Avoidance

Spoken dialogue state tracking recovers slot-value pairs from speech, where ASR errors concentrate in entity values and persist across turns, making it both a generation and an editing problem. A strong per-turn text editor corrects much of this but, operating on the transcript alone, leaves three recoverable errors: a value predicted inconsistently across turns, an omitted slot, and a value the audio does not support. We present AVERT, which scores each candidate value by combining cross-turn agreement with a trained audio-conditioned verifier and resolves the three error types with three operators, vote, add, and swap, each restricted to the slots where its error is common. On SpokenWOZ, a base speech-LLM reaches 33.04 JGA, a text editor 38.34, and AVERT 40.13, without retraining either. This is in the range of a 1B end-to-end system that consumes the full spoken history (39.32), though AVERT uses two 1B decoders rather than one. The audio verifier contributes a statistically significant gain, and restricting each operator to a selected slot subset matters: removing it lets unrestricted voting overwrite correct categorical values and fall below the editor.

How do learners avoid overgeneralizations such as Tom laughed me without explicit negative evidence? Constructionists have posited two proposals that describe indirect negative evidence against overgeneralizations: preemption (which privileges exposure to near-synonymous construction---e.g., she made him laugh) vs. entrenchment (all exposures to a verb's grammatical usages, including cases like He laughed). We disentangle these hypotheses by running controlled rearing experiments on LMs trained on child-caregiver conversations, where we systematically remove preemptive vs. non-preemptive evidence. We find that while LMs avoid overgeneralizations, they do not show preemption at a verb-specific level, instead showing weak but non-zero evidence of abstract preemption. Combined with results from analyzing the LMs' training dynamics, we find that LMs treat competing structures as indirect positive---as opposed to negative---evidence in the verb-specific condition. Insofar as preemption is the more plausible route to avoiding overgeneralizations in humans, our results point the need for there to be sensitivities to indirect negative evidence in neural network learners, and suggest new human experiments to test abstract preemption.

This paper extends the stochastic-oracle model of AI-augmented computing to include agentic oracles. Unlike a stationary stochastic oracle, which responds to the same query according to a fixed response distribution across calls, an agentic oracle can pursue a goal autonomously and may access an environment containing task-relevant resources. These capabilities affect both response distributions and token costs beyond what is visible at the query-response interface. We develop a framework for analyzing token costs in Stochastic-Oracle Turing Machines (SOTMs) that compute with agentic oracles. Each call has an \emph{orchestration token cost}, visible to the caller at the query-response interface, and an \emph{agentic token cost}, incurred by internal operations not exposed to the caller. We show that an SOTM computing with an agentic oracle that can retain intermediate state can have token-cost advantages over SOTMs using stationary stochastic oracles when solving the same task at the same quality level, both with and without environment access. We also investigate goal-loss risk, including how internal dispatch ordering can reduce exposure to irreversible actions. We provide a goal-loss avoidance criterion, derive progress--retry--goal-loss formulas, establish goal-depth lower bounds on token complexity, characterize token complexity when the probability of goal loss is zero, and show that goal-loss risk can impose an upper bound on the achievable quality of a task involving environment updates.

Goal reasoning in Non-Axiomatic Logic (NAL) explains how an adaptive system derives means for realizing desired events under insufficient knowledge and resources. However, the representation of avoidance is less clear. A common convention is to express avoid $G$'' as the goal sentence $\neg G!$'', but this notation conflates two different readings: pursuing the negated event $\neg G$, and avoiding the positive event $G$. This paper shows that the conflation can produce a paradoxical case in which an avoidance intention is converted into a positive goal to act merely because acting is usually followed by the absence of hurt. Starting from NAL's basic definition of goals, the framework is extended with a corresponding definition of anti-goals, so that avoidance can be represented without treating it as the pursuit of a negated event. Finally, a mental operation, $\op{prevent}$, is introduced to connect anti-goal reasoning with ordinary goal reasoning in cases of active prevention. Four minimal case studies check that the resulting rules distinguish pursuit, passive avoidance, active prevention, and withholding action to preserve a desired event.

Real-time collision avoidance for robotic manipulators requires fast reactions to unexpected obstacle motion and lookahead to avoid becoming trapped by near-future constraints. Full model predictive control can provide this foresight, but its online cost may grow quickly with horizon length, model fidelity, and the number of active geometric constraints. Conversely, horizon-free reactive methods are computationally efficient but can be short-sighted in dynamic clutter. We present a task-space receding-horizon controller that uses a short contact-consistent rollout to generate a terminal kinematic reference satisfying internal non-penetration constraints, then computes only the first input of a smooth minimum-acceleration transition toward that reference. Starting from a closed-loop inverse-kinematics regulation law, the rollout is performed with an iterative dynamics solver operating on inflated convex robot and obstacle geometries, so that robot-obstacle contacts, dynamic obstacle motion, and self-collisions can shape the terminal reference without requiring full constrained trajectory optimization. We analyze the contact-inactive closed loop and show local exponential task-space regulation under standard regularity assumptions. For contacts activated inside the rollout, we characterize the corresponding discrete updates and bound the effect of moving obstacles on regular operating sets. Simulations on a 40-DOF multi-chain system show that intermediate horizons balance anticipation, responsiveness, and computational cost. Hardware experiments on a 6-DOF platform demonstrate consistent sim-to-real behavior without accurate inertial parameter estimation, and comparisons against dynamic optimization fabrics and model predictive control (MPC) baselines show improved success rates in dynamic clutter while preserving solve times compatible with real-time execution in the tested regimes.

AI systems are increasingly used to provide legal advice, raising questions about whether laypeople accept guidance from algorithms--especially when that advice is legally correct but socially controversial. We report a preregistered survey experiment with 3,348 adults in mainland China examining how people evaluate identical legal advice when it is attributed either to an AI system or to a human lawyer, and when it is accompanied by reasoning or not. Contrary to expectations of algorithm aversion, attribution to an AI system has no net effect on perceived reasonableness. However, mediation analyses reveal opposing psychological pathways underlying this null result. AI-attributed advice is perceived as more objective, which increases perceived reasonableness, but also as less comprehensive and less attentive to special circumstances, which decreases perceived reasonableness. By contrast, providing legal reasoning substantially increases perceived reasonableness regardless of source, largely by enhancing perceptions of objectivity. Qualitative responses corroborate this tension between objectivity and contextual sensitivity in evaluations of legal advice. Together, these findings suggest that public responses to AI legal advisors are shaped not by rigid attitudes toward automation, but by the balancing of competing normative expectations. The results have implications for theories of algorithm aversion and the design of AI recommendation systems in normatively salient domains.

Instruction-tuned LLMs are increasingly converted into reasoning models through post-training to improve multi-step task performance. This conversion is usually optimized for reasoning accuracy, without explicitly preserving the alignment behavior of the instruction-tuned model, such as safe refusal, bias avoidance, and privacy protection. We ask: does this conversion preserve alignment? We study this question through a trustworthiness audit and find that it is not behavior-preserving by default. For a systematic analysis, we compare reasoning models produced via supervised fine-tuning, RL-based post-training, and distillation against matched instruction-tuned baselines across six trustworthiness dimensions: safety, toxicity, stereotyping and bias, machine ethics, privacy, and out-of-distribution robustness. We observe that reasoning models often improve on reasoning benchmarks but exhibit alignment regressions, including increased toxicity, amplified stereotyping, miscalibrated refusal, and contextual privacy leakage. These regressions are consistent with behavioral drift from the instruction-tuned baseline, measured by KL divergence. Overall, our results point to the broader conclusion that trustworthiness metrics are essential for evaluating reasoning models and should be reported alongside gains in reasoning capability.

Instruction-based suppression is widely used to prevent language models from generating prohibited content, yet it remains unclear whether suppression reduces internal representation or merely suppresses expression. We investigate this question through representational probing, attention analysis, and behavioral semantic leakage experiments across multiple transformer models. We find that prohibited concepts remain highly recoverable from hidden representations under suppression, continue to influence attention routing, and measurably shape downstream generations despite successful lexical avoidance. These effects persist across pooling strategies, indirect semantic controls, and multiple model families. Our results expose a fundamental gap between behavioral and representational alignment.

In machine learning, a critical class of decision-related problems concerns preventing predicted undesirable outcomes, referred to as the \textit{avoiding undesired future} (AUF) problem. To address this, the \textit{rehearsal learning} framework has been proposed to model influence relations for effective decisions. However, existing rehearsal methods rely on restrictive parametric assumptions such as linear systems or additive noise, limiting their practical applicability. In this paper, we propose the first non-parametric rehearsal learning approach for AUF without assuming specific functional forms of data generation processes. Specifically, we use kernel machinery to reformulate the AUF objective into a unified representation that disentangles desirability modeling from action-induced distributional changes. To handle the discontinuity of desirability indicator, we present a smooth Probit surrogate and provide an approximation error bound. Meanwhile, we capture the action-induced changes via conditional mean embeddings, and develop a kernel ridge regression based nested estimator for AUF objective with consistency guarantees. Such a formulation naturally accommodates nonlinear systems and non-additive noise, and empirical results on synthetic and real-data-derived semi-synthetic benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness and flexibility of our approach.

When a machine learning (ML) model forecasts an undesired event, one often seeks a decision to avoid it, known as the avoiding undesired future (AUF) problem. Many rehearsal learning methods have been proposed for AUF, but they rely on an underlying graph structure; learning such a graph from observational data is challenging and can incur substantial estimation error. In this work, we demonstrate that the order structure can be sufficient for AUF decision-making, and propose the first order-based rehearsal learning method. Although an order is less informative than a graph, it can be sufficient to identify the influence of decisions from observational data, suggesting that learning the entire graph is not always necessary. To learn the order, we develop an information-theoretic method that imposes no restrictions on the form of structural functions or the type of noise distributions. For AUF decision-making, we construct an order-based sampler to approximate the influence of decisions and, combined with a surrogate objective for maximizing the post-decision success probability, reduce the AUF task to a differentiable optimization problem. Experiments show that our order learning method outperforms existing methods, and that our AUF approach not only surpasses methods relying on learned graphs or learned orders, but also matches or even exceeds oracle baselines that are given the true graph.

When instructed to underperform on multiple-choice evaluations, do language models engage with question content or fall back on positional shortcuts? We map the boundary between these regimes using a six-condition adversarial instruction-specificity gradient administered to two instruction-tuned LLMs (Llama-3-8B and Llama-3.1-8B) on 2,000 MMLU-Pro items. Distributional screening (response-position entropy) and an independent content-engagement criterion (difficulty-accuracy correlation) jointly characterise each condition. The gradient reveals three regimes rather than a monotonic transition. Vague adversarial instructions produce moderate accuracy reduction with preserved content engagement. Standard sandbagging and capability-imitation instructions produce positional entropy collapse with partial content engagement. A two-step answer-aware avoidance instruction produces extreme positional collapse, with near-total concentration on a single response position (99.9% and 87.4%) and no measurable content sensitivity. This was the only multi-step instruction tested, and it produced the most extreme shortcut. The attractor position matches each model's content-absent null-prompt default. The effect replicates across both models and four academic domains. Distributional collapse and content engagement can co-occur (50% concordance between screening criteria), indicating that entropy-based screening and difficulty-based content assessment capture partially independent dimensions of response validity. Results suggest that instruction complexity can determine whether adversarial compliance uses content-aware or content-blind mechanisms in small instruction-tuned LLMs under greedy decoding.

This study applied the Apriori algorithm to analyze behavioral interaction patterns associated with learned helplessness (LH) in mathematics tutoring system logs. Interaction data were examined across three dimensions: LH level (low vs. high), system-based intervention (with vs. without), and problem-solving outcomes (solved vs. unsolved). The analysis of the complete dataset showed that skipping problems without using hints was the most frequent pattern linked to unsolved outcomes, while persistence behaviors such as not skipping were less dominant overall. Comparisons by LH level showed that low-LH students had stronger links between problem solving and not skipping, as well as positive associations between hint use and solved outcomes. High-LH students showed more avoidance patterns, with skipping strongly tied to unsolved outcomes. In the comparison of system-based intervention conditions, students without intervention had the highest lift for persistence-success links, while the with-intervention group had stronger patterns involving skipping behaviors leading to unsolved outcomes. Outcome-specific analysis showed that not skipping was consistently associated with solved problems across all groups, while skipping without hints predicted unsolved outcomes. Practical implications and recommendations are discussed.

Collision-free motion is often aided by tactile and proximity sensors distributed on the body of the robot due to their resistance to occlusion as opposed to external cameras. However, how to shape the sensor's properties, such as sensing coverage; type; and range, to enable avoidant behavior remains unclear. In this work, we present a reinforcement learning framework for whole-body collision avoidance on a humanoid H1-2 robot and use it to characterize how sensor properties shape learned avoidance behavior. Using dodgeball as a benchmark task, we ablate the properties of sensors distributed across the upper body of the robot and find that raw proximity measurements can substitute for explicit object localization provided the sensing range is sufficient and that sparse non-directional proximity signals outpace dense directional alternatives in sample efficiency.

Detecting sandbagging--the deliberate underperformance on capability evaluations--is an open problem in AI safety. We tested whether symptom validity testing (SVT) logic from clinical malingering detection could identify sandbagging through below-chance performance (BCB) on forced-choice items. In a pre-registered pilot at the 7-9 billion parameter instruction-tuned scale (3 models, 4 MMLU-Pro domains, 4 conditions, 500 items per cell, 24,000 total trials), the plausibility gate failed. Zero of 12 model-domain cells showed significant below-chance performance under sandbagging instruction. Exploratory analyses revealed three qualitatively distinct failure modes. Qwen-2.5-7B and Phi-3.5-mini largely ignored the sandbagging instruction, with 62-88% response identity with the honest baseline. Llama-3-8B complied substantially but implemented underperformance as a positional heuristic, collapsing its response distribution onto middle-alphabet options (E at 31.8%, F at 26.1%) regardless of where the correct answer fell. This produced accuracy boosts of up to 33 percentage points when the correct answer coincidentally occupied the model's preferred position. An explicit anti-task instruction ("pick the least likely answer") drove two of three models below chance, with accuracy as low as 0.024. The capability for answer-aware avoidance therefore exists but is not activated by "deliberately underperform." BCB did not fail as a logical marker of answer-aware avoidance. It was not observed in this regime because the model showing the largest behavioural shift exhibited behaviour consistent with a position-dominant response policy rather than content-aware answer avoidance. We propose that positional-distribution shift may be a more effective behavioural signature than below-chance accuracy for detecting prompted underperformance at this model scale.

Automatic speech recognition systems often produce confident yet incorrect transcriptions under noisy or ambiguous conditions, which can be misleading for both users and downstream applications. Standard evaluation based on Word Error Rate focuses solely on accuracy and fails to capture transcription reliability. We introduce an abstention-aware transcription framework that enables ASR models to explicitly abstain from uncertain segments. To evaluate reliability under abstention, we propose RAS, a reliability-oriented metric that balances transcription informativeness and error aversion, with its trade-off parameter calibrated by human preference. We then train an abstention-aware ASR model through supervised bootstrapping followed by reinforcement learning. Our experiments demonstrate substantial improvements in transcription reliability while maintaining competitive accuracy.

Modern generative models still lack human-level creativity, particularly in multi-branch diversity. Prior approaches to address this problem often incur heavy computation or strong dependency on model architecture. Therefore, we introduce UAG(Universal Avoidance Generation), a model-agnostic and computationally efficient generation strategy that penalizes similarity among previously generated outputs. Thus, UAG can enhance multi-branch diversity across both diffusion and transformer models, with minimal additional computation. In experiments, our method achieves up to 1.9 times higher diversity, runs 4.4 times faster, and requires only 1/64 of the FLOPs compared to state-of-the-art methods. The full code is https://anonymous.4open.science/r/2026_ACL_Universal/.

This paper studies obstacle avoidance under translation invariant dynamics using an avoid-side travel cost Hamilton Jacobi formulation. For running costs that are zero outside an obstacle and strictly negative inside it, we prove that the value function is non-positive everywhere, equals zero exactly outside the avoid set, and is strictly negative exactly on it. Under translation invariance, this yields a reuse principle: the value of any translated obstacle is obtained by translating a single template value function. We show that the pointwise minimum of translated template values exactly characterizes the union of the translated single-obstacle avoid sets and provides a conservative inner certificate of unavoidable collision in clutter. To reduce conservatism, we introduce a blockwise composition framework in which subsets of obstacles are merged and solved jointly. This yields a hierarchy of conservative certificates from singleton reuse to the exact clutter value, together with monotonicity under block merging and an exactness criterion based on the existence of a common clutter avoiding control. The framework is illustrated on a Dubins car example in a repeated clutter field.