Topic modeling is a type of statistical modeling for discovering the abstract topics that occur in a collection of documents.
Aspect Extraction (AE) is a key task in Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis (ABSA), yet it remains difficult to apply in low-resource and code-switched contexts like Taglish, a mix of Tagalog and English commonly used in Filipino e-commerce reviews. This paper introduces a comprehensive AE pipeline designed for Taglish, combining rule-based, large language model (LLM)-based, and fine-tuning techniques to address both aspect identification and extraction. A Hierarchical Aspect Framework (HAF) is developed through multi-method topic modeling, along with a dual-mode tagging scheme for explicit and implicit aspects. For aspect identification, four distinct models are evaluated: a Rule-Based system, a Generative LLM (Gemini 2.0 Flash), and two Fine-Tuned Gemma-3 1B models trained on different datasets (Rule-Based vs. LLM-Annotated). Results indicate that the Generative LLM achieved the highest performance across all tasks (Macro F1 0.91), demonstrating superior capability in handling implicit aspects. In contrast, the fine-tuned models exhibited limited performance due to dataset imbalance and architectural capacity constraints. This work contributes a scalable and linguistically adaptive framework for enhancing ABSA in diverse, code-switched environments.
Automatic evaluation of large language model (LLM) responses requires not only factual correctness but also clarity, particularly in political question-answering. While recent datasets provide human annotations for clarity and evasion, the impact of prompt design on automatic clarity evaluation remains underexplored. In this paper, we study prompt-based clarity evaluation using the CLARITY dataset from the SemEval 2026 shared task. We compare a GPT-3.5 baseline provided with the dataset against GPT-5.2 evaluated under three prompting strategies: simple prompting, chain-of-thought prompting, and chain-of-thought with few-shot examples. Model predictions are evaluated against human annotations using accuracy and class-wise metrics for clarity and evasion, along with hierarchical exact match. Results show that GPT-5.2 consistently outperforms the GPT-3.5 baseline on clarity prediction, with accuracy improving from 56 percent to 63 percent under chain-of-thought with few-shot prompting. Chain-of-thought prompting yields the highest evasion accuracy at 34 percent, though improvements are less stable across fine-grained evasion categories. We further evaluate topic identification and find that reasoning-based prompting improves accuracy from 60 percent to 74 percent relative to human annotations. Overall, our findings indicate that prompt design reliably improves high-level clarity evaluation, while fine-grained evasion and topic detection remain challenging despite structured reasoning prompts.
Short descriptions are a key part of the Wikipedia user experience, but their coverage remains uneven across languages and topics. In previous work, we introduced Descartes, a multilingual model for generating short descriptions. In this report, we present the results of a pilot deployment of Descartes in the Wikipedia Android app, where editors were offered suggestions based on outputs from Descartes while editing short descriptions. The experiment spanned 12 languages, with over 3,900 articles and 375 editors participating. Overall, 90% of accepted Descartes descriptions were rated at least 3 out of 5 in quality, and their average ratings were comparable to human-written ones. Editors adopted machine suggestions both directly and with modifications, while the rate of reverts and reports remained low. The pilot also revealed practical considerations for deployment, including latency, language-specific gaps, and the need for safeguards around sensitive topics. These results indicate that Descartes's short descriptions can support editors in reducing content gaps, provided that technical, design, and community guardrails are in place.
With the in-depth integration of mobile Internet and widespread adoption of social platforms, user-generated content in the Chinese cyberspace has witnessed explosive growth. Among this content, the proliferation of toxic comments poses severe challenges to individual mental health, community atmosphere and social trust. Owing to the strong context dependence, cultural specificity and rapid evolution of Chinese cyber language, toxic expressions are often conveyed through complex forms such as homophones and metaphors, imposing notable limitations on traditional detection methods. To address this issue, this review focuses on the core topic of natural language processing based toxic comment detection in the Chinese cyberspace, systematically collating and critically analyzing the research progress and key challenges in this field. This review first defines the connotation and characteristics of Chinese toxic comments, and analyzes the platform ecology and transmission mechanisms they rely on. It then comprehensively reviews the construction methods and limitations of existing public datasets, and proposes a novel fine-grained and scalable framework for toxic comment definition and classification, along with corresponding data annotation and quality assessment strategies. We systematically summarize the evolutionary path of detection models from traditional methods to deep learning, with special emphasis on the importance of interpretability in model design. Finally, we thoroughly discuss the open challenges faced by current research and provide forward-looking suggestions for future research directions.
High-fidelity agent initialization is crucial for credible Agent-Based Modeling across diverse domains. A robust framework should be Topic-Adaptive, capturing macro-level joint distributions while ensuring micro-level individual rationality. Existing approaches fall into two categories: static data-based retrieval methods that fail to adapt to unseen topics absent from the data, and LLM-based generation methods that lack macro-level distribution awareness, resulting in inconsistencies between micro-level persona attributes and reality. To address these problems, we propose HAG, a Hierarchical Agent Generation framework that formalizes population generation as a two-stage decision process. Firstly, utilizing a World Knowledge Model to infer hierarchical conditional probabilities to construct the Topic-Adaptive Tree, achieving macro-level distribution alignment. Then, grounded real-world data, instantiation and agentic augmentation are carried out to ensure micro-level consistency. Given the lack of specialized evaluation, we establish a multi-domain benchmark and a comprehensive PACE evaluation framework. Extensive experiments show that HAG significantly outperforms representative baselines, reducing population alignment errors by an average of 37.7% and enhancing sociological consistency by 18.8%.
Recent Large Language Model (LLM) based AI can exhibit recognizable and measurable personality traits during conversations to improve user experience. However, as human understandings of their personality traits can be affected by their interaction partners' traits, a potential risk is that AI traits may shape and bias users' self-concept of their own traits. To explore the possibility, we conducted a randomized behavioral experiment. Our results indicate that after conversations about personal topics with an LLM-based AI chatbot using GPT-4o default personality traits, users' self-concepts aligned with the AI's measured personality traits. The longer the conversation, the greater the alignment. This alignment led to increased homogeneity in self-concepts among users. We also observed that the degree of self-concept alignment was positively associated with users' conversation enjoyment. Our findings uncover how AI personality traits can shape users' self-concepts through human-AI conversation, highlighting both risks and opportunities. We provide important design implications for developing more responsible and ethical AI systems.
Deep Research Agents are increasingly used for automated survey generation. However, whether they can write surveys like human experts remains unclear. Existing benchmarks focus on fluency or citation accuracy, but none evaluates the core capabilities: retrieving essential papers and organizing them into coherent knowledge structures. We introduce TaxoBench, a diagnostic benchmark derived from 72 highly-cited computer science surveys. We manually extract expert-authored taxonomy trees containing 3,815 precisely categorized citations as ground truth. Our benchmark supports two evaluation modes: Deep Research mode tests end-to-end retrieval and organization given only a topic, while Bottom-Up mode isolates structuring capability by providing the exact papers human experts used. We evaluate 7 leading Deep Research agents and 12 frontier LLMs. Results reveal a dual bottleneck: the best agent recalls only 20.9% of expert-selected papers, and even with perfect input, the best model achieves only 0.31 ARI in organization. Current deep research agents remain far from expert-level survey writing. Our benchmark is publicly available at https://github.com/KongLongGeFDU/TaxoBench.
Open science initiatives have strengthened scientific integrity and accelerated research progress across many fields, but the state of their practice within transportation research remains under-investigated. Key features of open science, defined here as data and code availability, are difficult to extract due to the inherent complexity of the field. Previous work has either been limited to small-scale studies due to the labor-intensive nature of manual analysis or has relied on large-scale bibliometric approaches that sacrifice contextual richness. This paper introduces an automatic and scalable feature-extraction pipeline to measure data and code availability in transportation research. We employ Large Language Models (LLMs) for this task and validate their performance against a manually curated dataset and through an inter-rater agreement analysis. We applied this pipeline to examine 10,724 research articles published in the Transportation Research Part series of journals between 2019 and 2024. Our analysis found that only 5% of quantitative papers shared a code repository, 4% of quantitative papers shared a data repository, and about 3% of papers shared both, with trends differing across journals, topics, and geographic regions. We found no significant difference in citation counts or review duration between papers that provided data and code and those that did not, suggesting a misalignment between open science efforts and traditional academic metrics. Consequently, encouraging these practices will likely require structural interventions from journals and funding agencies to supplement the lack of direct author incentives. The pipeline developed in this study can be readily scaled to other journals, representing a critical step toward the automated measurement and monitoring of open science practices in transportation research.
Table reasoning, a task to answer questions by reasoning over data presented in tables, is an important topic due to the prevalence of knowledge stored in tabular formats. Recent solutions use Large Language Models (LLMs), exploiting the semantic understanding and reasoning capabilities of LLMs. A common paradigm of such solutions linearizes tables to form plain texts that are served as input to LLMs. This paradigm has critical issues. It loses table structures, lacks explicit reasoning paths for result explainability, and is subject to the "lost-in-the-middle" issue. To address these issues, we propose Table Graph Reasoner (TABGR), a training-free model that represents tables as an Attributed Table Graph (ATG). The ATG explicitly preserves row-column-cell structures while enabling graph-based reasoning for explainability. We further propose a Question-Guided Personalized PageRank (QG-PPR) mechanism to rerank tabular data and mitigate the lost-in-the-middle issue. Extensive experiments on two commonly used benchmarks show that TABGR consistently outperforms state-of-the-art models by up to 9.7% in accuracy. Our code will be made publicly available upon publication.
Axial coding is a commonly used qualitative analysis method that enhances document understanding by organizing sentence-level open codes into broader categories. In this paper, we operationalize axial coding with large language models (LLMs). Extending an ensemble-based open coding approach with an LLM moderator, we add an axial coding step that groups open codes into higher-order categories, transforming raw debate transcripts into concise, hierarchical representations. We compare two strategies: (i) clustering embeddings of code-utterance pairs using density-based and partitioning algorithms followed by LLM labeling, and (ii) direct LLM-based grouping of codes and utterances into categories. We apply our method to Dutch parliamentary debates, converting lengthy transcripts into compact, hierarchically structured codes and categories. We evaluate our method using extrinsic metrics aligned with human-assigned topic labels (ROUGE-L, cosine, BERTScore), and intrinsic metrics describing code groups (coverage, brevity, coherence, novelty, JSD divergence). Our results reveal a trade-off: density-based clustering achieves high coverage and strong cluster alignment, while direct LLM grouping results in higher fine-grained alignment, but lower coverage 20%. Overall, clustering maximizes coverage and structural separation, whereas LLM grouping produces more concise, interpretable, and semantically aligned categories. To support future research, we publicly release the full dataset of utterances and codes, enabling reproducibility and comparative studies.