#01Oct 22, 2026
cs.CL
Bilingual Language Models Capture Cross-Linguistic Influence in Second-Language Reading
Abderrahmane Issam, Irene E. Winther, Stefan L. Frank
While monolingual language model (LM) surprisal is widely established as a predictor of reading times, it cannot capture the non-native (L2) reading dynamics that are shaped by the reader's first language (L1). In this work, we investigate whether the cross-lingual transfer within bilingual models aligns with human L1-driven biases during L2 reading. We evaluate bilingual models on eye-tracking data of readers from 12 diverse L1 backgrounds reading English texts. To isolate L1-specific transfer, we compare bilingual models trained on an L1 that matches the readers' L1 background to both a monolingual English baseline and bilingual models trained on other L1s. We demonstrate that matching the readers' L1 improves the prediction of L2 reading times. This predictive advantage is concentrated in late-stage eye-tracking measures, modulated by L1-L2 script overlap, and peaks among intermediate-proficiency readers. These findings provide evidence that bilingual LMs capture aspects of cross-linguistic influence, and that such influence is present in L2 reading behavior.
#02Oct 22, 2026
cs.CL
Towards User Simulators That Stay On Task And Still Sound Natural
Mustafa Omer Gul, Philippe Laban, Tanya Goyal and 1 more
Users increasingly rely on AI systems for extended, multi-turn tasks, yet evidence indicates that LLM-based system performance degrades over prolonged interaction. To evaluate and improve AI assistants in such settings, we need user simulators that faithfully follow complex user intents while exhibiting realistic conversational behavior. Existing approaches manifest a trade-off: prompted assistants can follow complex user intents but lack behavioral fidelity, while specialized user simulators better approximate conversational behavior but struggle to remain faithful to complex intents. In this paper, we propose a reinforcement learning (RL) recipe that jointly rewards task intent adherence and behavioral naturalness. A crucial contribution of the method is operationalizing naturalness with a lightweight discriminator trained in an alternating, adversarial loop with the user simulator. We release the resulting model, UserLM-2.0, which produces valid simulated conversations (i.e., meeting both task-faithfulness and naturalness criteria) 46.2% of the time, over three times the rate of the strongest prior user simulator (14.1%).
#03Oct 22, 2026
cs.LG
When to Follow the Teacher: Advantage-Based On-Policy Distillation
Mahdi Sabbaghi, George Pappas, Hamed Hassani and 1 more
Online Policy Distillation (OPD) often outperforms offline methods such as Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) by training on trajectories sampled directly from the student. However, standard OPD trains the student to follow the teacher at every state of the trajectory, assuming that teacher guidance is always beneficial. We instead distinguish between what the teacher prefers and what actually helps the current student succeed. We introduce Advantage-Based On-Policy Distillation (AOPD), which weights teacher actions by their counterfactual advantage under the student. Teacher actions that improve the student's expected outcome are reinforced, while those that do not are downweighted. Directly computing these advantages requires trying alternative teacher actions at each step and running new rollouts from each. Instead, we show that the AOPD objective can be estimated using only standard student rollouts and their terminal rewards. Our estimator uses teacher importance weights on the student-sampled actions to provide unbiased advantage-weighted supervision, without any additional rollouts or reward evaluations. This allows AOPD to focus teacher supervision on actions that help the current student while preserving the rollout efficiency of standard OPD. Experiments on math, coding, and Medqa show gains over distillation and RL baselines in both external-teacher and self-distillation settings.
#04Oct 22, 2026
cs.CV
MoG-VLM: Efficient Video Anomaly Detection through Motion-Guided Vision-Language Models
Khaled Waleed Dawoud, Muhammad Zaigham Zaheer, Khan Muhammad and 1 more
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have shown strong potential for video anomaly detection, but dense frame-level inference makes them impractical for real-time deployment. Existing acceleration commonly relies on uniform sampling, which ignores content dynamics and can either waste computation on static segments or miss localized anomalies. We propose MoG-VLM a motion-adaptive anomaly detection framework that leverages motion purely as a lightweight control signal to decide when VLM inference is necessary. To this end, we introduce Temporal Gradient Magnitude (TGM) which performs content-aware sampling to concentrate computation on informative regions while avoiding redundant processing. We further introduce a hierarchical dual-stream design in which dense multi-frame VLM reasoning is activated only around frames with elevated anomaly likelihood, via anchor-triggered context-window expansion with early termination. A fusion module then reconciles these instantaneous semantic cues with temporal action dynamics. Across four benchmarks, our method achieves 91.91%, 84.30%, 87.88%, and 78.96% AUC-ROC on XD-Violence, UCF-Crime, MSAD, and ShanghaiTech, respectively, establishing new state of the art on three benchmarks under the zero-shot, training-free setting. On XD-Violence, we improve over the previous best result by +0.57% while delivering a 1.31x inference speedup. These results demonstrate that content-aware allocation of VLM capacity, processing fewer frames more intelligently rather than all frames uniformly, is a more effective axis of progress than uniformly densifying VLM inference across frames. Code is available on GitHub: https://github.com/kdawoud91/MoG-VLM.
#05Oct 22, 2026
cs.AI
Who Is Sycophantic to Whom? Confident LLMs, Human Deference, and the Collapse of Trust Calibration
Deepthika S, Pawni Yadav, B. Sankar
Research on sycophancy asks whether large language models (LLMs) bend towards what their users want to hear. We ask the reverse question: when an LLM is confident, consistent, and wrong, do users bend towards it? In a within-subjects experiment, 32 participants learned up to five science topics by chatting with five assistants built on the same model (GPT-5-mini). Unknown to participants, each assistant's briefing had 0, 25, 50, 75, or 100% of its facts replaced by plausible falsehoods, and every assistant spoke with full confidence. A surprise quiz after each topic offered the correct fact, the planted falsehood, and two distractors, with a confidence rating for every answer. Across 104 quizzes and 1,040 answers, scores fell from 7.4 to 2.9 out of 10, and the planted option was chosen on 60% of falsified items against 11% of correctly taught ones (odds ratio 12.5). Transcript coding showed that whenever the assistant stated a falsehood, it was adopted about 65% of the time at every falsification level. Absorbed falsehoods were held with high confidence (8.4/10), the modeled confidence advantage of right over wrong answers vanished, and the discrimination of confidence for correctness fell from an AUROC of 0.70 to chance, while post-task trust ratings barely moved. Participants tended to return to the chat more when the assistant was worse, but returning went with more absorption, not less, and 30% of all turns pasted quiz questions back to the source being checked. The assistant itself was almost never sycophantic and never conceded under pushback. We introduce a baseline-corrected Human Deference Index to quantify this human-side sycophancy and argue that trustworthiness is a property of the human-AI pair, that sycophancy evaluations should measure both directions, and that learning interfaces must make reliability legible claim by claim.