arXiv:2603.22904v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mitigating elderly loneliness requires policy interventions that achieve both adaptability and auditability. Existing methods struggle to reconcile these objectives: traditional agent-based models suffer from static rigidity, while direct large language model (LLM) controllers lack essential traceability. This work proposes a three-layer framework that separates diagnosis from control to achieve both properties simultaneously. LLMs operate strictly as diagnostic instruments that assess population state and generate structured risk evaluations, while deterministic formulas with explicit bounds translate these assessments into traceable parameter updates. This separation ensures that every policy decision can be attributed to inspectable rules while maintaining adaptive response to emergent needs. We validate the framework through systematic ablation across five experimental conditions in elderly care simulation. Results demonstrate that explicit control rules outperform end-to-end black-box LLM approaches by 11.7\% while preserving full auditability, confirming that transparency need not compromise adaptive performance.

arXiv:2512.06393v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) excel at many natural language tasks, yet their reasoning reliability under structured perturbations of rule-based systems remains brittle. We present a controlled evaluation framework consisting of four stress tests: (1) rule deletion (redundant vs. essential); (2) contradictory evidence injection; (3) logic-preserving rewrites; and (4) multi-law equivalence stacking. While representative model families (BERT, Qwen2, and TinyLlama) achieve Acc = 1.0000 on base tasks, our framework reveals a critical failure mode termed Logic Inertia - a total breakdown (Acc = 0.0000) under contradictions, where deductive momentum overrides factual reality. To resolve this, we propose Conflict-Aware Fusion, a framework grounded in the Cognitive Structure Hypothesis which posits that robust reasoning requires an explicit structural inductive bias. By imposing a dual-process architecture that separates premise verification from logical deduction, Conflict-Aware Fusion eliminates logic inertia, achieving 1.0000 accuracy on both base and contradictory stress tests, and significantly enhancing robustness to missing evidence. Our results demonstrate that, for reliable multi-step reasoning, structural verification discipline is as critical as training data scale, providing a blueprint for building robust, contradiction-aware AI systems https://github.com/14H034160212/lemo. See the OpenAI/Evals pull request https://github.com/openai/evals/pull/1622.