Topic modeling is a type of statistical modeling for discovering the abstract topics that occur in a collection of documents.
Understanding affective polarization in online discourse is crucial for evaluating the societal impact of social media interactions. This study presents a novel framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) and domain-informed heuristics to systematically analyze and quantify affective polarization in discussions on divisive topics such as climate change and gun control. Unlike most prior approaches that relied on sentiment analysis or predefined classifiers, our method integrates LLMs to extract stance, affective tone, and agreement patterns from large-scale social media discussions. We then apply a rule-based scoring system capable of quantifying affective polarization even in small conversations consisting of single interactions, based on stance alignment, emotional content, and interaction dynamics. Our analysis reveals distinct polarization patterns that are event dependent: (i) anticipation-driven polarization, where extreme polarization escalates before well-publicized events, and (ii) reactive polarization, where intense affective polarization spikes immediately after sudden, high-impact events. By combining AI-driven content annotation with domain-informed scoring, our framework offers a scalable and interpretable approach to measuring affective polarization. The source code is publicly available at: https://github.com/hasanjawad001/llm-social-media-polarization.
Social scientists employ latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) to find highly specific topics in large corpora, but they often struggle in this task because (1) LDA, in general, takes a significant amount of time to fit on large corpora; (2) unsupervised LDA fragments topics into sub-topics in short documents; (3) semi-supervised LDA fails to identify specific topics defined using seed words. To solve these problems, I have developed a new topic model called distributed asymmetric allocation (DAA) that integrates multiple algorithms for efficiently identifying sentences about important topics in large corpora. I evaluate the ability of DAA to identify politically important topics by fitting it to the transcripts of speeches at the United Nations General Assembly between 1991 and 2017. The results show that DAA can classify sentences significantly more accurately and quickly than LDA thanks to the new algorithms. More generally, the results demonstrate that it is important for social scientists to optimize Dirichlet priors of LDA to perform content analysis accurately.




Choosing the number of topics $T$ in Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) is a key design decision that strongly affects both the statistical fit and interpretability of topic models. In this work, we formulate the selection of $T$ as a discrete black-box optimization problem, where each function evaluation corresponds to training an LDA model and measuring its validation perplexity. Under a fixed evaluation budget, we compare four families of optimizers: two hand-designed evolutionary methods - Genetic Algorithm (GA) and Evolution Strategy (ES) - and two learned, amortized approaches, Preferential Amortized Black-Box Optimization (PABBO) and Sharpness-Aware Black-Box Optimization (SABBO). Our experiments show that, while GA, ES, PABBO, and SABBO eventually reach a similar band of final perplexity, the amortized optimizers are substantially more sample- and time-efficient. SABBO typically identifies a near-optimal topic number after essentially a single evaluation, and PABBO finds competitive configurations within a few evaluations, whereas GA and ES require almost the full budget to approach the same region.
Large language models (LLMs) have made rapid progress in formal theorem proving, yet current benchmarks under-measure the kind of abstraction and library-mediated reasoning that organizes modern mathematics. In parallel with FATE's emphasis on frontier algebra, we introduce LeanCat, a Lean benchmark for category-theoretic formalization -- a unifying language for mathematical structure and a core layer of modern proof engineering -- serving as a stress test of structural, interface-level reasoning. Part I: 1-Categories contains 100 fully formalized statement-level tasks, curated into topic families and three difficulty tiers via an LLM-assisted + human grading process. The best model solves 8.25% of tasks at pass@1 (32.50%/4.17%/0.00% by Easy/Medium/High) and 12.00% at pass@4 (50.00%/4.76%/0.00%). We also evaluate LeanBridge which use LeanExplore to search Mathlib, and observe consistent gains over single-model baselines. LeanCat is intended as a compact, reusable checkpoint for tracking both AI and human progress toward reliable, research-level formalization in Lean.
Modern enterprise retrieval systems must handle short, underspecified queries such as ``foreign transaction fee refund'' and ``recent check status''. In these cases, semantic nuance and metadata matter but per-query large language model (LLM) re-ranking and manual labeling are costly. We present Metadata-Aware Cross-Model Alignment (MACA), which distills a calibrated metadata aware LLM re-ranker into a compact student retriever, avoiding online LLM calls. A metadata-aware prompt verifies the teacher's trustworthiness by checking consistency under permutations and robustness to paraphrases, then supplies listwise scores, hard negatives, and calibrated relevance margins. The student trains with MACA's MetaFusion objective, which combines a metadata conditioned ranking loss with a cross model margin loss so it learns to push the correct answer above semantically similar candidates with mismatched topic, sub-topic, or entity. On a proprietary consumer banking FAQ corpus and BankFAQs, the MACA teacher surpasses a MAFA baseline at Accuracy@1 by five points on the proprietary set and three points on BankFAQs. MACA students substantially outperform pretrained encoders; e.g., on the proprietary corpus MiniLM Accuracy@1 improves from 0.23 to 0.48, while keeping inference free of LLM calls and supporting retrieval-augmented generation.
Explainable artificial intelligence (xAI) has gained significant attention in recent years. Among other things, explainablility for deep neural networks has been a topic of intensive research due to the meteoric rise in prominence of deep neural networks and their "black-box" nature. xAI approaches can be characterized along different dimensions such as their scope (global versus local explanations) or underlying methodologies (statistic-based versus rule-based strategies). Methods generating global explanations aim to provide reasoning process applicable to all possible output classes while local explanation methods focus only on a single, specific class. SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations), a well-known statistical technique, identifies important features of a network. Deep neural network rule extraction method constructs IF-THEN rules that link input conditions to a class. Another approach focuses on generating counterfactuals which help explain how small changes to an input can affect the model's predictions. However, these techniques primarily focus on the input-output relationship and thus neglect the structure of the network in explanation generation. In this work, we propose xDNN(ASP), an explanation generation system for deep neural networks that provides global explanations. Given a neural network model and its training data, xDNN(ASP) extracts a logic program under answer set semantics that-in the ideal case-represents the trained model, i.e., answer sets of the extracted program correspond one-to-one to input-output pairs of the network. We demonstrate experimentally, using two synthetic datasets, that not only the extracted logic program maintains a high-level of accuracy in the prediction task, but it also provides valuable information for the understanding of the model such as the importance of features as well as the impact of hidden nodes on the prediction. The latter can be used as a guide for reducing the number of nodes used in hidden layers, i.e., providing a means for optimizing the network.
Theme detection is a fundamental task in user-centric dialogue systems, aiming to identify the latent topic of each utterance without relying on predefined schemas. Unlike intent induction, which operates within fixed label spaces, theme detection requires cross-dialogue consistency and alignment with personalized user preferences, posing significant challenges. Existing methods often struggle with sparse, short utterances for accurate topic representation and fail to capture user-level thematic preferences across dialogues. To address these challenges, we propose CATCH (Controllable Theme Detection with Contextualized Clustering and Hierarchical Generation), a unified framework that integrates three core components: (1) context-aware topic representation, which enriches utterance-level semantics using surrounding topic segments; (2) preference-guided topic clustering, which jointly models semantic proximity and personalized feedback to align themes across dialogue; and (3) a hierarchical theme generation mechanism designed to suppress noise and produce robust, coherent topic labels. Experiments on a multi-domain customer dialogue benchmark (DSTC-12) demonstrate the effectiveness of CATCH with 8B LLM in both theme clustering and topic generation quality.
As generative AI systems become integrated into real-world applications, organizations increasingly need to be able to understand and interpret their behavior. In particular, decision-makers need to understand what causes generative AI systems to exhibit specific output characteristics. Within this general topic, this paper examines a key question: what is it about the input -- the prompt -- that causes an LLM-based generative AI system to produce output that exhibits specific characteristics, such as toxicity, negative sentiment, or political bias. To examine this question, we adapt a common technique from the Explainable AI literature: counterfactual explanations. We explain why traditional counterfactual explanations cannot be applied directly to generative AI systems, due to several differences in how generative AI systems function. We then propose a flexible framework that adapts counterfactual explanations to non-deterministic, generative AI systems in scenarios where downstream classifiers can reveal key characteristics of their outputs. Based on this framework, we introduce an algorithm for generating prompt-counterfactual explanations (PCEs). Finally, we demonstrate the production of counterfactual explanations for generative AI systems with three case studies, examining different output characteristics (viz., political leaning, toxicity, and sentiment). The case studies further show that PCEs can streamline prompt engineering to suppress undesirable output characteristics and can enhance red-teaming efforts to uncover additional prompts that elicit undesirable outputs. Ultimately, this work lays a foundation for prompt-focused interpretability in generative AI: a capability that will become indispensable as these models are entrusted with higher-stakes tasks and subject to emerging regulatory requirements for transparency and accountability.
Public debates surrounding infrastructure and energy projects involve complex networks of stakeholders, arguments, and evolving narratives. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for anticipating controversies and informing engagement strategies, yet existing tools in media intelligence largely rely on descriptive analytics with limited transparency. This paper presents Stakeholder Suite, a framework deployed in operational contexts for mapping actors, topics, and arguments within public debates. The system combines actor detection, topic modeling, argument extraction and stance classification in a unified pipeline. Tested on multiple energy infrastructure projects as a case study, the approach delivers fine-grained, source-grounded insights while remaining adaptable to diverse domains. The framework achieves strong retrieval precision and stance accuracy, producing arguments judged relevant in 75% of pilot use cases. Beyond quantitative metrics, the tool has proven effective for operational use: helping project teams visualize networks of influence, identify emerging controversies, and support evidence-based decision-making.
The capability of Unified Multimodal Models (UMMs) to apply world knowledge across diverse tasks remains a critical, unresolved challenge. Existing benchmarks fall short, offering only siloed, single-task evaluations with limited diagnostic power. To bridge this gap, we propose AEGIS (\emph{i.e.}, \textbf{A}ssessing \textbf{E}diting, \textbf{G}eneration, \textbf{I}nterpretation-Understanding for \textbf{S}uper-intelligence), a comprehensive multi-task benchmark covering visual understanding, generation, editing, and interleaved generation. AEGIS comprises 1,050 challenging, manually-annotated questions spanning 21 topics (including STEM, humanities, daily life, etc.) and 6 reasoning types. To concretely evaluate the performance of UMMs in world knowledge scope without ambiguous metrics, we further propose Deterministic Checklist-based Evaluation (DCE), a protocol that replaces ambiguous prompt-based scoring with atomic ``Y/N'' judgments, to enhance evaluation reliability. Our extensive experiments reveal that most UMMs exhibit severe world knowledge deficits and that performance degrades significantly with complex reasoning. Additionally, simple plug-in reasoning modules can partially mitigate these vulnerabilities, highlighting a promising direction for future research. These results highlight the importance of world-knowledge-based reasoning as a critical frontier for UMMs.