Virtual influencers~(VIs) -- digitally synthetic social-media personas -- attract audiences whose discourse appears qualitatively different from discourse around human influencers~(HIs). Existing work characterises this difference through surveys or aggregate engagement statistics, which reveal \emph{what} audiences say but not \emph{how} multiple signals co-occur. We propose a two-layer, structure-first framework grounded in Formal Concept Analysis~(FCA) and association rule mining. The first layer applies FCA with support-based iceberg filtering to weekly-aggregated comment data, extracting discourse profiles -- weekly co-occurrence bundles of sentiment, Big Five personality cues, and topic tags. The second layer mines association rules at the comment level, revealing personality--sentiment--topic dependencies invisible to frequency-table analysis. Applied to YouTube comments from three VI--HI influencer pairs, the two-layer analysis reveals a consistent structural divergence: HI discourse concentrates into a single, emotionally regulated (stability-centred) regime (low neuroticism anchoring positivity), while VI discourse supports three structurally distinct discourse modes, including an appearance-discourse cluster absent from HI despite near-equal marginal prevalence. Topic-specific analyses further show that VI contexts exhibit negative sentiment in psychologically sensitive domains (mental health, body image, artificial identity) relative to HI contexts. Our results position FCA as a principled tool for multi-signal discourse analysis and demonstrate that virtuality reshapes not just what audiences say, but the underlying grammar of how signals co-occur in their reactions.
Language models increasingly "show their work" by writing step-by-step reasoning before answering. But are these reasoning steps genuinely used, or decorative narratives generated after the model has already decided? Consider: a medical AI writes "The patient's eosinophilia and livedo reticularis following catheterization suggest cholesterol embolization syndrome. Answer: B." If we remove the eosinophilia observation, does the diagnosis change? For most frontier models, the answer is no - the step was decorative. We introduce step-level evaluation: remove one reasoning sentence at a time and check whether the answer changes. This simple test requires only API access -- no model weights -- and costs approximately $1-2 per model per task. Testing 10 frontier models (GPT-5.4, Claude Opus, DeepSeek-V3.2, MiniMax-M2.5, Kimi-K2.5, and others) across sentiment, mathematics, topic classification, and medical QA (N=376-500 each), the majority produce decorative reasoning: removing any step changes the answer less than 17% of the time, while any single step alone recovers the answer. This holds even on math, where smaller models (0.8-8B) show genuine step dependence (55% necessity). Two models break the pattern: MiniMax-M2.5 on sentiment (37% necessity) and Kimi-K2.5 on topic classification (39%) - but both shortcut other tasks. Faithfulness is model-specific and task-specific. We also discover "output rigidity": on the same medical questions, Claude Opus writes 11 diagnostic steps while GPT-OSS-120B outputs a single token. Mechanistic analysis (attention patterns) confirms that CoT attention drops more in late layers for decorative tasks (33%) than faithful ones (20%). Implications: step-by-step explanations from frontier models are largely decorative, per-model per-domain evaluation is essential, and training objectives - not scale - determine whether reasoning is genuine.
Sentiment signals derived from sparse news are commonly used in financial analysis and technology monitoring, yet transforming raw article-level observations into reliable temporal series remains a largely unsolved engineering problem. Rather than treating this as a classification challenge, we propose to frame it as a causal signal reconstruction problem: given probabilistic sentiment outputs from a fixed classifier, recover a stable latent sentiment series that is robust to the structural pathologies of news data such as sparsity, redundancy, and classifier uncertainty. We present a modular three-stage pipeline that (i) aggregates article-level scores onto a regular temporal grid with uncertainty-aware and redundancy-aware weights, (ii) fills coverage gaps through strictly causal projection rules, and (iii) applies causal smoothing to reduce residual noise. Because ground-truth longitudinal sentiment labels are typically unavailable, we introduce a label-free evaluation framework based on signal stability diagnostics, information preservation lag proxies, and counterfactual tests for causality compliance and redundancy robustness. As a secondary external check, we evaluate the consistency of reconstructed signals against stock-price data for a multi-firm dataset of AI-related news titles (November 2024 to February 2026). The key empirical finding is a three-week lead lag pattern between reconstructed sentiment and price that persists across all tested pipeline configurations and aggregation regimes, a structural regularity more informative than any single correlation coefficient. Overall, the results support the view that stable, deployable sentiment indicators require careful reconstruction, not only better classifiers.
We introduce a new agentic artificial intelligence (AI) platform for portfolio management. Our architecture consists of three layers. First, two large language model (LLM) agents are assigned specialized tasks: one agent screens for firms with desirable fundamentals, while a sentiment analysis agent screens for firms with desirable news. Second, these agents deliberate to generate and agree upon buy and sell signals from a large portfolio, substantially narrowing the pool of candidate assets. Finally, we apply a high-dimensional precision matrix estimation procedure to determine optimal portfolio weights. A defining theoretical feature of our framework is that the number of assets in the portfolio is itself a random variable, realized through the screening process. We introduce the concept of sensible screening and establish that, under mild screening errors, the squared Sharpe ratio of the screened portfolio consistently estimates its target. Empirically, our method achieves superior Sharpe ratios relative to an unscreened baseline portfolio and to conventional screening approaches, evaluated on S&P 500 data over the period 2020--2024.
Analyzing news coverage in multilingual societies can offer valuable insights into the dynamics of public discourse and the development of collective narratives, yet comprehensive studies that account for linguistic and cultural diversity within national media ecosystems remain limited, particularly in complex contexts such as Switzerland. This paper studies temporal trends in Swiss digital media across the country's three main linguistic regions, French, German, and Italian, using a triangulated methodology that combines quantitative analyses with qualitative insights. We collected and processed over 1.7 million news articles, applying lexical metrics, named entity recognition and Wikidata-based linking, targeted sentiment analysis, and consensus-based change-point detection. To enable principled cross-language comparisons and to connect to theories of domestication and cultural proximity, we derive domestication profiles together with a proximity salience ratio. Our analysis spans thematic, recurrent, and singular events. By integrating quantitative data with qualitative interpretation, we provide new insights into the dynamics of Swiss digital media and demonstrate the usefulness of triangulation in media studies. The findings reveal distinct temporal patterns and highlight how linguistic and cultural contexts influence reporting. Our approach offers a framework applicable to other multilingual or culturally diverse media environments, contributing to a deeper understanding of how news is shaped by linguistic and cultural factors.
This paper proposes a refutation-validated framework for aspect-based sentiment analysis in financial markets, addressing the limitations of correlational studies that cannot distinguish genuine associations from spurious ones. Using X data for the energy sector, we test whether aspect-level sentiment signals show robust, refutation-validated relationships with equity returns. Our pipeline combines net-ratio scoring with z-normalization, OLS with Newey West HAC errors, and refutation tests including placebo, random common cause, subset stability, and bootstrap. Across six energy tickers, only a few associations survive all checks, while renewables show aspect and horizon specific responses. While not establishing causality, the framework provides statistically robust, directionally interpretable signals, with limited sample size (six stocks, one quarter) constraining generalizability and framing this work as a methodological proof of concept.
Users often rely on Large Language Models (LLMs) for processing multiple documents or performing analysis over a number of instances. For example, analysing the overall sentiment of a number of movie reviews requires an LLM to process the sentiment of each review individually in order to provide a final aggregated answer. While LLM performance on such individual tasks is generally high, there has been little research on how LLMs perform when dealing with multi-instance inputs. In this paper, we perform a comprehensive evaluation of the multi-instance processing (MIP) ability of LLMs for tasks in which they excel individually. The results show that all LLMs follow a pattern of slight performance degradation for small numbers of instances (approximately 20-100), followed by a performance collapse on larger instance counts. Crucially, our analysis shows that while context length is associated with this degradation, the number of instances has a stronger effect on the final results. This finding suggests that when optimising LLM performance for MIP, attention should be paid to both context length and, in particular, instance count.
Most research in urban informatics and tourism focuses on mitigating overtourism in dense global cities. However, for regions experiencing demographic decline and structural stagnation, the primary risk is "under-vibrancy", a condition where low visitor density suppresses economic activity and diminishes satisfaction. This paper introduces the Distributed Human Data Engine (DHDE), a socio-technical framework previously validated in biological crisis management, and adapts it for regional economic flow optimization. Using high-granularity data from Japan's least-visited prefecture (Fukui), we utilize an AI-driven decision support system (DSS) to analyze two datasets: a raw Fukui spending database (90,350 records) and a regional standardized sentiment database (97,719 responses). The system achieves in-sample explanatory power of 81% (R^2 = 0.810) and out-of-sample predictive performance of 68% (R^2 = 0.683). We quantify an annual opportunity gap of 865,917 unrealized visits, equivalent to approximately 11.96 billion yen (USD 76.2 million) in lost revenue. We propose a dual-nudge governance architecture leveraging the DHDE to redistribute cross-prefectural flows and reduce economic leakage.
Human annotation is central to NLP evaluation, yet subjective tasks often exhibit substantial variability across annotators. While large language models (LLMs) can provide structured reasoning to support annotation, their influence on human annotation behavior remains unclear. We introduce ReasonAlign, a reasoning-based annotation scaffold that exposes LLM-generated explanations while withholding predicted labels. We frame this as a controlled study of how reasoning affects human annotation behavior, rather than a full evaluation of annotation accuracy. Using a two-pass protocol inspired by Delphi-style revision, annotators first label instances independently and then revise their decisions after viewing model-generated reasoning. We evaluate the approach on sentiment classification and opinion detection tasks, analyzing changes in inter-annotator agreement and revision behavior. To quantify these effects, we introduce the Annotator Effort Proxy (AEP), a metric capturing the proportion of labels revised after exposure to reasoning. Our results show that exposure to reasoning is associated with increased agreement alongside minimal revision, suggesting that reasoning primarily helps resolve ambiguous cases without inducing widespread changes. These findings provide insight into how reasoning explanations shape annotation consistency and highlight reasoning-based scaffolds as a practical mechanism for supporting human-AI annotation workflows.
We present FinRL-X, a modular and deployment-consistent trading architecture that unifies data processing, strategy construction, backtesting, and broker execution under a weight-centric interface. While existing open-source platforms are often backtesting- or model-centric, they rarely provide system-level consistency between research evaluation and live deployment. FinRL-X addresses this gap through a composable strategy pipeline that integrates stock selection, portfolio allocation, timing, and portfolio-level risk overlays within a unified protocol. The framework supports both rule-based and AI-driven components, including reinforcement learning allocators and LLM-based sentiment signals, without altering downstream execution semantics. FinRL-X provides an extensible foundation for reproducible, end-to-end quantitative trading research and deployment. The official FinRL-X implementation is available at https://github.com/AI4Finance-Foundation/FinRL-Trading.