Self-report questionnaires remain the default tool for probing the psychological characteristics of Large Language Model (LLM) agents, yet classical instruments (BFI, BDI, MBTI, BSS) inherit three well-known threats under LLMs: contamination from training corpora, directional bias under social-desirability framing, and limited responsiveness to context beyond the item text. We ask whether a *projective* paradigm can be adapted into a usable psychometric tool for LLM agents. We introduce **GenPT** (Generative Projective Testing), which reformulates TAT, Rorschach, and SCT with newly generated stimuli and organises assessment as a three-stage pipeline (Behavior Collection → Interpretation → Diagnosis) grounded in SCORS-G and a Simplified Rorschach Analysis System. On personality traits (Big Five, MBTI) and mental-health risks (depression, suicide ideation), questionnaires exhibit systematic directional shifts under social-desirability framing, most strongly on suicide ideation, whereas GenPT’s collected behavioral patterns stay near the symmetric baseline; under a longitudinal counselling context, GenPT-based depression assessment shifts by roughly an order of magnitude more than its questionnaire counterpart. Questionnaires remain competitive on clean-persona trait tasks where items align lexically with the persona description. Overall, GenPT complements rather than replaces self-report when contamination resistance, bias asymmetry, and context sensitivity matter. Code and stimuli: https://github.com/sci-m-wang/GenPT.

While prompt engineering offers effective control over Text-to-Image (T2I) generation, it remains labor-intensive for large-scale production. We present PRISM-DUEL, a black-box framework that formalizes prompt optimization as Automatic Prompt Engineering (APE), motivated by advertising workflows requiring low-latency, diverse variants faithful to a human-designed ads. Since zero-shot LLMs are unreliable judges of image quality, PRISM-DUEL obtains label-free pairwise preferences and rationales from an LLM judge over pairs of generated images, then uses a dueling-bandit optimizer to optimize a prompt for generating controlled variations while matching the reference ad’s visual content. By iteratively steering the prompt distribution towards higher-quality generations and improving posterior calibration, PRISM-DUEL preserves visual similarity and semantic faithfulness while increasing diversity. Experiments on PartiPrompts and DreamBooth across Gemini 2.5 Flash Image, FLUX.1, and Qwen-Image show consistent gains over strong baselines in visual faithfulness and prompt interpretability.

Constrained by the cost and ethical concerns of involving real seekers in AI-driven mental health, researchers develop LLM-based conversational agents (CAs) with tailored configurations, such as profiles, symptoms, and scenarios, to simulate seekers. While these efforts advance AI in mental health, achieving more realistic seeker simulation remains hindered by two key challenges: dynamic evolution and multi-session memory. Seekers’ mental states often fluctuate during counseling, which typically spans multiple sessions. To address this, we propose **AnnaAgent**, an emotional and cognitive dynamic agent system equipped with tertiary memory. AnnaAgent incorporates an emotion modulator and a complaint elicitor trained on real counseling dialogues, enabling dynamic control of the simulator’s configurations. Additionally, its tertiary memory mechanism effectively integrates short-term and long-term memory across sessions. Evaluation results, both automated and manual, demonstrate that AnnaAgent achieves more realistic seeker simulation in psychological counseling compared to existing baselines. The ethically reviewed and screened code can be found on [https://github.com/sci-m-wang/AnnaAgent](https://github.com/sci-m-wang/AnnaAgent).

In the context of data labeling, NLP researchers are increasingly interested in having humans select rationales, a subset of input tokens relevant to the chosen label. We conducted a 332-participant online user study to understand how humans select rationales, especially how different instructions and user interface affordances impact the rationales chosen. Participants labeled ten movie reviews as positive or negative, selecting words and phrases supporting their label as rationales. We varied the instructions given, the rationale-selection task, and the user interface. Participants often selected about 12% of input tokens as rationales, but selected fewer if unable to drag over multiple tokens at once. Whereas participants were near unanimous in their data labels, they were far less consistent in their rationales. The user interface affordances and task greatly impacted the types of rationales chosen. We also observed large variance across participants.