Topic modeling is a type of statistical modeling for discovering the abstract topics that occur in a collection of documents.
While context embeddings produced by LLMs can be used to estimate conceptual change, these representations are often not interpretable nor time-aware. Moreover, bias augmentation in historical data poses a non-trivial risk to researchers in the Digital Humanities. Hence, to model reliable concept trajectories in evolving scholarship, in this work we develop a framework that represents prototypical concepts through complex networks based on topics. Utilizing the Royal Society Corpus, we analyzed two competing theories from the Chemical Revolution (phlogiston vs. oxygen) as a case study to show that onomasiological change is linked to higher entropy and topological density, indicating increased diversity of ideas and connectivity effort.
Automated systems have been widely adopted across the educational testing industry for open-response assessment and essay scoring. These systems commonly achieve performance levels comparable to or superior than trained human raters, but have frequently been demonstrated to be vulnerable to the influence of construct-irrelevant factors (i.e., features of responses that are unrelated to the construct assessed) and adversarial conditions. Given the rising usage of large language models in automated scoring systems, there is a renewed focus on ``hallucinations'' and the robustness of these LLM-based automated scoring approaches to construct-irrelevant factors. This study investigates the effects of construct-irrelevant factors on a dual-architecture LLM-based scoring system designed to score short essay-like open-response items in a situational judgment test. It was found that the scoring system was generally robust to padding responses with meaningless text, spelling errors, and writing sophistication. Duplicating large passages of text resulted in lower scores predicted by the system, on average, contradicting results from previous studies of non-LLM-based scoring systems, while off-topic responses were heavily penalized by the scoring system. These results provide encouraging support for the robustness of future LLM-based scoring systems when designed with construct relevance in mind.
As large language models (LLMs) are deployed in multilingual settings, their safety behavior in culturally diverse, low-resource languages remains poorly understood. We present the first systematic evaluation of LLM safety across 12 Indic languages, spoken by over 1.2 billion people but underrepresented in LLM training data. Using a dataset of 6,000 culturally grounded prompts spanning caste, religion, gender, health, and politics, we assess 10 leading LLMs on translated variants of the prompt. Our analysis reveals significant safety drift: cross-language agreement is just 12.8\%, and \texttt{SAFE} rate variance exceeds 17\% across languages. Some models over-refuse benign prompts in low-resource scripts, overflag politically sensitive topics, while others fail to flag unsafe generations. We quantify these failures using prompt-level entropy, category bias scores, and multilingual consistency indices. Our findings highlight critical safety generalization gaps in multilingual LLMs and show that safety alignment does not transfer evenly across languages. We release \textsc{IndicSafe}, the first benchmark to enable culturally informed safety evaluation for Indic deployments, and advocate for language-aware alignment strategies grounded in regional harms.
The recent escalation of the Iran Israel USA conflict in 2026 has triggered widespread global discussions across social media platforms. As people increasingly use these platforms for expressing opinions, analyzing public sentiment from these discussions can provide valuable insights into global public perception. This study aims to analyze global public sentiment regarding the Iran Israel USA conflict by mining user-generated comments from YouTube news channels. The work contributes to public opinion analysis by introducing a privacy preserving framework that combines topic wise sentiment analysis with modern deep learning techniques and Federated Learning. To achieve this, approximately 19,000 YouTube comments were collected from major international news channels and preprocessed to remove noise and normalize text. Sentiment labels were initially generated using the VADER sentiment analyzer and later validated through manual inspection to improve reliability. Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) was applied to identify key discussion topics related to the conflict. Several transformer-based models, including BERT, RoBERTa, XLNet, DistilBERT, ModernBERT, and ELECTRA, were fine tuned for sentiment classification. The best-performing model was further integrated into a federated learning environment to enable distributed training by preserving user data privacy. Additionally, Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques using SHAP were applied to interpret model predictions and identify influential words affecting sentiment classification. Experimental results demonstrate that transformer models perform effectively, and among them, ELECTRA achieved the best performance with 91.32% accuracy. The federated learning also maintained strong performance while preserving privacy, achieving 89.59% accuracy in a two client configuration.
The topic of Multivariate Time Series Anomaly Detection (MTSAD) has grown rapidly over the past years, with a steady rise in publications and Deep Learning (DL) models becoming the dominant paradigm. To address the lack of systematization in the field, this study introduces a novel and unified taxonomy with eleven dimensions over three parts (Input, Output and Model) for the categorization of DL-based MTSAD methods. The dimensions were established in a two-fold approach. First, they derived from a comprehensive analysis of methodological studies. Second, insights from review papers were incorporated. Furthermore, the proposed taxonomy was validated using an additional set of recent publications, providing a clear overview of methodological trends in MTSAD. Results reveal a convergence toward Transformer-based and reconstruction and prediction models, setting the foundation for emerging adaptive and generative trends. Building on and complementing existing surveys, this unified taxonomy is designed to accommodate future developments, allowing for new categories or dimensions to be added as the field progresses. This work thus consolidates fragmented knowledge in the field and provides a reference point for future research in MTSAD.
Online social platforms increasingly rely on crowd-sourced systems to label misleading content at scale, but these systems must both aggregate users' evaluations and decide whose evaluations to trust. To address the latter, many platforms audit users by rewarding agreement with the final aggregate outcome, a design we term consensus-based auditing. We analyze the consequences of this design in X's Community Notes, which in September 2022 adopted consensus-based auditing that ties users' eligibility for participation to agreement with the eventual platform outcome. We find evidence of strategic conformity: minority contributors' evaluations drift toward the majority and their participation share falls on controversial topics, where independent signals matter most. We formalize this mechanism in a behavioral model in which contributors trade off private beliefs against anticipated penalties for disagreement. Motivated by these findings, we propose a two-stage auditing and aggregation algorithm that weights contributors by the stability of their past residuals rather than by agreement with the majority. The method first accounts for differences across content and contributors, and then measures how predictable each contributor's evaluations are relative to the latent-factor model. Contributors whose evaluations are consistently informative receive greater influence in aggregation, even when they disagree with the prevailing consensus. In the Community Notes data, this approach improves out-of-sample predictive performance while avoiding penalization of disagreement.
SinhaLegal introduces a Sinhala legislative text corpus containing approximately 2 million words across 1,206 legal documents. The dataset includes two types of legal documents: 1,065 Acts dated from 1981 to 2014 and 141 Bills from 2010 to 2014, which were systematically collected from official sources. The texts were extracted using OCR with Google Document AI, followed by extensive post-processing and manual cleaning to ensure high-quality, machine-readable content, along with dedicated metadata files for each document. A comprehensive evaluation was conducted, including corpus statistics, lexical diversity, word frequency analysis, named entity recognition, and topic modelling, demonstrating the structured and domain-specific nature of the corpus. Additionally, perplexity analysis using both large and small language models was performed to assess how effectively language models respond to domain-specific texts. The SinhaLegal corpus represents a vital resource designed to support NLP tasks such as summarisation, information extraction, and analysis, thereby bridging a critical gap in Sinhala legal research.
We demonstrate that user preferences can be represented and predicted across topical domains using large-scale social modeling. Given information about popular entities favored by a user, we project the user into a social embedding space learned from a large-scale sample of the Twitter (now X) network. By representing both users and popular entities in a joint social space, we can assess the relevance of candidate entities (e.g., music artists) using cosine similarity within this embedding space. A comprehensive evaluation using link prediction experiments shows that this method achieves effective personalization in zero-shot setting, when no user feedback is available for entities in the target domain, yielding substantial improvements over a strong popularity-based baseline. In-depth analysis further illustrates that socio-demographic factors encoded in the social embeddings are correlated with user preferences across domains. Finally, we argue and demonstrate that the proposed approach can facilitate social modeling of end users using large language models (LLMs).
Large language models (LLMs) have made remarkable progress in generating fluent text, but they still face a critical challenge of contextual misalignment in long-term and dynamic dialogue. When human users omit premises, simplify references, or shift context abruptly during interactions with LLMs, the models may fail to capture their actual intentions, producing mechanical or off-topic responses that weaken the collaborative potential of dialogue. To address this problem, this paper proposes a computational framework called the Context Alignment Pre-processor (C.A.P.). Rather than operating during generation, C.A.P. functions as a pre-processing module between user input and response generation. The framework includes three core processes: (1) semantic expansion, which extends a user instruction to a broader semantic span including its premises, literal meaning, and implications; (2) time-weighted context retrieval, which prioritizes recent dialogue history through a temporal decay function approximating human conversational focus; and (3) alignment verification and decision branching, which evaluates whether the dialogue remains on track by measuring the semantic similarity between the current prompt and the weighted historical context. When a significant deviation is detected, C.A.P. initiates a structured clarification protocol to help users and the system recalibrate the conversation. This study presents the architecture and theoretical basis of C.A.P., drawing on cognitive science and Common Ground theory in human-computer interaction. We argue that C.A.P. is not only a technical refinement but also a step toward shifting human-computer dialogue from one-way command-execution patterns to two-way, self-correcting, partnership-based collaboration. Finally, we discuss implementation paths, evaluation methods, and implications for the future design of interactive intelligent systems.
Medical language models must be updated as evidence and terminology evolve, yet sequential updating can trigger catastrophic forgetting. Although biomedical NLP has many static benchmarks, no unified, task-diverse benchmark exists for evaluating continual learning under standardized protocols, robustness to task order and compute-aware reporting. We introduce MedCL-Bench, which streams ten biomedical NLP datasets spanning five task families and evaluates eleven continual learning strategies across eight task orders, reporting retention, transfer, and GPU-hour cost. Across backbones and task orders, direct sequential fine-tuning on incoming tasks induces catastrophic forgetting, causing update-induced performance regressions on prior tasks. Continual learning methods occupy distinct retention-compute frontiers: parameter-isolation provides the best retention per GPU-hour, replay offers strong protection at higher cost, and regularization yields limited benefit. Forgetting is task-dependent, with multi-label topic classification most vulnerable and constrained-output tasks more robust. MedCL-Bench provides a reproducible framework for auditing model updates before deployment.