Analog circuit topology synthesis is integral to Electronic Design Automation (EDA), enabling the automated creation of circuit structures tailored to specific design requirements. However, the vast design search space and strict constraint adherence make efficient synthesis challenging. Leveraging the versatility of Large Language Models (LLMs), we propose AUTOCIRCUIT-RL, a novel reinforcement learning (RL)-based framework for automated analog circuit synthesis. The framework operates in two phases: instruction tuning, where an LLM learns to generate circuit topologies from structured prompts encoding design constraints, and RL refinement, which further improves the instruction-tuned model using reward models that evaluate validity, efficiency, and output voltage. The refined model is then used directly to generate topologies that satisfy the design constraints. Empirical results show that AUTOCIRCUIT-RL generates ~12% more valid circuits and improves efficiency by ~14% compared to the best baselines, while reducing duplicate generation rates by ~38%. It achieves over 60% success in synthesizing valid circuits with limited training data, demonstrating strong generalization. These findings highlight the framework's effectiveness in scaling to complex circuits while maintaining efficiency and constraint adherence, marking a significant advancement in AI-driven circuit design.

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing (NLP) and expanded their applications across diverse domains. However, despite their impressive capabilities, LLMs have been shown to reflect and perpetuate harmful societal biases, including those based on ethnicity, gender, and religion. A critical and underexplored issue is the reinforcement of caste-based biases, particularly towards India's marginalized caste groups such as Dalits and Shudras. In this paper, we address this gap by proposing DECASTE, a novel, multi-dimensional framework designed to detect and assess both implicit and explicit caste biases in LLMs. Our approach evaluates caste fairness across four dimensions: socio-cultural, economic, educational, and political, using a range of customized prompting strategies. By benchmarking several state-of-the-art LLMs, we reveal that these models systematically reinforce caste biases, with significant disparities observed in the treatment of oppressed versus dominant caste groups. For example, bias scores are notably elevated when comparing Dalits and Shudras with dominant caste groups, reflecting societal prejudices that persist in model outputs. These results expose the subtle yet pervasive caste biases in LLMs and emphasize the need for more comprehensive and inclusive bias evaluation methodologies that assess the potential risks of deploying such models in real-world contexts.