Real Talk, Virtual Faces: A Formal Concept Analysis of Personality and Sentiment in Influencer Audiences

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.

VILLA: Versatile Information Retrieval From Scientific Literature Using Large LAnguage Models

The lack of high-quality ground truth datasets to train machine learning (ML) models impedes the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) for science research. Scientific information extraction (SIE) from the literature using LLMs is emerging as a powerful approach to automate the creation of these datasets. However, existing LLM-based approaches and benchmarking studies for SIE focus on broad topics such as biomedicine and chemistry, are limited to choice-based tasks, and focus on extracting information from short and well-formatted text. The potential of SIE methods in complex, open-ended tasks is considerably under-explored. In this study, we used a domain that has been virtually ignored in SIE, namely virology, to address these research gaps. We design a unique, open-ended SIE task of extracting mutations in a given virus that modify its interaction with the host. We develop a new, multi-step retrieval augmented generation (RAG) framework called VILLA for SIE. In parallel, we curate a novel dataset of 629 mutations in ten influenza A virus proteins obtained from 239 scientific publications to serve as ground truth for the mutation extraction task. Finally, we demonstrate VILLA's superior performance using a novel and comprehensive evaluation and comparison with vanilla RAG and other state-of-the art RAG- and agent-based tools for SIE.

Knowledge Access Beats Model Size: Memory Augmented Routing for Persistent AI Agents

Production AI agents frequently receive user-specific queries that are highly repetitive, with up to 47\% being semantically similar to prior interactions, yet each query is typically processed with the same computational cost. We argue that this redundancy can be exploited through conversational memory, transforming repetition from a cost burden into an efficiency advantage. We propose a memory-augmented inference framework in which a lightweight 8B-parameter model leverages retrieved conversational context to answer all queries via a low-cost inference path. Without any additional training or labeled data, this approach achieves 30.5\% F1, recovering 69\% of the performance of a full-context 235B model while reducing effective cost by 96\%. Notably, a 235B model without memory (13.7\% F1) underperforms even the standalone 8B model (15.4\% F1), indicating that for user-specific queries, access to relevant knowledge outweighs model scale. We further analyze the role of routing and confidence. At practical confidence thresholds, routing alone already directs 96\% of queries to the small model, but yields poor accuracy (13.0\% F1) due to confident hallucinations. Memory does not substantially alter routing decisions; instead, it improves correctness by grounding responses in retrieved user-specific information. As conversational memory accumulates over time, coverage of recurring topics increases, further narrowing the performance gap. We evaluate on 152 LoCoMo questions (Qwen3-8B/235B) and 500 LongMemEval questions. Incorporating hybrid retrieval (BM25 + cosine similarity) improves performance by an additional +7.7 F1, demonstrating that retrieval quality directly enhances end-to-end system performance. Overall, our results highlight that memory, rather than model size, is the primary driver of accuracy and efficiency in persistent AI agents.

When AI Shows Its Work, Is It Actually Working? Step-Level Evaluation Reveals Frontier Language Models Frequently Bypass Their Own Reasoning

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.

On the Failure of Topic-Matched Contrast Baselines in Multi-Directional Refusal Abliteration

Inasmuch as the removal of refusal behavior from instruction-tuned language models by directional abliteration requires the extraction of refusal-mediating directions from the residual stream activation space, and inasmuch as the construction of the contrast baseline against which harmful prompt activations are compared has been treated in the existing literature as an implementation detail rather than a methodological concern, the present work investigates whether a topically matched contrast baseline yields superior refusal directions. The investigation is carried out on the Qwen~3.5 2B model using per-category matched prompt pairs, per-class Self-Organizing Map extraction, and Singular Value Decomposition orthogonalization. It was found that topic-matched contrast produces no functional refusal directions at any tested weight level on any tested layer, while unmatched contrast on the same model, same extraction code, and same evaluation protocol achieves complete refusal elimination on six layers. The geometric analysis of the failure establishes that topic-matched subtraction cancels the dominant activation component shared between harmful and harmless prompts of the same subject, reducing the extracted direction magnitude below the threshold at which weight-matrix projection perturbs the residual stream. The implications for the design of contrast baselines in abliteration research are discussed.

Politics of Questions in News: A Mixed-Methods Study of Interrogative Stances as Markers of Voice and Power

Interrogatives in news discourse have been examined in linguistics and conversation analysis, but mostly in broadcast interviews and relatively small, often English-language corpora, while large-scale computational studies of news rarely distinguish interrogatives from declaratives or differentiate their functions. This paper brings these strands together through a mixed-methods study of the "Politics of Questions" in contemporary French-language digital news. Using over one million articles published between January 2023 and June 2024, we automatically detect interrogative stances, approximate their functional types, and locate textual answers when present, linking these quantitative measures to a qualitatively annotated subcorpus grounded in semantic and pragmatic theories of questions. Interrogatives are sparse but systematically patterned: they mainly introduce or organize issues, with most remaining cases being information-seeking or echo-like, while explicitly leading or tag questions are rare. Although their density and mix vary across outlets and topics, our heuristic suggests that questions are overwhelmingly taken up within the same article and usually linked to a subsequent answer-like span, most often in the journalist's narrative voice and less often through quoted speech. Interrogative contexts are densely populated with named individuals, organizations, and places, whereas publics and broad social groups are mentioned much less frequently, suggesting that interrogative discourse tends to foreground already prominent actors and places and thus exhibits strong personalization. We show how interrogative stance, textual uptake, and voice can be operationalized at corpus scale, and argue that combining computational methods with pragmatic and sociological perspectives can help account for how questioning practices structure contemporary news discourse.

Timing In stand-up Comedy: Text, Audio, Laughter, Kinesics (TIC-TALK): Pipeline and Database for the Multimodal Study of Comedic Timing

Stand-up comedy, and humor in general, are often studied through their verbal content. Yet live performance relies just as much on embodied presence and audience feedback. We introduce TIC-TALK, a multimodal resource with 5,400+ temporally aligned topic segments capturing language, gesture, and audience response across 90 professionally filmed stand-up comedy specials (2015-2024). The pipeline combines BERTopic for 60 s thematic segmentation with dense sentence embeddings, Whisper-AT for 0.8 s laughter detection, a fine-tuned YOLOv8-cls shot classifier, and YOLOv8s-pose for raw keypoint extraction at 1 fps. Raw 17-joint skeletal coordinates are retained without prior clustering, enabling the computation of continuous kinematic signals-arm spread, kinetic energy, and trunk lean-that serve as proxies for performance dynamics. All streams are aligned by hierarchical temporal containment without resampling, and each topic segment stores its sentence-BERT embedding for downstream similarity and clustering tasks. As a concrete use case, we study laughter dynamics across 24 thematic topics: kinetic energy negatively predicts audience laughter rate (r = -0.75, N = 24), consistent with a stillness-before-punchline pattern; personal and bodily content elicits more laughter than geopolitical themes; and shot close-up proportion correlates positively with laughter (r = +0.28), consistent with reactive montage.

When Documents Disagree: Measuring Institutional Variation in Transplant Guidance with Retrieval-Augmented Language Models

Patient education materials for solid-organ transplantation vary substantially across U.S. centers, yet no systematic method exists to quantify this heterogeneity at scale. We introduce a framework that grounds the same patient questions in different centers' handbooks using retrieval-augmented language models and compares the resulting answers using a five-label consistency taxonomy. Applied to 102 handbooks from 23 centers and 1,115 benchmark questions, the framework quantifies heterogeneity across four dimensions: question, topic, organ, and center. We find that 20.8% of non-absent pairwise comparisons exhibit clinically meaningful divergence, concentrated in condition monitoring and lifestyle topics. Coverage gaps are even more prominent: 96.2% of question-handbook pairs miss relevant content, with reproductive health at 95.1% absence. Center-level divergence profiles are stable and interpretable, where heterogeneity reflects systematic institutional differences, likely due to patient diversity. These findings expose an information gap in transplant patient education materials, with document-grounded medical question answering highlighting opportunities for content improvement.

AwesomeLit: Towards Hypothesis Generation with Agent-Supported Literature Research

There are different goals for literature research, from understanding an unfamiliar topic to generate hypothesis for the next research project. The nature of literature research also varies according to user's familiarity level of the topic. For inexperienced researchers, identifying gaps in the existing literature and generating feasible hypothesis are crucial but challenging. While general ``deep research'' tools can be used, they are not designed for such use case, thus often not effective. In addition, the ``black box" nature and hallucination of Large Language Models (LLMs) often lead to distrust. In this paper, we introduce a human-agent collaborative visualization system AwesomeLit to address this need. It has several novel features: a transparent user-steerable agentic workflow; a dynamically generated query exploring tree, visualizing the exploration path and provenance; and a semantic similarity view, depicting the relationships between papers. It enables users to transition from general intentions to detailed research topics. Finally, a qualitative study involving several early researchers showed that AwesomeLit is effective in helping users explore unfamiliar topics, identify promising research directions, and improve confidence in research results.

Reddit After Roe: A Computational Analysis of Abortion Narratives and Barriers in the Wake of Dobbs

The 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization reshaped the reproductive rights landscape, introducing new uncertainty and barriers to abortion access. We present a large-scale computational analysis of abortion discourse on Reddit, examining how barriers to access are articulated across information-seeking and information-sharing behaviors, different stages of abortion (before, during, after), and three phases of the Dobbs decision in 2022. Drawing on more than 17,000 posts from four abortion-related subreddits, we employed a multi-step pipeline to classify posts by information type, abortion stage, barrier category, and expressed emotions. Using a codebook of eight barrier types, including legal, financial, emotional, and social obstacles, we analyzed their associations with emotions and information behaviors. Topic modeling of model-generated barrier rationales further revealed how discourse evolved in response to shifting legal and cultural contexts. Our findings show that emotional and psychological barriers consistently dominate abortion narratives online, with emotions such as nervousness, confusion, fear, and sadness prevalent across discourse. By linking information behaviors, barriers, emotions, and temporal dynamics, this study provides a multi-dimensional account of how abortion is navigated in online communities.