Today’s digest highlights how evaluation and alignment are evolving across multilingual speech, multimodal reasoning, and code-related detection tasks. A common thread is the growing use of preference signals and targeted training objectives to make systems better reflect human judgments and more reliable behavior. At the same time, several works stress that prompts and evaluators can introduce their own failure modes, underscoring the need for more robust assessment of vision-language systems.

Preferences of a Voice-First Nation: Large-Scale Pairwise Evaluation and Preference Analysis for TTS in Indian Languages

Crowdsourced pairwise evaluation has emerged as a scalable approach for assessing foundation models. However, applying it to Text to Speech(TTS) introduces high variance due to linguistic diversity and multidimensional nature of speech perception. We present a controlled multidimensional pairwise evaluation framework for multilingual TTS that combines linguistic control with perceptually grounded annotation. Using 5K+ native and code-mixed sentences across 10 Indic languages, we evaluate 7 state-of-the-art TTS systems and collect over 120K pairwise comparisons from over 1900 native raters. In addition to overall preference, raters provide judgments across 6 perceptual dimensions: intelligibility, expressiveness, voice quality, liveliness, noise, and hallucinations. Using Bradley-Terry modeling, we construct a multilingual leaderboard, interpret human preference using SHAP analysis and analyze leaderboard reliability alongside model strengths and trade-offs across perceptual dimensions.

Incentivizing Neuro-symbolic Language-based Reasoning in VLMs via Reinforcement Learning

There are 7,407 languages in the world. But, what about the languages that are not there in the world? Are humans so narrow minded that we don't care about the languages aliens communicate in? Aliens are humans too! In the 2016 movie Arrival, Amy Adams plays a linguist, Dr. Louise Banks who, by learning to think in an alien language (Heptapod) formed of non-sequential sentences, gains the ability to transcend time and look into the future. In this work, I aim to explore the representation and reasoning of vision-language concepts in a neuro-symbolic language, and study improvement in analytical reasoning abilities and efficiency of "thinking systems". With Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct as base model and 4 $\times$ Nvidia H200 GPU nodes, I achieve an accuracy improvement of 3.33\% on a vision-language evaluation dataset consisting of math, science, and general knowledge questions, while reducing the reasoning tokens by 75\% over SymPy. I've documented the compute challenges faced, scaling possibilities, and the future work to improve thinking in a neuro-symbolic language in vision-language models. The training and inference setup can be found here: https://github.com/i-like-bfs-and-dfs/wolfram-reasoning.

mcdok at SemEval-2026 Task 13: Finetuning LLMs for Detection of Machine-Generated Code

Multi-domain detection of the machine-generated code snippets in various programming languages is a challenging task. SemEval-2026 Task~13 copes with this challenge in various angles, as a binary detection problem as well as attribution of the source. Specifically, its subtasks also cover generator LLM family detection, as well as a hybrid code co-generated by humans and machines, or adversarially modified codes hiding its origin. Our submitted systems adjusted the existing mdok approach (focused on machine-generated text detection) to these specific kinds of problems by exploring various base models, more suitable for code understanding. The results indicate that the submitted systems are competitive in all three subtasks. However, the margins from the top-performing systems are significant, and thus further improvements are possible.

When Prompts Override Vision: Prompt-Induced Hallucinations in LVLMs

Despite impressive progress in capabilities of large vision-language models (LVLMs), these systems remain vulnerable to hallucinations, i.e., outputs that are not grounded in the visual input. Prior work has attributed hallucinations in LVLMs to factors such as limitations of the vision backbone or the dominance of the language component, yet the relative importance of these factors remains unclear. To resolve this ambiguity, We propose HalluScope, a benchmark to better understand the extent to which different factors induce hallucinations. Our analysis indicates that hallucinations largely stem from excessive reliance on textual priors and background knowledge, especially information introduced through textual instructions. To mitigate hallucinations induced by textual instruction priors, we propose HalluVL-DPO, a framework for fine-tuning off-the-shelf LVLMs towards more visually grounded responses. HalluVL-DPO leverages preference optimization using a curated training dataset that we construct, guiding the model to prefer grounded responses over hallucinated ones. We demonstrate that our optimized model effectively mitigates the targeted hallucination failure mode, while preserving or improving performance on other hallucination benchmarks and visual capability evaluations. To support reproducibility and further research, we will publicly release our evaluation benchmark, preference training dataset, and code at https://pegah-kh.github.io/projects/prompts-override-vision/ .

Seeing Isn't Believing: Uncovering Blind Spots in Evaluator Vision-Language Models

Large Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are increasingly used to evaluate outputs of other models, for image-to-text (I2T) tasks such as visual question answering, and text-to-image (T2I) generation tasks. Despite this growing reliance, the reliability of these Evaluator VLMs remains under explored. In this work, we systematically evaluate the reliability of Evaluator VLMs across both I2T and T2I tasks. We introduce targeted perturbations that degrade output quality along key error dimensions, including object hallucinations, spatial reasoning, factual grounding, and visual fidelity. These perturbations test whether Evaluator VLMs can reliably account for these quality degrading errors in their evaluations. Using a comprehensive benchmark of over 4000 perturbed instances spanning 40 perturbation dimensions, we evaluate 4 prominent VLMs using single-answer scoring, pairwise comparison, and reference-guided paradigms. Our findings reveal that current VLM evaluators exhibit substantial blind spots: they often fail to detect perturbed outputs - in some cases exceeding 50%, struggle particularly with fine-grained compositional and spatial errors, and are often insensitive to hallucinated content that contradicts the input image. Pairwise comparison proves more reliable, though failure rates persist. These results highlight the unreliable nature of current Evaluator VLMs and urge caution in their deployment for benchmarking and development decisions. Code and data have been made publicly available.