Choosing a Model, Shaping a Future: Comparing LLM Perspectives on Sustainability and its Relationship with AI

As organizations increasingly rely on AI systems for decision support in sustainability contexts, it becomes critical to understand the inherent biases and perspectives embedded in Large Language Models (LLMs). This study systematically investigates how five state-of-the-art LLMs -- Claude, DeepSeek, GPT, LLaMA, and Mistral - conceptualize sustainability and its relationship with AI. We administered validated, psychometric sustainability-related questionnaires - each 100 times per model -- to capture response patterns and variability. Our findings revealed significant inter-model differences: For example, GPT exhibited skepticism about the compatibility of AI and sustainability, whereas LLaMA demonstrated extreme techno-optimism with perfect scores for several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Models also diverged in attributing institutional responsibility for AI and sustainability integration, a results that holds implications for technology governance approaches. Our results demonstrate that model selection could substantially influence organizational sustainability strategies, highlighting the need for awareness of model-specific biases when deploying LLMs for sustainability-related decision-making.

Whose Morality Do They Speak? Unraveling Cultural Bias in Multilingual Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) have become integral tools in diverse domains, yet their moral reasoning capabilities across cultural and linguistic contexts remain underexplored. This study investigates whether multilingual LLMs, such as GPT-3.5-Turbo, GPT-4o-mini, Llama 3.1, and MistralNeMo, reflect culturally specific moral values or impose dominant moral norms, particularly those rooted in English. Using the updated Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ-2) in eight languages, Arabic, Farsi, English, Spanish, Japanese, Chinese, French, and Russian, the study analyzes the models' adherence to six core moral foundations: care, equality, proportionality, loyalty, authority, and purity. The results reveal significant cultural and linguistic variability, challenging the assumption of universal moral consistency in LLMs. Although some models demonstrate adaptability to diverse contexts, others exhibit biases influenced by the composition of the training data. These findings underscore the need for culturally inclusive model development to improve fairness and trust in multilingual AI systems.

Reviewer Assignment Problem: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Appropriate reviewer assignment significantly impacts the quality of proposal evaluation, as accurate and fair reviews are contingent on their assignment to relevant reviewers. The crucial task of assigning reviewers to submitted proposals is the starting point of the review process and is also known as the reviewer assignment problem (RAP). Due to the obvious restrictions of manual assignment, journal editors, conference organizers, and grant managers demand automatic reviewer assignment approaches. Many studies have proposed assignment solutions in response to the demand for automated procedures since 1992. The primary objective of this survey paper is to provide scholars and practitioners with a comprehensive overview of available research on the RAP. To achieve this goal, this article presents an in-depth systematic review of 103 publications in the field of reviewer assignment published in the past three decades and available in the Web of Science, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and Semantic Scholar databases. This review paper classified and discussed the RAP approaches into two broad categories and numerous subcategories based on their underlying techniques. Furthermore, potential future research directions for each category are presented. This survey shows that the research on the RAP is becoming more significant and that more effort is required to develop new approaches and a framework.