurrent error structures and use them during corpus annotation. Finally, we show that LLM annotations can be transferred to an encoder model through soft-label training, retaining theory-based value interpretations and information about uncertainty in value expression.

Few-shot example retrieval is the dominant paradigm for grounding large language models (LLMs) in domain-specific text-to-SQL systems. However, the quality of the annotated example bank directly governs system accuracy, and expert annotation is prohibitively expensive. We formalize the active selection of these examples as a constrained experimental design problem over the intrinsic, low-dimensional manifold of semantic query embeddings. Unlike standard active learning frameworks, our setting introduces three critical challenges: varying, query-dependent annotation reliability (heteroscedasticity), strict requirements for spatial diversity across semantic topics (partition matroid constraints), and the inherent reality that the true covariance structure of the embedding space is unknown (misspecification). To address these, we propose a stratified greedy algorithm that maximizes a heteroscedastic mutual information objective. We prove that this objective remains submodular and approximately monotonic on the intrinsic manifold, yielding a theoretical constant-factor approximation guarantee. We establish a spectral bound demonstrating that this approximation guarantee degrades gracefully, rather than catastrophically, when the assumed surrogate kernel diverges from the true underlying data-generating process. Empirical results demonstrate that the proposed strategy significantly reduces labeling effort while maintaining high text-to-SQL retrieval accuracy.

This short paper introduces a stylometric interpretation method inspired by genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Each "gene" token's association with "phenotype" authorship is tested using logistic regression with multiple-comparison correction. Applied to English, German, and Russian corpora, the method detects statistically significant lexical markers distinctive of individual authors.

In high-stakes settings such as brand compliance, clinical care, and content moderation, machine learning cannot be deployed as opaque oracles: practitioners inspect the features driving model decisions, and models must leverage the expert documentation governing these domains. In practice, the data arrives as unstructured content, and features extracted from it must be interpretable, discriminative, and aligned with what experts consider important. Existing methods fall short: they target tabular inputs, lack demonstrated expert alignment, and cannot operationalize qualitative criteria such as 'maintain professional tone' into precise features. We present FEST (Feature Engineering with Self-evolving Trees), combining dual-stream feature generation (semantic and deterministic), semantic deduplication, and tree-guided iterative evolution to discover auditable features from raw text and images. FEST leads in 17 of 20 classifier-task combinations across brand classification, content authenticity detection, and stress detection, with a mean gain of 4.2 pp over the strongest baseline across five classifiers. An LLM-as-judge evaluation shows FEST achieves 60-80% coverage of expert-designed brand features at strict semantic-alignment thresholds, corroborated by a human expert study rating features highly on relevance, clarity, and actionability. When seeded with expert guidelines, FEST refines qualitative criteria into operational features, improving accuracy by 6-12 pp on average across brands. To enable systematic evaluation of expert alignment in automated feature engineering, we release BrandGuide, the first dataset pairing expert-designed features with 1M+ assets across 2,683 brands. By grounding feature engineering in expert knowledge, FEST opens a practical pathway for interpretable ML in domains demanding human oversight.

While Deep Active Learning (DAL) effectively reduces human annotation costs, its efficacy is constrained by human annotation errors. This is because the data sampled for active learning is assumed to be highly informative for training. When human annotators introduce errors into this informative data at a certain rate, the active learning performance drops significantly and, in some cases, even exhibits worse outcomes than passive learning. In this paper, we first analyze the impact of human annotation errors in the DAL setting. Then we propose a framework to address the human annotation noise problem for DAL. Informed by human learning patterns, the core idea of our proposed solution involves allocating a portion of the human annotation budget to re-annotate data that has already been labeled. Previous theoretical work suggests that when the model possesses a certain level of ability to identify potentially noisy data, even re-labeling a small fraction of the data can effectively remove noise from the active training set. To achieve this, we implement two active noise sampling strategies to detect noise under different circumstances and allocate a part of the annotation budget to re-annotate these instances. Our approach imbues active learning with a revisiting and introspective behavior. Our experiments demonstrate that, under the same annotation budget, our method is more data-efficient and yields a relatively noise-free annotation dataset in the end.

Author name disambiguation is a critical challenge in academic search systems, often addressed through from-scratch and real-time disambiguation approaches. However, current algorithms remain vulnerable to cumulative errors of paper-author assignments and overlook inconsistent assignments across different sources. Resorting to expert annotation is resource-intensive. To this end, this paper explores a new perspective for author name disambiguation: cross-source correction by leveraging inconsistent assignments across sources. We propose CrossND, a full-stack framework that integrates data refinement, cross-source reasoning, and test-time scaling. First, a chain-of-refinement pipeline denoises author profiles and produces more accurate paper-author matching probabilities. Second, a supervised fine-tuning process incorporates these refined signals and a probabilistic soft logic-based cross-correction module to infer the assignments of which sources are incorrect. Third, test-time scaling further enhances the accuracy and robustness of the predictions. Experiments on real-world datasets indicate that CrossND consistently outperforms 17 baselines by leveraging cross-source reasoning without human intervention.

Sycophancy in language models is typically studied as excessive agreement or validation, while explicit praise and flattery have received comparatively little attention. We argue that sycophantic praise is a distinct alignment problem that cannot be reliably measured using current methods. We introduce a parameterized framework that measures whether praise is excessive relative to contribution quality and expected user ability. We show that our framework substantially outperforms generic LLM judges in agreement with human annotations, and that sycophantic praise occurs far more frequently in social and interpretive domains than in objective reasoning settings. Together, these findings position praise calibration as a distinct alignment challenge.

Large language model (LLM)-based agents often make suboptimal tool-use decisions, including unsupported tool invocation and hallucinated direct responses, which may accumulate errors throughout multi-step interactions. Existing approaches mainly improve these behaviors through inference-time correction or coarse-grained reward signals based on decision outcomes and structured checklists, leaving the uncertainty characteristics of agent decisions underexplored. We observe that decision-oriented reinforcement learning tends to weaken the uncertainty separation between correct and incorrect actions, resulting in overconfident mistakes and weaker exploration signals. Therefore, we propose TRUST, which incorporates uncertainty quantification into reward design as a repulsive force for maintaining uncertainty separation, and labels lightweight key-turn annotations for unified post-training of multi-turn trajectories. Experimental results across diverse tool-use benchmarks show that TRUST consistently enhances both decision quality and agent performance while maintaining more reliable uncertainty estimates during optimization.

We ask whether topic sentiment has a causal effect on perceived political ideology, and whether the answer depends on who assigns the ideology label. Using articles from AllSides, paired with shared sentiment annotations from Llama-3.3-70b-versatile, we compare ideology labels from expert human annotators, GPT-4o-mini (baseline and finetuned), and Llama-3.3-70B. We apply Double Machine Learning (DML) and mediation analysis across all four annotation paradigms. Zero-shot LLMs regularly inflate effect sizes relative to human annotations, while fine-tuning often attenuates them back toward the human scale. Our results have implications for the use of LLM annotations as silver labels and as proxies for human judgment in downstream causal analyses: they may be reliable for recovering the presence and direction of effects on the partisan topics, but not their magnitude, leading to over- or under-prediction of some ideology given particular topics.

Hate speech detection is inherently subjective: people from different demographic groups perceive the same content very differently. Collecting enough annotations from multiple demographic groups is costly and difficult to scale. Persona-conditioned Large Language Models (models prompted to adopt a specific demographic identity) have been proposed as a way to simulate diverse perspectives at scale. But do they actually reflect how different groups disagree? We evaluate three aspects of human social judgement: (i) whether personas from different groups disagree in human-like ways (inter-group disagreement), (ii) whether they become more sensitive when content targets their own identity (in-group sensitivity), and (iii) whether they can accurately predict how another group would react (vicarious prediction). Our results show that no model consistently captures all three dimensions, and performance is highly model-dependent and does not emerge reliably from minimal identity prompts alone. However, vicarious prompting with Llama 3.1 yields the highest cross-group agreement in most demographic axes and provides the closest overall approximation to human disagreement patterns, indicating that this configuration may provide a more reliable setting for automatic annotation aligned with human judgements.