Reflections

Large language models (LLMs) have transformed how humans access information, but not how we reason with it. Their fluency accelerates consumption while bypassing the slow, reflective processes that underpin sound judgment. This paper introduces Relational Reflective Intelligence (RRI), an inference-time governance layer that operationalizes reflection through auditable reasoning loops. RRI operates not inside the model but around it, providing a practical structure for stable, auditable reasoning between humans and LLMs. The core premise is that LLMs inherit cognitive vulnerabilities similar to those that shape human thought: reliance on intuitive shortcuts, confusion between representation and reality, and a preference for coherence over falsification. When humans and models share these tendencies, their errors compound. We refer to this as relational drift, a failure that arises from interaction rather than from the model alone. Addressing this requires a shift from modeling relations between words to structuring relations between model outputs and human reasoning. RRI provides this missing layer through three components: the Rose-Frame, which identifies likely breakdowns in reasoning; the Architect's Pen, which introduces targeted reflection steps at critical moments; and an inference-time workflow that embeds these steps without retraining the model. Together, these elements transform human-AI interaction into a joint reasoning system with explicit checkpoints, conflict surfacing, and an auditable trail of assumptions. Rather than making machines think like humans or forcing humans to reason like machines, RRI creates a structured interaction in which both compensate for each other's limitations. It reframes AI safety as a cognitive architecture problem, where reliable decisions depend on embedding reflection directly into the interaction process.

AI is increasingly used for mental health and well-being support, creating an urgent need for safer engagement, while design, evaluation, and governance take time to develop. We explore a complementary approach: helping users critically reflect on their own AI conversations. We introduce CounselReflect, a tool that translates literature-grounded counseling quality metrics into a user-facing reflection framework. Using CounselReflect as a study probe, we interviewed 21 users of AI for mental health and well-being support. Although most participants did not routinely reflect on their conversations, they articulated concrete questions they would want reflection to address. Tool-assisted reflection also revealed challenges: participants selectively sought evidence confirming existing perceptions of AI and prioritized dimensions they already valued. We argue that reflection tools should surface blind spots and scaffold more holistic examination of AI interactions. Finally, overcoming emotional barriers to revisiting tense conversations remains a major design challenge and warrants input from future work.

When capturing images through glass surfaces or windshields on rainy days, raindrops and reflections frequently co-occur to significantly reduce the visibility of captured images. This practical problem lacks attention and needs to be resolved urgently. Prior de-raindrop, de-reflection, and all-in-one models have failed to address this composite degradation. To this end, we first formally define the unified removal of raindrops and reflections (UR$^3$) task for the first time and construct a real-shot dataset, namely RainDrop and ReFlection (RDRF), which provides a new benchmark with substantial, high-quality, diverse image pairs. Then, we propose a novel diffusion-based framework (i.e., DiffUR$^3$) with several target designs to address this challenging task. By leveraging the powerful generative prior, DiffUR$^3$ successfully removes both types of degradations. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance on our benchmark and on challenging in-the-wild images.

Test-time training (TTT) adapts large language models (LLMs) during inference using only unlabeled test inputs. Existing methods, however, face two major bottlenecks on hard reasoning tasks: (1) \emph{lack of learnable samples}, as self-generated pseudo-labels on difficult questions are often noisy and yield unstable rewards; and (2) \emph{inefficient exploration}, as performance gains depend on repeatedly sampling many rollouts without explicit diagnosis of why previous attempts fail. We propose \textbf{TTSR} (\textbf{T}est-\textbf{T}ime \textbf{S}elf-\textbf{R}eflection), a self-evolving framework based on a \emph{reflect-then-synthesize} paradigm. A single pretrained model alternates between a \textit{Student} role and a \textit{Teacher} role: the Student solves test questions and updates, while the Teacher analyzes failed trajectories and synthesizes targeted variant questions closer to the Student's capability frontier. TTSR further maintains a cross-iteration \textit{weakness memory} and compiles persistent weaknesses into a lightweight \textit{strategy note} prepended to subsequent Student inputs, so diagnostic knowledge can guide exploration and gradually fade as weaknesses are resolved. Experiments on challenging mathematical reasoning benchmarks show consistent test-time improvements, strong cross-backbone generalization, and transfer to general-domain reasoning tasks.

Signature-based Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) detect malicious activity by matching network or host events against predefined rules. Security analysts manually develop these rules from Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI). As threats evolve, this manual pipeline faces two bottlenecks. Before authoring a new rule, an analyst must reconcile the incoming CTI with the existing rule base and determine whether to create, update, or retire one. This process is challenging due to the representational differences between the CTI and Rule formats. This gap limits the effectiveness of keyword- and embedding-based search, making rule reconciliation cognitively demanding and, in turn, contributing to "rule bloat". Second, automated verification of a new rule is inherently difficult as zero-day threats lack ground truth from simulated testing. Hence, standard metrics cannot prove that a rule semantically adheres to the CTI, and the use of LLMs leads to non-deterministic behavior. To address these challenges, we introduce FALCON, an agentic framework for CTI-grounded rule retrieval, generation, and validation. At its core, a novel CTI-Rule semantic scorer, quantifies the functional alignment between a CTI and a rule; the same signal drives a retriever that surfaces relevant deployed rules and a ground-truth-free validator that scores generated ones. Around it, a generation pipeline produces deployable rules from CTI in real time and refines them through self-reflective syntactic, semantic, and performance validators. Across network (Snort) and host-based (YARA) platforms on a purpose-built CTI-Rule dataset, FALCON attains a mean relevance of 0.72 (approx), with 84% inter-rater agreement among cybersecurity analysts, underscoring the promise of real-time security automation.

Reflexion is an AI-powered prototype designed to explore structured emotional self-reflection. By integrating emotion detection, layered reflective prompting, and metaphorical storytelling generation, Reflexion was intended to support users in autonomous emotional exploration beyond basic sentiment categorization. Grounded primarily in expressive writing, cognitive restructuring, and self-determination theory, the system was designed to organize reflection as a progressive pathway from surface-level emotional recognition toward value-aligned action planning. Its final action-planning layer is additionally informed by broader questions of agency and empowerment, which remain future directions rather than fully implemented mechanisms in the current prototype. Informal design feedback indicated that some reviewers found the layered interaction model understandable and potentially useful; no empirical efficacy claims are made. As an early prototype, Reflexion documents one direction in theory-informed affective computing.