Natural Language

Anthropomorphism, or the attribution of human traits to technology, is an automatic and unconscious response that occurs even in those with advanced technical expertise. In this position paper, we analyze hundreds of thousands of research articles to present empirical evidence of the prevalence and growth of anthropomorphic terminology in research on large language models (LLMs). We argue for challenging the deeper assumptions reflected in this terminology -- which, though often useful, may inadvertently constrain LLM development -- and broadening beyond them to open new pathways for understanding and improving LLMs. Specifically, we identify and examine five anthropomorphic assumptions that shape research across the LLM development lifecycle. For each assumption (e.g., that LLMs must use natural language for reasoning, or that they should be evaluated on benchmarks originally meant for humans), we demonstrate empirical, non-anthropomorphic alternatives that remain under-explored yet offer promising directions for LLM research and development.

Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable capabilities in generative tasks but pose potential risks due to their tendency to generate hallucinatory responses. Therefore, Uncertainty Quantification (UQ), which aims to distinguish the validity of answers, is crucial for ensuring the safety and robustness of AI systems. However, existing methods primarily rely on measuring the entropy of multiple stochastic samples to represent uncertainty, often overlooking the specific uncertainty information associated with the candidate answer under evaluation. This oversight can lead to biased classification outcomes. In this paper, we investigate the discrepancy between global entropy from multiple samples and local confidence of candidate answer, and propose a Label-Confidence-Aware Uncertainty Quantification (LCA-UQ) method based on Pointwise Kullback-Leibler (PKL) divergence. Our method effectively bridges the gap between the consistency of sampled outputs and the calibration of the candidate answer, thereby enhancing the reliability and stability of uncertainty assessments. Empirical evaluations across a range of popular LLMs and NLP datasets reveal that label sources significantly impact classification. Furthermore, our approach effectively captures the nuances between sampling results and label sources, demonstrating superior performance in uncertainty estimation.

Modern language models (LMs) can learn to perform new tasks in different ways: in instruction following, the target task is described explicitly in natural language; in few-shot prompting, the task is specified implicitly with a small number of examples; in instruction inference, LMs are presented with in-context examples and are then prompted to generate a natural language task description before making predictions. Each of these procedures may be thought of as invoking a different form of reasoning: instruction following involves deductive reasoning, few-shot prompting involves inductive reasoning, and instruction inference involves abductive reasoning. How do these different capabilities relate? Across four LMs (from the gpt and llama families) and two learning problems (involving arithmetic functions and machine translation) we find a strong dissociation between the different types of reasoning: LMs can sometimes learn effectively from few-shot prompts even when they are unable to explain their own prediction rules; conversely, they sometimes infer useful task descriptions while completely failing to learn from human-generated descriptions of the same task. Our results highlight the non-systematic nature of reasoning even in some of today's largest LMs, and underscore the fact that very different learning mechanisms may be invoked by seemingly similar prompting procedures.

An agent skill is a folder containing a SKILL.md file with instructions for a language-model agent, optionally accompanied by scripts and reference files. The agent loads the skill when it judges that a task matches the skill description. Anthropic introduced the format in October 2025 as an open specification. Nine months later, public GitHub repositories hold millions of skill files. Skills are unlike the artifacts that software engineering researchers usually mine: they are written mainly in natural language, a model selects them probabilistically at run time, and no compiler or type checker verifies the selection. Skills also have no central registry or package manager; developers reuse them by copying folders between repositories. How developers write, reuse, and maintain skills is therefore an empirical question, and no existing dataset records this population. We present GitSkills, a dataset of 3,797,117 SKILL.md files collected from 282,200 public repositories in July 2026. The dataset retains every file occurrence with its repository, path, and content hash. We group identical files into 1,877,981 distinct contents and enrich one representative per group with the full text, parsed front matter, folder contents, repository metadata, and, for a subset, the commit history of the file. A single self-contained SQLite file supports research on the adoption, reuse, structure, authorship, maintenance, and security of agent skills.

Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO) is a central formulation for combinatorial optimization and has gained increasing attention due to its compatibility with quantum, hybrid quantum-classical, and quantum-inspired solvers. However, translating natural-language problem descriptions into correct QUBO formulations remains difficult, requiring the identification of binary variables, constraints, objective functions, penalty terms, and suitable penalty weights. This process is time-consuming and often demands substantial domain expertise. To address this challenge, we propose an end-to-end multi-agent framework that automatically generates QUBO formulations from natural-language problem descriptions, supported by structured or unstructured test cases. To evaluate its performance, We also introduce QUBOBench, a benchmark containing 100 combinatorial optimization problems across 12 application domains, curated from peer-reviewed literature, competitions, and canonical NP-hard problems. Experimental results show that our framework achieves 68% accuracy on QUBOBench, outperforming a direct single-call baseline by 22%. Further analysis identifies iterative self-repair as the most important component contributing to improved performance. The data and code are open-sourced at https://quitttcat.github.io/QuantumQUBOAgent.