Gamification is especially effective in learning domains requiring active problem-solving and iterative skill-building, such as cybersecurity education. Generative AI agents offer a path to delivering such experiences adaptively at scale, but introduce well-documented risks in educational settings: inconsistent behavior, hallucinated reasoning, and misalignment with pedagogical frameworks. Grounding these systems in learning science is therefore essential. We present , an agentic framework for gamified cybersecurity learning that enables structured autonomy through ontology-guided validation, schema-governed behavioral control, and competency-based progression. The system is organized around a competency-based progression model that structures topics by difficulty and prerequisite relationships, reflecting evidence-based principles of scaffolded instruction. The learning loop is decomposed into four specialized agents: challenge, support, evaluation, and reward, each governed by behavioral schemas that encode operational modes and progression logic, bounding agent autonomy without eliminating generative flexibility. A cybersecurity ontology validates all generated content prior to display, enforcing domain-consistent reasoning and safety constraints. We evaluate CyberAgents through classroom deployment with undergraduate students, complemented by expert evaluations from educators and domain specialists. Results indicate improved engagement, clearer feedback interpretation, and greater learner trust in AI-generated responses when behavioral schemas and ontology validation are active. Preliminary comparisons with an unconstrained configuration further support the role of structured control in stabilizing instructional behavior. These findings offer a blueprint for designing pedagogically grounded agentic gamified learning systems.

Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is central to aligning Large Language Models (LLMs), yet it introduces a critical vulnerability: an imperfect Reward Model (RM) can become a single point of failure when it fails to penalize unsafe behaviors. While existing red-teaming approaches primarily target policy-level weaknesses, they overlook what we term systemic weaknesses cases where both the core LLM and the RM fail in tandem. We present ARES, a framework that systematically discovers and mitigates such dual vulnerabilities. ARES employs a “Safety Mentor” that dynamically composes semantically coherent adversarial prompts by combining structured component types (topics, personas, tactics, goals) and generates corresponding malicious and safe responses. This dual-targeting approach exposes weaknesses in both the core LLM and the RM simultaneously. Using the vulnerabilities gained, ARES implements a two-stage repair process: first fine-tuning the RM to better detect harmful content, then leveraging the improved RM to optimize the core model. Experiments across multiple adversarial safety benchmarks demonstrate that ARES substantially enhances safety robustness while preserving model capabilities, establishing a new paradigm for comprehensive RLHF safety alignment.

Fact-checking judges if a piece of information is factual by analyzing data sources in multiple modalities, such as text and image. Traditional fact-checking relies on humans to formulate relevant and targeted Fact-Checking Questions (FCQs), search for evidence, and verify the factuality of claims. Large Language Models (LLMs) have been commonly used to automate evidence retrieval and factuality verification at scale. However, their effectiveness for fact-checking is hindered by the absence of FCQ formulation. To bridge this gap, we seek to answer two research questions: (1) Can LLMs generate relevant FCQs? and (2) Can LLM-generated FCQs improve multimodal factchecking? In this paper, we introduce Lrq-Fact, a framework that is grounded in social theories and utilizes LLMs to generate relevant FCQs to facilitate evidence retrieval and enhance factchecking by probing targeted information across modalities. Through extensive experiments, we aim to verify if Lrq-FACT can generate relevant FCQs of different types and if Lrq-FACT can consistently outperform baseline methods in multimodal factchecking. Further analysis illustrates how each component in Lrq-Fact works toward improving the performance.

Effective mental health support is crucial for alleviating psychological distress. While large language model (LLM)-based assistants have shown promise in mental health interventions, existing research often defines "effective" support primarily in terms of empathetic acknowledgments, overlooking other essential dimensions such as informational guidance, community validation, and tangible coping strategies. To address this limitation and better understand what constitutes effective support, we introduce RedditESS, a novel real-world dataset derived from Reddit posts, including supportive comments and original posters' follow-up responses. Grounded in established social science theories, we develop an ensemble labeling mechanism to annotate supportive comments as effective or not and perform qualitative assessments to ensure the reliability of the annotations. Additionally, we demonstrate the practical utility of RedditESS by using it to guide LLM alignment toward generating more context-sensitive and genuinely helpful supportive responses. By broadening the understanding of effective support, our study paves the way for advanced AI-driven mental health interventions.

The rapid advancement of conversational agents, particularly chatbots powered by Large Language Models (LLMs), poses a significant risk of social engineering (SE) attacks on social media platforms. SE detection in multi-turn, chat-based interactions is considerably more complex than single-instance detection due to the dynamic nature of these conversations. A critical factor in mitigating this threat is understanding the SE attack mechanisms through which SE attacks operate, specifically how attackers exploit vulnerabilities and how victims' personality traits contribute to their susceptibility. In this work, we propose an LLM-agentic framework, SE-VSim, to simulate SE attack mechanisms by generating multi-turn conversations. We model victim agents with varying personality traits to assess how psychological profiles influence susceptibility to manipulation. Using a dataset of over 1000 simulated conversations, we examine attack scenarios in which adversaries, posing as recruiters, funding agencies, and journalists, attempt to extract sensitive information. Based on this analysis, we present a proof of concept, SE-OmniGuard, to offer personalized protection to users by leveraging prior knowledge of the victims personality, evaluating attack strategies, and monitoring information exchanges in conversations to identify potential SE attempts.

Integrating AI into education has the potential to transform the teaching of science and technology courses, particularly in the field of cybersecurity. AI-driven question-answering (QA) systems can actively manage uncertainty in cybersecurity problem-solving, offering interactive, inquiry-based learning experiences. Recently, Large language models (LLMs) have gained prominence in AI-driven QA systems, enabling advanced language understanding and user engagement. However, they face challenges like hallucinations and limited domain-specific knowledge, which reduce their reliability in educational settings. To address these challenges, we propose CyberRAG, an ontology-aware retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) approach for developing a reliable and safe QA system in cybersecurity education. CyberRAG employs a two-step approach: first, it augments the domain-specific knowledge by retrieving validated cybersecurity documents from a knowledge base to enhance the relevance and accuracy of the response. Second, it mitigates hallucinations and misuse by integrating a knowledge graph ontology to validate the final answer. Comprehensive experiments on publicly available datasets reveal that CyberRAG delivers accurate, reliable responses aligned with domain knowledge, demonstrating the potential of AI tools to enhance education.

Advancements in large language models (LLMs) have enabled the development of intelligent educational tools that support inquiry-based learning across technical domains. In cybersecurity education, where accuracy and safety are paramount, systems must go beyond surface-level relevance to provide information that is both trustworthy and domain-appropriate. To address this challenge, we introduce CyberBOT, a question-answering chatbot that leverages a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) pipeline to incorporate contextual information from course-specific materials and validate responses using a domain-specific cybersecurity ontology. The ontology serves as a structured reasoning layer that constrains and verifies LLM-generated answers, reducing the risk of misleading or unsafe guidance. CyberBOT has been deployed in a large graduate-level course at Arizona State University (ASU), where more than one hundred students actively engage with the system through a dedicated web-based platform. Computational evaluations in lab environments highlight the potential capacity of CyberBOT, and a forthcoming field study will evaluate its pedagogical impact. By integrating structured domain reasoning with modern generative capabilities, CyberBOT illustrates a promising direction for developing reliable and curriculum-aligned AI applications in specialized educational contexts.

Advancements in large language models (LLMs) have enabled the development of intelligent educational tools that support inquiry-based learning across technical domains. In cybersecurity education, where accuracy and safety are paramount, systems must go beyond surface-level relevance to provide information that is both trustworthy and domain-appropriate. To address this challenge, we introduce CyberBOT(1), a question-answering chatbot that leverages a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) pipeline to incorporate contextual information from course-specific materials and validate responses using a domain-specific cybersecurity ontology. The ontology serves as a structured reasoning layer that constrains and verifies LLM-generated answers, reducing the risk of misleading or unsafe guidance. CyberBOT has been deployed in a large graduate-level course at Arizona State University (ASU),(2) which illustrates a promising direction for developing reliable and curriculum-aligned AI applications in specialized educational contexts.

Social media platforms, despite their value in promoting open discourse, are often exploited to spread harmful content. Current deep learning and natural language processing models used for detecting this harmful content overly rely on domain-specific terms affecting their capabilities to adapt to generalizable hate speech detection. This is because they tend to focus too narrowly on particular linguistic signals or the use of certain categories of words. Another significant challenge arises when platforms lack high-quality annotated data for training, leading to a need for cross-platform models that can adapt to different distribution shifts. Our research introduces a cross-platform hate speech detection model capable of being trained on one platform's data and generalizing to multiple unseen platforms. To achieve good generalizability across platforms, one way is to disentangle the input representations into invariant and platform-dependent features. We also argue that learning causal relationships, which remain constant across diverse environments, can significantly aid in understanding invariant representations in hate speech. By disentangling input into platform-dependent features (useful for predicting hate targets) and platform-independent features (used to predict the presence of hate), we learn invariant representations resistant to distribution shifts. These features are then used to predict hate speech across unseen platforms. Our extensive experiments across four platforms highlight our model's enhanced efficacy compared to existing state-of-the-art methods in detecting generalized hate speech.

This is the third book in the Online Hate Speech Trilogy. It focuses on presenting methods for detecting, analysing, and combating toxic language on the Internet. Alongside the legal dilemmas born from a desire to punish hate speech disseminators, identifying online hate speech is one of the biggest challenges in the field of studies on violent narratives and virtual attacks. The authors analyse the challenges of identifying violent narratives through automation, the advantages of manually coding social media posts, and the opportunities offered by AI in this field of research.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are proficient at generating coherent and contextually relevant text but face challenges when addressing knowledge-intensive queries in domain-specific and factual question-answering tasks. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems mitigate this by incorporating external knowledge sources, such as structured knowledge graphs (KGs). However, LLMs often struggle to produce accurate answers despite access to KG-extracted information containing necessary facts. Our study investigates this dilemma by analyzing error patterns in existing KG-based RAG methods and identifying eight critical failure points. We observed that these errors predominantly occur due to insufficient focus on discerning the question's intent and adequately gathering relevant context from the knowledge graph facts. Drawing on this analysis, we propose the Mindful-RAG approach, a framework designed for intent-based and contextually aligned knowledge retrieval. This method explicitly targets the identified failures and offers improvements in the correctness and relevance of responses provided by LLMs, representing a significant step forward from existing methods.

Content moderation faces a challenging task as social media's ability to spread hate speech contrasts with its role in promoting global connectivity. With rapidly evolving slang and hate speech, the adaptability of conventional deep learning to the fluid landscape of online dialogue remains limited. In response, causality inspired disentanglement has shown promise by segregating platform specific peculiarities from universal hate indicators. However, its dependency on available ground truth target labels for discerning these nuances faces practical hurdles with the incessant evolution of platforms and the mutable nature of hate speech. Using confidence based reweighting and contrastive regularization, this study presents HATE WATCH, a novel framework of weakly supervised causal disentanglement that circumvents the need for explicit target labeling and effectively disentangles input features into invariant representations of hate. Empirical validation across platforms two with target labels and two without positions HATE WATCH as a novel method in cross platform hate speech detection with superior performance. HATE WATCH advances scalable content moderation techniques towards developing safer online communities.

The proliferation of Large Language Models (LLMs) poses challenges in detecting and mitigating digital deception, as these models can emulate human conversational patterns and facilitate chat-based social engineering (CSE) attacks. This study investigates the dual capabilities of LLMs as both facilitators and defenders against CSE threats. We develop a novel dataset, SEConvo, simulating CSE scenarios in academic and recruitment contexts, and designed to examine how LLMs can be exploited in these situations. Our findings reveal that, while off-the-shelf LLMs generate high-quality CSE content, their detection capabilities are suboptimal, leading to increased operational costs for defense. In response, we propose ConvoSentinel, a modular defense pipeline that improves detection at both the message and the conversation levels, offering enhanced adaptability and cost-effectiveness. The retrieval-augmented module in ConvoSentinel identifies malicious intent by comparing messages to a database of similar conversations, enhancing CSE detection at all stages. Our study highlights the need for advanced strategies to leverage LLMs in cybersecurity.

Large language models (LLMs) excel in many diverse applications beyond language generation, e.g., translation, summarization, and sentiment analysis. One intriguing application is in text classification. This becomes pertinent in the realm of identifying hateful or toxic speech -- a domain fraught with challenges and ethical dilemmas. In our study, we have two objectives: firstly, to offer a literature review revolving around LLMs as classifiers, emphasizing their role in detecting and classifying hateful or toxic content. Subsequently, we explore the efficacy of several LLMs in classifying hate speech: identifying which LLMs excel in this task as well as their underlying attributes and training. Providing insight into the factors that contribute to an LLM proficiency (or lack thereof) in discerning hateful content. By combining a comprehensive literature review with an empirical analysis, our paper strives to shed light on the capabilities and constraints of LLMs in the crucial domain of hate speech detection.

The contemporary LLMs are prone to producing hallucinations, stemming mainly from the knowledge gaps within the models. To address this critical limitation, researchers employ diverse strategies to augment the LLMs by incorporating external knowledge, aiming to reduce hallucinations and enhance reasoning accuracy. Among these strategies, leveraging knowledge graphs as a source of external information has demonstrated promising results. In this survey, we comprehensively review these knowledge-graph-based augmentation techniques in LLMs, focusing on their efficacy in mitigating hallucinations. We systematically categorize these methods into three overarching groups, offering methodological comparisons and performance evaluations. Lastly, this survey explores the current trends and challenges associated with these techniques and outlines potential avenues for future research in this emerging field.

We have witnessed lately a rapid proliferation of advanced Large Language Models (LLMs) capable of generating high-quality text. While these LLMs have revolutionized text generation across various domains, they also pose significant risks to the information ecosystem, such as the potential for generating convincing propaganda, misinformation, and disinformation at scale. This paper offers a review of AI-generated text forensic systems, an emerging field addressing the challenges of LLM misuses. We present an overview of the existing efforts in AI-generated text forensics by introducing a detailed taxonomy, focusing on three primary pillars: detection, attribution, and characterization. These pillars enable a practical understanding of AI-generated text, from identifying AI-generated content (detection), determining the specific AI model involved (attribution), and grouping the underlying intents of the text (characterization). Furthermore, we explore available resources for AI-generated text forensics research and discuss the evolving challenges and future directions of forensic systems in an AI era.

In the digital age, social media has been a go-to platform for stress-related discussions, yielding valuable data to advance the understanding and detection of stress. Swift identification of stress indicators in these online conversations is essential in enabling immediate support and helping to avert subsequent severe mental and physical health issues, especially during global crises such as pandemics and conflicts. Detecting stress in social media posts automatically poses a formidable challenge. While techniques such as supervised Pretrained Language Models (PLMs) and zero-shot Large Language Models (LLMs) based classifiers have demonstrated significant performance, they exhibit limitations, especially on platforms like Reddit. For example, on Reddit, users tend to write lengthy, expressive posts, which causes these methods to often fail to consider the entire context, leading to incomplete or inaccurate assessments of a user's mental health or stress status. To overcome these limitations, we present a new approach to identifying and classifying stress-related discourse on social media. Our approach involves analyzing condensed versions of user posts, such as user-provided summaries or the "Too Long Didn’t Read" (TLDR) portion of the original post. We question whether these abridged texts can yield a more accurate classification of stress. In this paper, we make the following contributions. First, we investigate the relationship between the performance of the model's perceived textual context and the length of social media posts. Second, we present a novel approach to use the summarized texts for stress detection. We experiment with different classifiers to evaluate their performance on stress detection accuracy using summarized versus full-length posts. Furthermore, by examining the emotional and linguistic features of the original posts and their summaries, we suggest improvements to current state-of-the-art LLM-based stress classifier prompts, thereby enhancing stress detection capabilities. Finally, when user summaries are absent, we synthetically generate meaningful user post summaries by incorporating the power of LLMs. Our results show that the stress detection performance deteriorates for longer posts, and utilizing the TLDR and summaries improves classification outcomes. We also provide augmented datasets containing human and AI-generated summaries for future research in stress detection on social media.

Hate speech detection refers to the task of detecting hateful content that aims at denigrating an individual or a group based on their religion, gender, sexual orientation, or other characteristics. Due to the different policies of the platforms, different groups of people express hate in different ways. Furthermore, due to the lack of labeled data in some platforms it becomes challenging to build hate speech detection models. To this end, we revisit if we can learn a generalizable hate speech detection model for the cross platform setting, where we train the model on the data from one (source) platform and generalize the model across multiple (target) platforms. Existing generalization models rely on linguistic cues or auxiliary information, making them biased towards certain tags or certain kinds of words (e.g., abusive words) on the source platform and thus not applicable to the target platforms. Inspired by social and psychological theories, we endeavor to explore if there exist inherent causal cues that can be leveraged to learn generalizable representations for detecting hate speech across these distribution shifts. To this end, we propose a causality-guided framework, PEACE, that identifies and leverages two intrinsic causal cues omnipresent in hateful content: the overall sentiment and the aggression in the text. We conduct extensive experiments across multiple platforms (representing the distribution shift) showing if causal cues can help cross-platform generalization.

Large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4, PaLM, and Llama have significantly propelled the generation of AI-crafted text. With rising concerns about their potential misuse, there is a pressing need for AI-generated-text forensics. Neural authorship attribution is a forensic effort, seeking to trace AI-generated text back to its originating LLM. The LLM landscape can be divided into two primary categories: proprietary and open-source. In this work, we delve into these emerging categories of LLMs, focusing on the nuances of neural authorship attribution. To enrich our understanding, we carry out an empirical analysis of LLM writing signatures, highlighting the contrasts between proprietary and open-source models, and scrutinizing variations within each group. By integrating stylometric features across lexical, syntactic, and structural aspects of language, we explore their potential to yield interpretable results and augment pre-trained language model-based classifiers utilized in neural authorship attribution. Our findings, based on a range of state-of-the-art LLMs, provide empirical insights into neural authorship attribution, paving the way for future investigations aimed at mitigating the threats posed by AI-generated misinformation.

Recent advancements in pre-trained language models have enabled convenient methods for generating human-like text at a large scale. Though these generation capabilities hold great potential for breakthrough applications, it can also be a tool for an adversary to generate misinformation. In particular, social media platforms like Twitter are highly susceptible to AI-generated misinformation. A potential threat scenario is when an adversary hijacks a credible user account and incorporates a natural language generator to generate misinformation. Such threats necessitate automated detectors for AI-generated tweets in a given user's Twitter timeline. However, tweets are inherently short, thus making it difficult for current state-of-the-art pre-trained language model-based detectors to accurately detect at what point the AI starts to generate tweets in a given Twitter timeline. In this paper, we present a novel algorithm using stylometric signals to aid detecting AI-generated tweets. We propose models corresponding to quantifying stylistic changes in human and AI tweets in two related tasks: Task 1 - discriminate between human and AI-generated tweets, and Task 2 - detect if and when an AI starts to generate tweets in a given Twitter timeline. Our extensive experiments demonstrate that the stylometric features are effective in augmenting the state-of-the-art AI-generated text detectors.