arXiv:2603.12755v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large-scale models are typically adapted to meet the diverse requirements of model owners and users. However, maintaining multiple specialized versions of the model is inefficient. In response, we propose AIM, a novel model modulation paradigm that enables a single model to exhibit diverse behaviors to meet the specific end requirements. AIM enables two key modulation modes: utility and focus modulations. The former provides model owners with dynamic control over output quality to deliver varying utility levels, and the latter offers users precise control to shift model's focused input features. AIM introduces a logits redistribution strategy that operates in a training data-agnostic and retraining-free manner. We establish a formal foundation to ensure AIM's regulation capability, based on the statistical properties of logits ordering via joint probability distributions. Our evaluation confirms AIM's practicality and versatility for Al model modulation, with tasks spanning image classification, semantic segmentation and text generation, and prevalent architectures including ResNet, SegFormer and Llama.

arXiv:2602.18446v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Users increasingly rely on Large Language Models (LLMs) for Deep Research, using them to synthesize diverse sources into structured reports that support understanding and action. In this context, the practical reliability of such reports hinges on logical quality: whether the report's claims and arguments are explicitly supported and can be trusted as a basis for downstream use, rather than merely appearing fluent or informative. However, current evaluation frameworks largely overlook this requirement. To bridge this gap, we introduce ReportLogic, a benchmark that quantifies report-level logical quality through a reader-centric lens of auditability. Specifically, ReportLogic adopts a hierarchical taxonomy that evaluates whether readers can (1) trace an on-topic report structure with a unified analytical arc (Macro-Logic), (2) understand the progression with necessary context (Expositional-Logic), and (3) verify conclusions via explicit claim--support (Structural-Logic). Based on this taxonomy, we construct a human-annotated rubric-guided dataset and train an open-source LogicJudge for scalable evaluation. We further evaluate judge robustness via adversarial attacks, showing that off-the-shelf LLM judges are frequently influenced by superficial cues (e.g., verbosity), and reasoning modes can mask broken support relations. Overall, our results provide actionable guidance for building more robust logic evaluators and improving the logical reliability of LLM-generated reports.