Model Preference

Research and news coverage of language-model deception increasingly attributes human-like mental-state concepts to language models. Such claims can blur the distinction between behavior that looks deceptive and a mechanism that is actually deceptive. We introduce a causal taxonomy separating prior commitment from retrospective report, model preference from realized output, false preference from sensitivity to the utility of misleading a recipient, and deceptive behavior from the provenance of the objective or strategy producing it. We test these distinctions in two open-weight model families. Across controlled guessing-game and stock-trading experiments, we find that deceptive-looking behavior can arise without the corresponding proposed mechanism, while other interventions provide direct evidence that recipient information state can causally affect deceptive preference. These results show that deceptive behavior can provide evidence for a deceptive mechanism. But even evidence for such a mechanism does not establish model agency in the deception.

We investigate the role of conversational context modeling in user preference tracking for Conversational Recommendation Systems (CRSs). In this regard, we propose DREAMS, a novel tree-structured context modeling framework that explicitly captures user preference evolution throughout multi-turn interactions. DREAMS introduces two specialized node types to support the two fundamental objectives of CRSs: preference elicitation and preference exploitation. Specifically, elicitation nodes leverage Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to strategically explore conversational actions and infer latent user preferences, while exploitation nodes employ LLM-based refinement to transform the tracked preference state into structured retrieval queries for recommendation. Extensive experiments on benchmark datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of DREAMS and its design.

Multi-organ ultrasound segmentation remains challenging when anatomically adjacent structures must be delineated jointly, as localized boundary errors can persist even when Dice scores are high. To address these challenges, we propose Boundary-Adaptive Prompting for Multi-Organ Segmentation (BAP-MOS), a closed-loop adaptive prompting framework. BAP-MOS formulates prompt selection as an organ-specific multi-armed bandit problem over box, point, and combined prompts. An outer Tree-structured Parzen Estimator (TPE) loop selects the prompt-selection parameter vector, while an inner UCB-Tuned loop adapts per-organ prompt preferences during fine-tuning using a bounded Dice--MSD--HD95 validation-probe reward. The framework further introduces an organ-scaled negative prompt ring to adapt sparse prompt geometry across anatomical scales, while keeping the image and prompt encoders frozen and updating only the mask decoder. We evaluate BAP-MOS on pooled prostate-region TRUS cohorts against U-Net, nnU-Net, MedSAM, fixed-prompt SAM/MedSAM, and adaptive policy variants. On this benchmark, BAP-MOS achieves Dice 0.982, HD95 0.482, and MSD 0.204, reducing HD95 by approximately 48% and MSD by 45% relative to the strongest conventional baseline. To verify the generalization ability of the framework, we tested it on the external PFUS1 pelvic-floor ultrasound corpus using MedSAM and its adaptive strategy variants, and the results were good. These results support adaptive prompt allocation as an effective mechanism for improving boundary-sensitive multi-organ ultrasound segmentation without modifying the foundation-model backbone. Source Code is available at: https://github.com/SatvikPraveen/BAP-MOS

Token-level collaboration allows a large language model (LLM) to assist a small language model (SLM) when their predictions diverge. Existing methods either use LLM-generated intervention tokens or rank candidates with the LLM's next-token probabilities. Both rely on the LLM's local preference, even though an LLM-selected token may be difficult for the SLM to build on. We present FutureBridge, which ranks joint LLM-SLM token candidates according to how well they support the SLM's subsequent reasoning. During training, an answer-verified LLM trajectory supplies a fixed shared future, and a frozen SLM evaluates every candidate under this common context. The resulting counterfactual scores supervise a lightweight token reranker that observes only the current state and candidate token. At inference, FutureBridge uses the LLM only to expand the candidate pool, selects one token, and returns generation to the SLM without generating or appending a future suffix. Across five mathematical reasoning benchmarks, FutureBridge improves the Qwen3-1.7B SLM's Math Avg. by 35.1% relative to greedy SLM decoding. These results indicate that token selection benefits from modeling whether the receiving SLM can use each candidate to continue reasoning, rather than relying on the LLM's local preference alone.

Large language models (LLMs) have been shown to exhibit strong Python preferences when generating project-level code, but there is currently no systematic way to measure this behaviour across new models. To bridge this gap, we introduce LangChoiceBench, a project-level code-generation benchmark for measuring Python preference, recommendation-implementation consistency, and language diversity. LangChoiceBench covers 28 projects across seven software areas where Python is often a poor default. We evaluate 25 diverse LLMs and find that Python remains heavily over-selected, recommendation-implementation consistency is low, and smaller open-weight models generally show stronger Python preference and lower language diversity. We further analyse 9,826 reasoning traces and find that most Python choices are automatic or driven primarily by ease, rather than explicit consideration of project requirements. In a smaller but important set of cases, models fabricate contextual support for choosing Python - a failure mode we call phantom evidence - or produce code that contradicts the language selected in their own reasoning.

Personalizing language models (LMs) to individual user preferences is essential for aligning responses with diverse goals and backgrounds. Existing methods typically train a separate adapter for each user or learn a reward model whose scores depend on the user. Despite explicitly optimizing for each user, these methods must learn from limited observations and therefore suffer from data sparsity and poor generalization to unseen users and domains. In-context learning (ICL) and Context Steering (CoS) can instead provide more effective personalization by conditioning the base LM directly on user context and leveraging its pretrained capabilities without per-user training. Yet neither adapts the influence of that context across decoding steps: ICL leaves it uncontrolled, whereas CoS applies a fixed steering coefficient and requires two LM forward passes per step. We propose Cautious Context Steering (CCS), which adds a lightweight adapter to a frozen backbone LM to decide at each token whether and how strongly user context should affect generation. The adapter learns this behavior from an oracle context-conditioned LM and preserves the base LM when the context is not helpful. A single CCS adapter trained on only one dataset improves generation quality both in-domain and across four out-of-distribution personalization benchmarks, demonstrating robust generalization to new users and domains. CCS also avoids per-user fine-tuning and the additional context-conditioned forward pass required by CoS, substantially reducing inference cost.

As large language model (LLM) agents evolve into personalized companions, memory has emerged as a core capability. However, LLMs face a knowledge utilization problem: they may fail to act on relevant user preferences even when they are fully present in context. When an agent fails to tailor its response in a context where previously shared user preferences should matter, it is unclear whether the model failed to remember that information or remembered it but failed to use it. To isolate this breakdown, we introduce a decoupled evaluation paradigm that administers paired Know and Act tests to the same user preference. We conduct large-scale experiments across 16 systems and five memory architectures, evaluating 1,000 preferences embedded at three levels of expression strength. Our results show a large gap between Know and Act outcomes: agents often pass the recall test for a user preference but fail to reflect that same preference in the paired behavioral scenario. While memory architectures reduce this gap, utilization remains especially weak for health and therapy-related preferences, where failures to act carry the greatest real-world stakes.

Inference-time thinking improves the performance of large language models, but aggregate outcomes do not reveal whether models use available evidence more effectively or seek information that could improve future decisions. We distinguish these responses by measuring action preference, thinking length, and reported confidence under matched uncertainty. Ten open-weight models completed matched horizon-style two-armed bandit trials in thinking and non-thinking modes. A cognitive model separated value-guided action and uncertainty-independent choice noise from two behavioral signatures of exploration: a UCB-like preference for the less-known arm and Thompson-like choice variability that increases with total uncertainty. On average, thinking strengthened value-guided action and reduced uncertainty-independent choice noise, without producing UCB-like exploration or strengthening Thompson-like exploration. Outside action, the information-imbalanced history condition, which also displayed more observations than the matched balanced condition, was associated with greater thinking length. Reported confidence became more sensitive to decision difficulty and more strongly associated with chosen task evidence. We interpret these thinking-length and reported-confidence patterns as consistent with metacognitive control and metacognitive monitoring, respectively, without establishing either process. Decoder sweeps, especially temperature, altered choice noise and thinking length but did not reproduce the joint cross-output pattern. In this controlled decision setting, thinking improved how models acted on current evidence, while neither measured signature supported a shift toward a more information-seeking policy.

Offline reinforcement learning (RL) aims to learn an effective policy from a static dataset, but its performance is fundamentally limited by dataset coverage. Action preference queries leverage expert feedback without additional environment interaction, enabling policy improvement during offline training. However, existing methods still face two key challenges: selecting informative preference queries and effectively exploiting the collected feedback. Current approaches typically rely only on the distance between policy actions and dataset actions for query selection, while enforcing fixed constraints that keep the policy close to queried preferences. Such strategies often lead to unstable policy updates and integrate poorly with value regularization. To address these limitations, we propose Conservative Query and Adaptive Regularization under Uncertainty Estimation, a lightweight framework that jointly improves preference querying and preference exploitation. Specifically, we employ a Morse network to estimate the uncertainty of policy actions with respect to the offline dataset. Based on this uncertainty, we introduce a conservative query strategy that selectively queries actions near the dataset to preserve Bellman-update stability, together with an uncertainty-aware adaptive regularization scheme that dynamically adjusts data-level constraints during policy optimization. We integrate our framework with CQL and evaluate it extensively on the D4RL benchmark. Experimental results demonstrate superior or competitive performance across a wide range of tasks.

Packing for air travel is recurring and error-prone: the checklist must be personal and context-aware, yet feasible under safety rules, item dependencies, and luggage limits. Existing packing assistants are template-driven and generic, or recommendation-driven but unconstrained, leaving users to manually patch regulatory and capacity violations. We propose a reasoning-guided learning framework with three stages: (1) a symbolic engine that generates a regulation-aware seed checklist with explicit dependency structure, (2) a two-stage preference learner that estimates inclusion and priority utilities from user add and remove actions while mitigating survivorship bias, and (3) a CP-SAT optimizer that selects a compact, compliant subset. The architecture instantiates a general pattern for constrained personalization, applicable wherever hard feasibility coexists with sparse preference signals. On 604 labeled trip scenarios, comprising 29K inclusion labels and 343K pairwise comparisons, the symbolic engine attains 99.7% recall and 0.96 rubric validity, compared with 0.78 to 0.81 for frontier LLMs. Gradient-boosted trees and LambdaMART reach an AUC-ROC of 0.943 and an NDCG@5 of 0.923. CP-SAT attains 100% constraint satisfaction, compared with 28% for greedy selection and 10% for random selection. Deployment in FlyEnJoy, a production iOS travel app, doubled checklist completions and reduced editing and completion time.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming economies, societies, and polities, raising fundamental questions about how it should be regulated. Policymakers face choices over whether to prioritize innovation or safety, rely on public oversight or private self-regulation, and govern nationally or internationally. Yet little is known about how citizens evaluate these competing priorities. Here we report a conjoint survey experiment conducted in seven countries with diverse political and economic profiles. We find that citizens strongly support regulating AI and generally prioritize safety over innovation, public governance over private self-regulation, and international over national approaches. The preference for safety is strongest among those who perceive AI as risky, unpredictable, and personally consequential. These findings reveal a systematic misalignment between dominant regulatory approaches and citizen preferences.

Aligning language models with human preferences often requires optimising multiple behavioural objectives. A practical approach is to apply these objectives sequentially using preference optimisation methods such as Direct Preference Optimisation (DPO), but it remains unclear whether later training uniformly degrades preferences learned earlier or whether the effect depends on the relationship between objectives. We study sequential DPO across four preference settings covering distributional conflict, multi-attribute interaction, strong safety signal, and compatible response-quality objectives. Using Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct with LoRA adapters, we evaluate all objectives after every stage with a fixed base-model reference. We find that sequential DPO does not produce a single forgetting pattern; preference change ranges from partial degradation to stability, pair-level redistribution, or positive transfer depending on objective relationship, signal strength, and training order. Pair-level analysis using length-normalised policy margins shows that aggregate metrics can mask heterogeneous changes across preference pairs, whereas quartile decomposition reveals that high-confidence pairs can either degrade or improve depending on the setting. Mechanistic diagnostics show that Stage~2 gradients and adapter updates are near-orthogonal to the previous objective across all settings, providing little evidence that direct gradient opposition is the primary driver. These findings suggest that future sequential alignment pipelines should account for objective compatibility and signal strength, rather than assuming that later objectives affect earlier preferences uniformly.

Personalized public transit routing in public transit systems remains challenging due to the difficulty of capturing and integrating diverse user preferences into routing algorithms. This paper presents ChatPlanner, a novel framework that leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) to enable preference aware public transit routing. Our approach employs fine-tuned LLMs with Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to extract routing parameters and interpret nuanced user preferences from natural language queries, subsequently integrating these preferences into the objective function of a public transit routing algorithm. This study designs preference aware datasets incorporating eight personas and five contexts to establish scoring standards for both fine-tuning and RAG. This work conducted three experiments to validate the solutions' feasibility, extraction of routing information and preferences, and solution set quality and completeness. Results demonstrate that ChatPlanner generates feasible solutions reliably. Fine-tuning enforces the required output structure and learns general preference patterns, while RAG provides query-specific context to resolve imprecise or conversational expressions and calibrate continuous scores. The combination of both achieves the highest accuracy in routing information extraction and user preference interpretation. Results based on selected case studies show that by capturing user preferences, ChatPlanner identifies valuable solutions across different dimensions that existing route planners overlook, generating more valuable route alternatives. This research establishes a new paradigm for integrating natural language understanding into transportation optimization.

Search Agents (SAs) typically leverage large language models (LLMs) to support complex information-seeking tasks by autonomously exploring web sources and synthesizing information into comprehensive responses. For SAs evaluation, prior benchmarks mainly focus on specialized tasks that are unlikely to arise in real-world user scenarios. Moreover, their reliance on coarse task-level rubrics often limits evaluation interpretability. To bridge this gap, we introduce DailyReport, an open-ended benchmark to evaluate SA capabilities on daily search tasks. It contains 150 open-ended tasks with 3,546 associated rubrics, capturing widely discussed and timely information demands of real-world users. Each task is decomposed into subtasks and evaluated with cascade rubrics across disentangled dimensions. Through cascade performance attribution and user-centric aggregation, we derive highly interpretable scores for each dimension, along with a user preference score. Our results on 17 agentic systems show that current systems still fall short of users' expectations. To facilitate future research, our dataset and code are made publicly available at https://github.com/AGI-Eval-Official/DailyReport.

Offline reinforcement learning (RL) offers a path to policy improvement from logged data alone, using historical returns or other measurable outcomes as world feedback. A key difficulty is improving observed behavior without extrapolating beyond what the offline data supports. We propose \emph{counterfactual transport flows}, a source-conditioned trajectory refinement framework for offline decision-making guided by world feedback. Given a low-feedback candidate trajectory, we construct local preference pairs from offline data by retrieving nearby trajectories in latent trajectory space with higher task-specific feedback, and use them as weak supervision for conservative refinement. The framework learns instance-specific refinement directions: at inference time, a refinement strength parameter controls how far the candidate trajectory is transported, enabling a trade-off between preserving the original behavior and applying stronger improvement. Experiments on D4RL benchmarks, including AntMaze and MuJoCo tasks, show that our method improves behavior from historical returns as world feedback, while providing interpretable trajectory-level refinement paths.

Large language models are increasingly used for social decision-making situations that require balancing cultural norms with personal preferences. For example, a user preferring honesty might ask whether to correct a coworker publicly when local norms favor indirect feedback. Yet existing research studies cultural alignment and personalization largely separately. We introduce PACT, the Personal-Preference and Cultural-Norm Trade-off framework, which evaluates whether models choose to follow a cultural norm or allow personal preferences. We find that LLMs vary in how rigidly they enforce cultural norms, with behavior shifted more by country context (7.8%) than age (1%) and gender (0.7%) and shifting non-uniformly after instruction tuning. Furthermore, our five-country human study on PACT shows that culture-following in humans is mainly driven by scenario country, with the lowest agreement when participants judge their own cultural contexts, showing within-culture pluralism. Finally, human-LLM alignment experiments show that models can match majority choices, but fail to capture response distributions and uncertainty (with best correlations reaching only 0.24). Together, these findings motivate alignment evaluations that go beyond majority to capture cultural pluralism and disagreement in social judgment.

We study preference alignment for image inpainting. Rather than proposing yet another method, we revisit the problem from first principles and reassess its core challenges. We adopt the widely used direct preference optimization framework and construct preference training data with publicly available reward models. Our empirical study spans nine reward models, two benchmarks, and two baseline inpainting models that differ in architecture and generative mechanism. Our main findings are: (1) Most reward models provide valid signals for preference data construction, although some are unreliable as evaluators. (2) Across models and benchmarks, preference data exhibits consistent trends under both candidate and sample scaling. (3) Reward models display pronounced biases--particularly in brightness, composition, and color scheme--that make them prone to inducing reward hacking. (4) A simple ensemble of reward models mitigates such biases and yields robust, generalizable performance. {\color{rebuttal_blue}(5) Preference alignment is transferable to the object removal task, where the goal shifts from open-ended creative generation to coherent background completion. (6) Further analysis reveals that a calibrated ensemble method further mitigates hacking and improves robustness.} Without modifying model architectures or introducing additional datasets, our models substantially outperform prior state-of-the-art models on standard metrics, large vision-language model evaluations, and human assessments. Our code is available at: https://github.com/shenytzzz/Follow-Your-Preference.

Aligning large language models (LLMs) with diverse and multifaceted user preferences is a fundamental challenge in personalized AI systems. Existing multi-objective alignment methods either rely on costly training or require pre-trained reward models for each preference, making it difficult for them to adapt to evolving preferences. Prompt-based personalization offers a training-free alternative, but prompting alone often provides limited steerability, as LLMs may overemphasize or overlook certain preferences and fail to give users reliable control over the relative importance of different objectives when conflicts arise, leading to suboptimal alignment. In this paper, we introduce MATO, a training-free framework for Multi-objective personalized Alignment with Test-time Optimization. MATO formulates personalization as a test-time optimization problem that steers the relative importance of multiple objectives through controllable weights during decoding, without modifying model parameters or requiring external reward models. Specifically, a reward discovery module recovers preference rewards directly from the backbone LLM for diverse objectives specified in natural language, while a weight optimization module dynamically adjusts objective weights based on the user's initial preferences and the partially generated response to balance competing objectives during generation. The resulting rewards and weights jointly guide an online optimization procedure over the token distribution, enabling better alignment with the target objectives. Extensive experiments across multiple datasets and backbone LLMs show that MATO consistently outperforms strong baselines, achieving Pareto-improving multi-objective alignment and stronger steerability. These results highlight test-time optimization as a promising direction for scalable, controllable, and model-agnostic personalized alignment.

Serving personalized content on mobile devices has traditionally required pooling sensitive user data on centralized servers, a practice increasingly at odds with modern privacy expectations and geographical regulations. We present a two-stage federated recommendation system pipeline for mobile devices, built around a principled separation between non-sensitive user preference data and sensitive mobile context data that never leaves the device. The first stage runs a collaborative filtering model on non-sensitive app-context data in the cloud to generate a shortlist of relevant items. The second stage re-ranks these candidates on-device using sensitive mobile signals, with only model updates/gradients ever leaving the device. We validate the approach on MovieLens, UCI Human Activity Recognition, and a proprietary pilot dataset, and deliver a production-ready implementation as a Kotlin Multiplatform library deployable on Android and iOS.

As LLMs continue to scale up, improving training efficiency heavily relies on effective data utilization. Data selection mitigates this issue by allocating the limited training budget to high-value examples that optimally facilitate the model's target behavior. Most existing approaches define target behavior via a set of target examples and score candidate training data based on their estimated influence on these samples. However, such methods uniformly treat all target examples as equally important, ignoring the varying relevance of individual examples to model optimization. Specifically, target examples that align closely with the model's inherent behavior deliver stronger supervisory signals, whereas discrepant examples yield only weak and ineffective local guidance. We propose PRISM, a Preference-aware Influence function based Data Selection Method. It leverages model preference to assign weights to target examples and builds a preference-aware target direction. PRISM evaluates candidate training samples according to their influence on this direction, and prioritizes data budget allocation to samples that effectively drive the model to match expected target behavior. Theoretical analysis verifies that weighted preference construction generates a superior first-order gradient direction for boosting target preference, compared with uniform aggregation strategies. Extensive experiments covering diverse model architectures and parameter scales demonstrate that PRISM achieves better performance in efficient fine-tuning and safety-aligned supervised fine-tuning rectification. The results validate that accurate characterization of target behavior serves as the core of cost-effective data selection.

Personalized pricing negotiations are a challenging testbed for LLM agents because successful interaction does not guarantee profitable decision making. A seller may produce valid actions and close many deals while still pricing poorly when buyer willingness to pay and bargaining traits remain hidden. This paper presents PrefBench, a simulator-based benchmark for hidden-preference personalized pricing negotiations. Each episode pairs a simulated buyer with a fixed vehicle-customization bundle; the seller observes public persona descriptors, bundle information, and negotiation history, while latent buyer variables govern valuation, patience, counter-offer behavior, and walkaway decisions. PrefBench evaluates this setting through an LLM-facing state-summary protocol that constrains agents to return strict JSON actions under a fixed hidden-information boundary. We evaluate zero-shot LLM sellers against heuristic references over 7,500 episodes. The tested LLMs follow the protocol reliably and achieve deal rates above 0.99, but their seller-profit outcomes remain weak: the best LLM average profit is only slightly above the random baseline and far below a simple concession heuristic under the same episode stream. These results show that structured action compliance and agreement-seeking behavior can coexist with weak profit-sensitive bargaining. PrefBench provides a controlled benchmark for evaluating pricing-agent behavior under hidden buyer preferences.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are highly sensitive to their input contexts, motivating the development of automated context engineering. However, existing methods predominantly treat this as a global search problem, seeking a single context strategy that maximizes average performance across a dataset. This restrictive assumption overlooks the fact that different inputs often require distinct guidance, leaving substantial instance-level performance gains untapped. In this paper, we propose a paradigm shift by formulating context engineering as a recommendation problem. We introduce \textbf{Neural Collaborative Context Engineering (NCCE)}, a framework that transitions optimization from a static global search to dynamic, instance-wise routing. NCCE first bootstraps a diverse catalog of anchor contexts and then employs a novel \textbf{Context-CF Co-Evolution} mechanism. This stage establishes a synergistic feedback loop: a lightweight Neural Collaborative Filtering (NCF) model learns instance-context preferences to guide the generation of specialized context variants, while the newly evaluated contexts continuously refine the NCF model's understanding of latent preferences. At inference time, the trained NCF model acts as a context router, dynamically assigning the most suitable context strategy to each unseen instance. Theoretical Proofs and comprehensive experiments demonstrate that by matching individual inputs with their optimal contexts, NCCE significantly improves task accuracy, highlighting the critical importance of personalization in LLM context engineering.

We study language generation in the limit under a global preference ordering on strings, as introduced by Kleinberg and Wei. As is done in previous work, we aim for breadth, but impose an additional requirement of timeliness: higher-ranked strings should be generated earlier. A string is then only credited if it is generated before a deadline, where its deadline is defined by a function that maps a string's rank in the target language to the time by which it must be produced. This is in keeping with a central consideration in machine learning, where inductive bias favors simpler'' or more plausible'' outputs, all else being equal. We show that timely generation is impossible in a strong sense for eventually consistent generators -- the protagonists of most prior related work. Under what is perhaps the mildest natural relaxation of consistency, a hallucination rate that vanishes over time, we show that we can circumvent our impossibility result. In particular, we can achieve optimal density with respect to any superlinear deadline function. We also show this is tight by ruling out timely generation with linear deadlines and vanishing hallucination rate.

Nash equilibrium serves as a fundamental mathematical tool in economics and game theory. However, it classically assumes knowledge of player utilities, whereas economics generally regards preferences as more fundamental. To leverage equilibrium analysis in strategic scenarios, one must first elicit numerical utilities consistent with player preferences, a delicate and time-consuming process. In this work, we forgo precise utilities and generalize the Nash equilibrium to a setting where we only assume a player is capable of providing an ordinal ranking of their actions within the context of other players' joint actions. The key technical challenge is to rethink the definition of a best-response. While the classical definition identifies actions maximizing expected payoff, we naturally look towards social choice theory for how to aggregate preferences to identify the most preferred actions. We define this generalized notion of a context-ordinal Nash equilibrium, establish its existence under mild conditions on aggregation methods, introduce notions of regularization, approximation, and regret, explore complexity for simple settings, and develop learning rules for computing such equilibria. In doing so, we provide a generalization of Nash equilibrium and demonstrate its direct applicability to elicited preferences in human experiments.

LLMs are increasingly used for end-user task planning, yet their black-box nature limits users' ability to ensure reliability and control. While recent systems incorporate verification techniques, it remains unclear how users can effectively apply such rigid constraints to represent intent or adapt to real-world variability. For example, prior work finds that hard-only constraints are too rigid, and numeric flexibility weights confuse users. We investigate how interaction workflows can better support users in applying constraints to guide LLM-generated plans, examining whether abstracting strictness into high-level types (i.e., hard and soft) paired with distinct verification mechanisms helps users more reliably express and align intent. We present U-Define, a system that lets users define constraints in natural language and categorize them as either hard rules that must not be violated or soft preferences that allow flexibility. U-Define verifies these types through complementary methods: formal model checking for hard constraints and LLM-as-judge evaluation for soft ones. Through a technical evaluation and user studies with general and expert participants, we find that user-defined constraint types improve perceived usefulness, performance, and satisfaction while maintaining usability. These findings provide insights for designing flexible yet reliable constraint-based workflows.

While LLMs have demonstrated remarkable potential in Question Answering (QA), evaluating personalization remains a critical bottleneck. Existing paradigms predominantly rely on lexical-level similarity or manual heuristics, often lacking sufficient data-driven validation. We address this by mining Community-Individual Preference Divergence (CIPD), where individual choices override consensus, to distill six key personalization factors as evaluative dimensions. Accordingly, we introduce CoPA, a benchmark with 1,985 user profiles for fine-grained, factor-level assessment. By quantifying the alignment between model outputs and user-specific cognitive preferences inferred from interaction patterns, CoPA provides a more comprehensive and discriminative standard for evaluating personalized QA than generic metrics. The code is available at https://github.com/bjzgcai/CoPA.

Personalized large language models are often expected to follow explicit style instructions, yet we find that such instructions can undermine the user-specific characteristics that personalization methods aim to preserve. We call this failure mode personalization collapse: explicit style control can conflict with implicit user preferences. To address this challenge, we propose PsPLUG, a lightweight plug-in that learns a user-specific residual after accounting for the requested style. PsPLUG also allows us to tune personalization strength at inference time. Our experiments show that explicit style instructions can diminish personalization in existing methods, whereas PsPLUG better preserves user preferences while providing precise control over the balance between personalization and style adherence.

Personalized image preference assessment aims to evaluate an individual user's image preferences by relying only on a small set of reference images as prior information. Existing methods mainly focus on general preference assessment, training models with large-scale data to tackle well-defined tasks such as text-image alignment. However, these approaches struggle to handle personalized preference because user-specific data are scarce and not easily scalable, and individual tastes are often diverse and complex. To overcome these challenges, we introduce a common preference profile that serves as a bridge across users, allowing large-scale user data to be leveraged for training profile prediction and capturing complex personalized preferences. Building on this idea, we propose a reasoning-based personalized image preference assessment framework that follows a \textit{predict-then-assess} paradigm: it first predicts a user's preference profile from reference images, and then provides interpretable, multi-dimensional scores and assessments of candidate images based on the predicted profile. To support this, we first construct a large-scale Chain-of-Thought (CoT)-style personalized assessment dataset annotated with diverse user preference profiles and high-quality CoT-style reasoning, enabling explicit supervision of structured reasoning. Next, we adopt a two-stage training strategy: a cold-start supervised fine-tuning phase to empower the model with structured reasoning capabilities, followed by reinforcement learning to incentivize the model to explore more reasonable assessment paths and enhance generalization. Furthermore, we propose a similarity-aware prediction reward to encourage better prediction of the user's preference profile, which facilitates more reasonable assessments exploration. Extensive experiments demonstrate the superiority of the proposed method.

Large Language Model (LLM) routing has demonstrated strong capability in balancing response quality with computational cost. As users exhibit diverse preferences, personalization has attracted increasing attention in LLM routing, since even identical queries may require different models to generate responses tailored to individual needs. However, existing approaches are not fully personalized and often fail to faithfully capture the complex interactions between users and LLMs. Moreover, user preference data is typically scarce and inconsistent in format, which limits the effectiveness of methods that directly leverage user-specific data. To address these challenges, we propose GMTRouter, which represents multi-turn user-LLM interactions as a heterogeneous graph with five node types: user, LLM, query, response and turn, thereby maximally preserving the rich relational structure of the interaction. Through a lightweight inductive graph learning framework combined with a tailored user-conditioned graph sampling mechanism, GMTRouter learns to capture user preferences from few-shot data, enabling effective personalization. Extensive experiments demonstrate that GMTRouter outperforms the strongest baselines, achieving up to a 0.108 absolute improvement in accuracy and a 0.124 improvement in AUC. More importantly, we further demonstrate that GMTRouter can adapt to new users using only few-shot data, without extensive fine-tuning. The code for GMTRouter is publicly available at https://github.com/ulab-uiuc/GMTRouter.

AI copilots represent a new generation of AI-powered systems designed to assist users, particularly knowledge workers and developers, in complex, context-rich tasks. As these systems become more embedded in daily workflows, personalization has emerged as a critical factor for improving usability, effectiveness, and user satisfaction. Central to this personalization is preference optimization: the system's ability to detect, interpret, and align with individual user preferences. While prior work in intelligent assistants and optimization algorithms is extensive, their intersection within AI copilots remains underexplored. This survey addresses that gap by examining how user preferences are operationalized in AI copilots. We investigate how preference signals are sourced, modeled across different interaction stages, and refined through feedback loops. Building on a comprehensive literature review, we define the concept of an AI copilot and introduce a taxonomy of preference optimization techniques across pre-, mid-, and post-interaction phases. Each technique is evaluated in terms of advantages, limitations, and design implications. By consolidating fragmented efforts across AI personalization, human-AI interaction, and language model adaptation, this work offers both a unified conceptual foundation and a practical design perspective for building user-aligned, persona-aware AI copilots that support end-to-end adaptability and deployment.