Fairness in Link Prediction Beyond Demographic Parity: A Reproducibility Study

In fair ranked link prediction, demographic parity ($Δ_\mathrm{DP}$) is a common fairness metric. Yet, Mattos et al. (2025) argue that it fails to detect exposure bias because it ignores where links appear in the ranking. In this study, we reproduce this claim by showing that $Δ_\mathrm{DP}$ can indicate aggregate parity even when some subgroup-pair links are systematically ranked lower than others. The proposed rank-aware Normalized Discounted KL-divergence (NDKL), however, does detect such disparities. We also reproduce the effectiveness of MORAL, a post-processing method that improves exposure-based fairness while maintaining competitive utility. Beyond reproduction, we assess robustness using synthetic homophily settings, categorical sensitive attributes, and additional fairness and utility metrics, including subgroup-pair-adapted Attention-Weighted Rank Fairness (AWRF). Overall, our results show that exposure-based metrics uncover biases hidden by $Δ_\mathrm{DP}$ and that MORAL reduces these biases with minimal utility loss across diverse settings and datasets. We release a corrected, reproducible implementation at https://github.com/Floris93100/reproducing-MORAL.

XFeat Revisited: Reproducibility and Evaluation of a Lightweight Image Matcher

We present a reproducibility study of XFeat, a lightweight local feature extractor and matcher designed to identify corresponding points across images efficiently on resource-constrained hardware. We re-implement the architecture based on the paper and supplementary material, re-evaluate the authors' released checkpoint alongside our re-implementation, and conduct additional architectural ablations to examine design choices that were not fully justified in the original work. This distinction between re-evaluation and reproduction is important, as the paper, supplement, and public code differ in several implementation details, including the backbone layout, fusion block, and training losses. Empirically, our reproduced models closely match and, in some cases, outperform the re-evaluated original checkpoint on MegaDepth-1500 and ScanNet-1500, supporting the main claim that XFeat provides a strong accuracy-efficiency trade-off for standard image-matching benchmarks. Our ablations provide a more nuanced view of two architectural arguments from the original paper. In particular, the parallel keypoint branch is important for semi-dense matching, but its benefit is less pronounced than originally claimed, while the evidence for the specific placement of the single skip-connection remains inconclusive. Finally, we reproduce the original downstream evaluations and find close agreement for homography estimation, while Aachen visual localization remains below the reported results, even for the released checkpoint, suggesting sensitivity to underspecified evaluation details. We then extend the analysis to zero-shot out-of-distribution and cross-modal matching across retinal, thermal-visible, and multimodal remote-sensing imagery, where XFeat remains effective in some settings but degrades sharply under severe modality shifts.

Do All LLMs Know When They're Being Harmful? A Reproducibility Study of Latent-Space Safety Probes Across Model Families

Khatri et al. (2026) [DOI: 10.1109/DSN-W70714.2026.00027] show that lightweight MLP probes on final-layer activations of a single 8B model (LLaMA-3.1-8B) detect harmful prompts at F1 competitive with guard models 1000x larger, using one probe per benchmark. We reproduce this pipeline end-to-end and extend it along two axes the original study leaves open. First, we test whether the result generalizes across other model architecture and scale by training identical probes on activations from models like Gemma-4-E4B, Mistral-7B-v0.3, and Qwen2-7B, using the three benchmarks (WildJailbreak, BeaverTails, AEGIS 2.0). Second, we test how much of the reported performance is affected by non-determinism during inference by repeating extraction under five random seeds and measuring the variance of F1 scores. Our results reproduce the original LLaMA model benchmarks within 0.37 percentage points of the original F1 scores (and within 0.2 points on BeaverTails). We find that the original MLP probe architecture extends to other model families with F1 scores within a point of the values reported for LLaMA-3.1-8B. Our experiments varying seed values reveal an interesting observation: final token latent vectors remained the same for all tested architectures irrespective of the seed values used.

A Reproducibility Study of Partial Residual Ablations in Pre-LN Transformers

Residual connections are a fundamental component of transformer architectures, yet the roles of the attention and feed-forward residual pathways remain poorly understood when considered independently. This paper presents a reproducibility study of partial residual ablations in Pre-LN GPT-style transformers trained at two scales (10M and 124M parameters). I compare four architectural configurations by selectively removing the attention residual connection, the feed-forward residual connection, or both. Across all experiments, removing the attention residual (FFNOnly) consistently causes deterministic collapse to the No-Residual performance floor. In contrast, removing the feed-forward residual (AttnOnly) exhibits a reproducible recovery effect at 10M scale under a controlled 8-seed deterministic study, while its behavior at 124M remains unresolved because of substantial seed variance. During the investigation, I identified and corrected an experimental measurement confound in runtime gain scaling and document both the failed intermediate reproduction and the subsequent controlled replication. Based on the empirical results, I propose a cross-position routing hypothesis to explain the observed asymmetry while explicitly distinguishing confirmed findings from unresolved questions. To support reproducibility, I release the complete source code, experiment configurations, checkpoints, training logs, and all experimental results, including intermediate non-reproducing runs.

Rethinking CD: A Reproducibility Study and Extension on the Ineffectiveness of Contrastive Decoding at Mitigating Object Hallucinations in MLLMs

Contrastive decoding (CD) has been proposed as a training-free strategy for mitigating object hallucinations in multimodal large language models (MLLMs), with reported gains on benchmarks such as POPE. However, recent work has questioned whether these gains reflect genuine improvements in visual grounding. In this study, we reproduce and extend the findings of "The Mirage of Performance Gains: Why Contrastive Decoding Fails to Mitigate Object Hallucinations in MLLMs." Specifically, we test the claim that CD induces a unidirectional output distribution shift in discriminative datasets and examine its generalizability across datasets. We also verify that the adaptive plausibility constraint (APC) reduces sampling to greedy search on both discriminative and generative benchmarks. Beyond reproduction, we rigorously study the effects of CD across generative and discriminative datasets. We conduct several experiments that provide additional insights: we analyze the logit distributions induced by different CD strategies on generative datasets, propose a proxy method and compare its performance against CD techniques, and investigate how hallucination signals propagate through each layer of the expert and amateur models. Experimental results across MME, POPE, and CHAIR using LLaVA and Qwen validate the original claims and show that the apparent improvements from CD are often spurious and do not consistently translate into stronger visual grounding for reducing hallucinations. These findings challenge the effectiveness of current contrastive decoding strategies and motivate the development of more reliable approaches for mitigating hallucinations in MLLMs.

Reproducibility Study of "AlphaEdit: Null-Space Constrained Knowledge Editing for Language Models"

Fang et al. (2025) introduced a null-space constrained projection, named AlphaEdit, for locate-then-edit knowledge editing methods, theoretically guaranteeing that edits do not disrupt previously preserved knowledge, and reports substantial gains over existing editing methods on LLaMA3, GPT2-XL, and GPT-J. In this work, we present a reproducibility study of AlphaEdit, reproducing its reported results under the original experimental setup and extending the evaluation along three axes: new model architectures, additional downstream benchmarks, and substantially longer sequential editing horizons. We successfully reproduce AlphaEdit's reported metrics across the original models, though we identify a discrepancy in the reported fluency and consistency metric. Extending AlphaEdit to newer model families, we find that its advantage does not generalize uniformly, which we trace to architectural assumptions in the locate-then-edit paradigm that are violated by these newer models. We further stress-test AlphaEdit's central sequential-editing claim by extending the number of edits well beyond those evaluated in the original paper, and find that performance, which is stable at the originally reported scale, degrades as edits reach a much higher count, indicating that the null-space projection's protection against catastrophic forgetting is bounded rather than unconditional. Finally, we extend evaluation of edited models on three extra benchmarks, namely, BoolQ, HellaSwag, and XSTest, and we find that large-scale sequential editing degrades both general downstream task competence and safety-relevant refusal behavior. Our results confirm that AlphaEdit performs as reported within its original scope, while showing that its core theoretical guarantees are sensitive to model architecture and editing scale in ways that have practical implications for its deployment.

Revisiting Vul-RAG: Reproducibility and Replicability of RAG-based Vulnerability Detection with Open-Weight Models

Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong potential for automated software vulnerability detection, particularly in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) settings. However, for approaches relying on proprietary models and APIs, reproducibility and replicability remain largely unexplored, raising the question of whether reported results generalize or depend primarily on specific model choices. In this work, we present a reproducibility study of Vul-RAG, a RAG-based framework for source code vulnerability detection that enhances LLMs with high-level vulnerability knowledge. We first replicate the results in a fully local and open-weights setting using the reported open-weight baseline models. We then extend the evaluation to a diverse set of recent open-weight LLMs, including code-specialized, general-purpose, and reasoning models of varying parameter sizes. The results confirm that the findings of Vul-RAG are reproducible under local deployment, but with minor deviations. Across all evaluated models, we observe a performance plateau at approximately 0.30 pairwise accuracy (code pairs for which both the vulnerable and the patched function are correctly classified). Notably, this plateau persists even for more recent and advanced models, indicating that improvements in model capacity alone do not substantially enhance performance. Finally, we discuss practical implications and trade-offs between detection effectiveness, model capabilities, and model scale. Implementation and evaluation artifacts are publicly available at https://github.com/hs-esslingen-it-security/revisiting-Vul-RAG.

A Reproducibility Study of LLM-Based Query Reformulation

Large Language Models (LLMs) are now widely used for query reformulation and expansion in Information Retrieval, with many studies reporting substantial effectiveness gains. However, these results are typically obtained under heterogeneous experimental conditions, making it difficult to assess which findings are reproducible and which depend on specific implementation choices. In this work, we present a systematic reproducibility and comparative study of ten representative LLM-based query reformulation methods under a unified and strictly controlled experimental framework. We evaluate methods across two architectural LLM families at two parameter scales, three retrieval paradigms (lexical, learned sparse, and dense), and nine benchmark datasets spanning TREC Deep Learning and BEIR. Our results show that reformulation gains are strongly conditioned on the retrieval paradigm, that improvements observed under lexical retrieval do not consistently transfer to neural retrievers, and that larger LLMs do not uniformly yield better downstream performance. These findings clarify the stability and limits of reported gains in prior work. To enable transparent replication and ongoing comparison, we release all prompts, configurations, evaluation scripts, and run files through QueryGym, an open-source reformulation toolkit with a public leaderboard.\footnote{https://leaderboard.querygym.com}