NeurIPS 2025 Papers

Large Language Models (LLMs) show strong generalization across diverse tasks, yet the internal decision-making processes behind their predictions remain opaque. In this work, we study the geometry of hidden representations in LLMs through the lens of intrinsic dimension (ID), focusing specifically on decision-making dynamics in a multiple-choice question answering (MCQA) setting. We perform a large-scale study, with 28 open-weight transformer models and estimate ID across layers using multiple estimators, while also quantifying per-layer performance on MCQA tasks. Our findings reveal a consistent ID pattern across models: early layers operate on low-dimensional manifolds, middle layers expand this space, and later layers compress it again, converging to decision-relevant representations. Together, these results suggest LLMs implicitly learn to project linguistic inputs onto structured, low-dimensional manifolds aligned with task-specific decisions, providing new geometric insights into how generalization and reasoning emerge in language models.

As large language models (LLMs) increasingly serve as close collaborators for humans, it is crucial that they express their reasoning in ways that humans can understand and learn from. However, this capability remains relatively less understood and under-evaluated. To address this, we introduce a conceptual framework for such Human-AI knowledge transfer capabilities and conduct the first large-scale user study (N=118) explicitly designed to measure it. In our two-phase setup, humans first ideate with an LLM on problem-solving strategies, then independently implement solutions, isolating the influence of model reasoning on human understanding. Our findings reveal that while model benchmark performance correlates with collaborative outcomes, this relationship is notably inconsistent with significant outliers, highlighting that knowledge transfer is a distinct capability requiring dedicated optimization. Our analysis uncovers behavioral and strategic factors that mediate successful knowledge transfer, and we release our code, dataset, and evaluation framework to support future work on communicatively aligned models.

The growing interest in employing large language models (LLMs) for decision-making in social and economic contexts has raised questions about their potential to function as agents in these domains. A significant number of societal problems involve the distribution of resources, where fairness, along with economic efficiency, play a critical role in the desirability of outcomes. In this paper, we examine whether LLM responses adhere to fundamental fairness concepts such as equitability, envy-freeness, and Rawlsian maximin, and investigate their alignment with human preferences. We evaluate the performance of several LLMs, providing a comparative benchmark of their ability to reflect these measures. Our results demonstrate a lack of alignment between current LLM responses and human distributional preferences. Moreover, LLMs are unable to utilize money as a transferable resource to mitigate inequality. Nonetheless, we demonstrate a stark contrast when (some) LLMs are tasked with selecting from a predefined menu of options rather than generating one. In addition, we analyze the robustness of LLM responses to variations in semantic factors (e.g. intentions or personas) or non-semantic prompting changes (e.g. templates or orderings). Finally, we highlight potential strategies aimed at enhancing the alignment of LLM behavior with well-established fairness concepts.

A challenge in human-AI decision-making is to balance three factors: the *correctness* of predictions, the *cost* of knowledge and reasoning complexity, and the confidence about whether to *abstain* from automated answers or escalate to human experts. In this work, we present a cascaded LLM decision framework that adaptively delegates tasks across multiple tiers of expertise -- a base model for initial candidate answers, a more capable and knowledgeable (but costlier) large model, and a human expert for when the model cascade abstains. Our method proceeds in two stages. First, a deferral policy determines whether to accept the base model’s answer or regenerate it with the large model based on the confidence score. Second, an abstention policy decides whether the cascade model response is sufficiently certain or requires human intervention. Moreover, to overcome static policies and accommodate changing task difficulty, we incorporate an online learning mechanism which uses human feedback. We demonstrate this approach to general question-answering (ARC-Easy, ARC-Challenge, and MMLU) and medical question-answering (MedQA and MedMCQA). Our results demonstrate that our cascaded strategy outperforms single-model baselines in most cases, achieving higher accuracy while reducing costs and providing a principled approach to handling abstentions.

Sparse and low-rank matrix composite approximation has emerged as a promising paradigm for compressing large language models (LLMs), offering a more flexible pruning structure than conventional methods based solely on sparse matrices. The significant variation in weight redundancy across layers, along with the differing rank and sparsity structures of weight matrices, makes identifying the globally optimal pruning structure extremely challenging. Existing methods often depend on uniform or manually designed heuristic rules to allocate weight sparsity across layers, subsequently compressing each matrix using matrix approximation techniques. Given the above theoretical difficulty in global compression of LLMs and the limited computational and data resources available compared to the training phase, we argue that a collaboration between learning and matrix approximation is essential for effective compression. In this paper, we propose a novel LLM compression framework based on generalized bilevel optimization that naturally formulates an effective collaborative mechanism. Specifically, the outer loop frames the weight allocation task as a probabilistic optimization problem, enabling the automatic learning of both layer-wise sparsities and matrix-wise retained ranks, while the inner loop solves the corresponding sparsity and rank-constrained model compression problem via matrix approximation. Our main technical contributions include two key innovations for efficiently solving this bilevel optimization problem. First, we introduce a truncated Gaussian prior-based probabilistic parameterization integrated with a policy gradient estimator, which avoids expensive backpropagation and stabilizes the optimization process. Second, we design an adapted QR-based matrix approximation algorithm that significantly accelerates inner loop computations. Extensive experiments on Phi-3 and the LLama-2/3 family demonstrate the effectiveness of our method. Notably, it maintains over 95\% zero-shot accuracy under 50\% sparsity and achieves up to 2× inference speedup.

Motion planning in high-dimensional continuous spaces remains challenging due to complex environments and computational constraints. Although learning-based planners, especially graph neural network (GNN)-based, have significantly improved planning performance, they still struggle with inaccurate graph construction and limited structural reasoning, constraining search efficiency and path quality. The human brain exhibits efficient planning through a two-stage Perception-Decision model. First, egocentric spatial representations from visual and proprioceptive input are constructed, and then semantic–episodic synergy is leveraged to support decision-making in uncertainty scenarios. Inspired by this process, we propose NeuroMP, a brain-inspired planning framework that learns to plan like the human brain. NeuroMP integrates a Perceptive Segment Selector inspired by visuospatial perception to construct safer graphs, and a Global Alignment Heuristic guide search in weakly connected graphs by modeling semantic-episodic synergistic decision-making. Experimental results demonstrate that NeuroMP significantly outperforms existing planning methods in efficiency and quality while maintaining a high success rate.

Simpson's paradox poses a challenge in probabilistic inference and decision-making. Our study revisits the paradox by re-estimating its frequency with an unbiased data generation process and reaffirms that it is not an artifact of deficient data collection. Thus, it can lead to incorrect recommendations in fields as diverse as statistics, psychology, and artificial intelligence. We show that the paradox can be resolved by assuming a minimal — though not necessarily observed — common cause (or screening) variable for the involved random variables. In our approach, conditioning on this minimal common cause establishes the correct association between events, which coincides with the conditioning (i.e., fine-grained) option of the original Simpson paradox. This resolution applies to both discrete cases of binary variables and continuous settings modeled by Gaussian variables. For a non-minimal common cause, the resolution of the paradox is possible, but detailed knowledge of the common cause is required. Our findings extend traditional understandings of the paradox and offer practical guidance for resolving apparent contradictions in probabilistic inference, ultimately enhancing decision-making processes. This point is illustrated by several examples.