Large Language Model (LLM) judges exhibit strong reasoning capabilities but are limited to textual content. This leaves current automatic Speech-to-Speech (S2S) evaluation methods reliant on opaque and expensive Audio Language Models (ALMs). In this work, we propose TRACE (Textual Reasoning over Audio Cues for Evaluation), a novel framework that enables LLM judges to reason over audio cues to achieve cost-efficient and human-aligned S2S evaluation. To demonstrate the strength of the framework, we first introduce a Human Chain-of-Thought (HCoT) annotation protocol to improve the diagnostic capability of existing judge benchmarks by separating evaluation into explicit dimensions: content (C), voice quality (VQ), and paralinguistics (P). Using this data, TRACE constructs a textual blueprint of inexpensive audio signals and prompts an LLM to render dimension-wise judgments, fusing them into an overall rating via a deterministic policy. TRACE achieves higher agreement with human raters than ALMs and transcript-only LLM judges while being significantly more cost-effective. We will release the HCoT annotations and the TRACE framework to enable scalable and human-aligned S2S evaluation.

Search-augmented LLM agents can produce deep research reports (DRRs), but verifying claim-level factuality remains challenging. Existing fact-checkers usually target general-domain atomic claims, and there is no benchmark to test whether such verifiers transfer to DRRs.Yet building such a benchmark for DRR fact-checkers is itself difficult because it requires expert judgments over cognitively demanding, domain-specific claims.In a controlled study with PhD-level specialists, unassisted experts achieve only 60.8% accuracy on hidden known-answer claims. We therefore propose evolving benchmarking via **Audit-then-Score** (**AtS**), in which labels and rationales remain revisable: when a verifier disagrees with the current benchmark, it submits evidence; an auditor adjudicates the dispute; and accepted revisions update the benchmark before scoring. After three additional **AtS** rounds, expert accuracy rises to 90.9%, showing that experts are better auditors than one-shot labelers.We instantiate **AtS** as **DeepFactBench**, a versioned DRR factuality benchmark with auditable rationales, and introduce **DeepFactEval**, a claim-level verifier.On the frozen **DeepFactBench** release, **DeepFactEval** achieves 83.4% accuracy, outperforming the best prior deep-research and traditional fact-checkers by 14.3 and 24.9 points, respectively, and transferring well to external factuality datasets.

Temporal Domain Generalization (TDG) aims to generalize across temporal distribution shifts, e.g., lexical change over time. Prior work often addresses this by predicting future model weights. However, full model prediction is prohibitively expensive for even reasonably sized models. Thus, recent methods only predict the classifier layer, limiting generalization by failing to adjust other model components. To address this, we propose Temporal Expert Averaging (TEA), a novel and scalable TDG framework that updates the entire model using weight averaging to maximize generalization potential while minimizing computational costs. Our theoretical analysis guides us to two steps that enhance generalization to future domains. First, we create expert models with functional diversity yet parameter similarity by fine-tuning a domain-agnostic base model on individual temporal domains while constraining weight changes. Second, we optimize the bias-variance tradeoff through adaptive averaging coefficients derived from modeling temporal weight trajectories in a principal component subspace. Expert’s contributions are based on their projected proximity to future domains. Extensive experiments across 7 TDG benchmarks, 5 models, and 2 TDG settings shows TEA outperforms prior TDG methods by up to 69% while being up to 60x more efficient.

We propose a novel supervised learning approach for political ideology prediction (PIP) that is capable of predicting out-of-distribution inputs. This problem is motivated by the fact that manual data-labeling is expensive, while self-reported labels are often scarce and exhibit significant selection bias. We propose a novel statistical model that decomposes the document embeddings into a linear superposition of two vectors; a latent neutral context vector independent of ideology, and a latent position vector aligned with ideology. We train an end-to-end model that has intermediate contextual and positional vectors as outputs. At deployment time, our model predicts labels for input documents by exclusively leveraging the predicted positional vectors. On two benchmark datasets we show that our model is capable of outputting predictions even when trained with as little as 5% biased data, and is significantly more accurate than the state-of-the-art. Through crowd-sourcing we validate the neutrality of contextual vectors, and show that context filtering results in ideological concentration, allowing for prediction on out-of-distribution examples.

We design a generic framework for learning a robust text classification model that achieves high accuracy under different selection budgets (a.k.a selection rates) at test-time. We take a different approach from existing methods and learn to dynamically filter a large fraction of unimportant words by a low-complexity selector such that any high-complexity state-of-art classifier only needs to process a small fraction of text, relevant for the target task. To this end, we propose a data aggregation method to train the classifier, allowing it to achieve competitive performance on fractured sentences. On four benchmark text classification tasks, we demonstrate that the framework gains consistent speedup with little degradation in accuracy on various selection budgets.