Topic modeling is a type of statistical modeling for discovering the abstract topics that occur in a collection of documents.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in the social sciences to simulate human behavior, based on the assumption that they can generate realistic, human-like text. Yet this assumption remains largely untested. Existing validation efforts rely heavily on human-judgment-based evaluations -- testing whether humans can distinguish AI from human output -- despite evidence that such judgments are blunt and unreliable. As a result, the field lacks robust tools for assessing the realism of LLM-generated text or for calibrating models to real-world data. This paper makes two contributions. First, we introduce a computational Turing test: a validation framework that integrates aggregate metrics (BERT-based detectability and semantic similarity) with interpretable linguistic features (stylistic markers and topical patterns) to assess how closely LLMs approximate human language within a given dataset. Second, we systematically compare nine open-weight LLMs across five calibration strategies -- including fine-tuning, stylistic prompting, and context retrieval -- benchmarking their ability to reproduce user interactions on X (formerly Twitter), Bluesky, and Reddit. Our findings challenge core assumptions in the literature. Even after calibration, LLM outputs remain clearly distinguishable from human text, particularly in affective tone and emotional expression. Instruction-tuned models underperform their base counterparts, and scaling up model size does not enhance human-likeness. Crucially, we identify a trade-off: optimizing for human-likeness often comes at the cost of semantic fidelity, and vice versa. These results provide a much-needed scalable framework for validation and calibration in LLM simulations -- and offer a cautionary note about their current limitations in capturing human communication.
While a multi-agent approach based on large language models (LLMs) represents a promising strategy to surpass the capabilities of single models, its success is critically dependent on synergistic team composition. However, forming optimal teams is a significant challenge, as the inherent opacity of most models obscures the internal characteristics necessary for effective collaboration. In this paper, we propose an interaction-centric framework for automatic team composition that does not require any prior knowledge including their internal architectures, training data, or task performances. Our method constructs a "language model graph" that maps relationships between models from the semantic coherence of pairwise conversations, and then applies community detection to identify synergistic model clusters. Our experiments with diverse LLMs demonstrate that the proposed method discovers functionally coherent groups that reflect their latent specializations. Priming conversations with specific topics identified synergistic teams which outperform random baselines on downstream benchmarks and achieve comparable accuracy to that of manually-curated teams based on known model specializations. Our findings provide a new basis for the automated design of collaborative multi-agent LLM teams.




Agentic AI systems and Physical or Embodied AI systems have been two key research verticals at the forefront of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, with Model Context Protocol (MCP) increasingly becoming a key component and enabler of agentic applications. However, the literature at the intersection of these verticals, i.e., Agentic Embodied AI, remains scarce. This paper introduces an MCP server for analyzing ROS and ROS 2 bags, allowing for analyzing, visualizing and processing robot data with natural language through LLMs and VLMs. We describe specific tooling built with robotics domain knowledge, with our initial release focused on mobile robotics and supporting natively the analysis of trajectories, laser scan data, transforms, or time series data. This is in addition to providing an interface to standard ROS 2 CLI tools ("ros2 bag list" or "ros2 bag info"), as well as the ability to filter bags with a subset of topics or trimmed in time. Coupled with the MCP server, we provide a lightweight UI that allows the benchmarking of the tooling with different LLMs, both proprietary (Anthropic, OpenAI) and open-source (through Groq). Our experimental results include the analysis of tool calling capabilities of eight different state-of-the-art LLM/VLM models, both proprietary and open-source, large and small. Our experiments indicate that there is a large divide in tool calling capabilities, with Kimi K2 and Claude Sonnet 4 demonstrating clearly superior performance. We also conclude that there are multiple factors affecting the success rates, from the tool description schema to the number of arguments, as well as the number of tools available to the models. The code is available with a permissive license at https://github.com/binabik-ai/mcp-rosbags.
Recent advances in finance-specific language models such as FinBERT have enabled the quantification of public sentiment into index-based measures, yet compressing diverse linguistic signals into single metrics overlooks contextual nuances and limits interpretability. To address this limitation, explainable AI techniques, particularly SHAP (SHapley Additive Explanations), have been employed to identify influential features. However, SHAP's computational cost grows exponentially with input features, making it impractical for large-scale text-based financial data. This study introduces a GRU-based forecasting framework enhanced with GroupSHAP, which quantifies contributions of semantically related keyword groups rather than individual tokens, substantially reducing computational burden while preserving interpretability. We employed FinBERT to embed news articles from 2015 to 2024, clustered them into coherent semantic groups, and applied GroupSHAP to measure each group's contribution to stock price movements. The resulting group-level SHAP variables across multiple topics were used as input features for the prediction model. Empirical results from one-day-ahead forecasting of the S&P 500 index throughout 2024 demonstrate that our approach achieves a 32.2% reduction in MAE and a 40.5% reduction in RMSE compared with benchmark models without the GroupSHAP mechanism. This research presents the first application of GroupSHAP in news-driven financial forecasting, showing that grouped sentiment representations simultaneously enhance interpretability and predictive performance.
Evaluating the abilities of large language models (LLMs) for tasks that require long-term memory and thus long-context reasoning, for example in conversational settings, is hampered by the existing benchmarks, which often lack narrative coherence, cover narrow domains, and only test simple recall-oriented tasks. This paper introduces a comprehensive solution to these challenges. First, we present a novel framework for automatically generating long (up to 10M tokens), coherent, and topically diverse conversations, accompanied by probing questions targeting a wide range of memory abilities. From this, we construct BEAM, a new benchmark comprising 100 conversations and 2,000 validated questions. Second, to enhance model performance, we propose LIGHT-a framework inspired by human cognition that equips LLMs with three complementary memory systems: a long-term episodic memory, a short-term working memory, and a scratchpad for accumulating salient facts. Our experiments on BEAM reveal that even LLMs with 1M token context windows (with and without retrieval-augmentation) struggle as dialogues lengthen. In contrast, LIGHT consistently improves performance across various models, achieving an average improvement of 3.5%-12.69% over the strongest baselines, depending on the backbone LLM. An ablation study further confirms the contribution of each memory component.




Document expansion (DE) via query generation tackles vocabulary mismatch in sparse retrieval, yet faces limitations: uncontrolled generation producing hallucinated or redundant queries with low diversity; poor generalization from in-domain training (e.g., MS MARCO) to out-of-domain data like BEIR; and noise from concatenation harming dense retrieval. While Large Language Models (LLMs) enable cross-domain query generation, basic prompting lacks control, and taxonomy-based methods rely on domain-specific structures, limiting applicability. To address these challenges, we introduce Doc2Query++, a DE framework that structures query generation by first inferring a document's latent topics via unsupervised topic modeling for cross-domain applicability, then using hybrid keyword selection to create a diverse and relevant keyword set per document. This guides LLM not only to leverage keywords, which ensure comprehensive topic representation, but also to reduce redundancy through diverse, relevant terms. To prevent noise from query appending in dense retrieval, we propose Dual-Index Fusion strategy that isolates text and query signals, boosting performance in dense settings. Extensive experiments show Doc2Query++ significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, achieving substantial gains in MAP, nDCG@10 and Recall@100 across diverse datasets on both sparse and dense retrieval.




The polarization of opinions, information segregation, and cognitive biases on social media have attracted significant academic attention. In real-world networks, information often spans multiple interrelated topics, posing challenges for opinion evolution and highlighting the need for frameworks that simulate interactions among topics. Existing studies based on large language models (LLMs) focus largely on single topics, limiting the capture of cognitive transfer in multi-topic, cross-domain contexts. Traditional numerical models, meanwhile, simplify complex linguistic attitudes into discrete values, lacking interpretability, behavioral consistency, and the ability to integrate multiple topics. To address these issues, we propose Multi-topic Opinion Simulation (MTOS), a social simulation framework integrating multi-topic contexts with LLMs. MTOS leverages LLMs alongside short-term and long-term memory, incorporates multiple user-selection interaction mechanisms and dynamic topic-selection strategies, and employs a belief decay mechanism to enable perspective updates across topics. We conduct extensive experiments on MTOS, varying topic numbers, correlation types, and performing ablation studies to assess features such as group polarization and local consistency. Results show that multi-topic settings significantly alter polarization trends: positively correlated topics amplify echo chambers, negatively correlated topics inhibit them, and irrelevant topics also mitigate echo chamber effects through resource competition. Compared with numerical models, LLM-based agents realistically simulate dynamic opinion changes, reproduce linguistic features of news texts, and capture complex human reasoning, improving simulation interpretability and system stability.
Understanding how ideas develop and flow in small-group conversations is critical for analyzing collaborative learning. A key structural feature of these interactions is threading, the way discourse talk naturally organizes into interwoven topical strands that evolve over time. While threading has been widely studied in asynchronous text settings, detecting threads in synchronous spoken dialogue remains challenging due to overlapping turns and implicit cues. At the same time, large language models (LLMs) show promise for automating discourse analysis but often struggle with long-context tasks that depend on tracing these conversational links. In this paper, we investigate whether explicit thread linkages can improve LLM-based coding of relational moves in group talk. We contribute a systematic guidebook for identifying threads in synchronous multi-party transcripts and benchmark different LLM prompting strategies for automated threading. We then test how threading influences performance on downstream coding of conversational analysis frameworks, that capture core collaborative actions such as agreeing, building, and eliciting. Our results show that providing clear conversational thread information improves LLM coding performance and underscores the heavy reliance of downstream analysis on well-structured dialogue. We also discuss practical trade-offs in time and cost, emphasizing where human-AI hybrid approaches can yield the best value. Together, this work advances methods for combining LLMs and robust conversational thread structures to make sense of complex, real-time group interactions.




Large language models (LLMs) have shown promising accuracy in predicting survey responses and policy preferences, which has increased interest in their potential to represent human interests in various domains. Most existing research has focused on behavioral cloning, effectively evaluating how well models reproduce individuals' expressed preferences. Drawing on theories of political representation, we highlight an underexplored design trade-off: whether AI systems should act as delegates, mirroring expressed preferences, or as trustees, exercising judgment about what best serves an individual's interests. This trade-off is closely related to issues of LLM sycophancy, where models can encourage behavior or validate beliefs that may be aligned with a user's short-term preferences, but is detrimental to their long-term interests. Through a series of experiments simulating votes on various policy issues in the U.S. context, we apply a temporal utility framework that weighs short and long-term interests (simulating a trustee role) and compare voting outcomes to behavior-cloning models (simulating a delegate). We find that trustee-style predictions weighted toward long-term interests produce policy decisions that align more closely with expert consensus on well-understood issues, but also show greater bias toward models' default stances on topics lacking clear agreement. These findings reveal a fundamental trade-off in designing AI systems to represent human interests. Delegate models better preserve user autonomy but may diverge from well-supported policy positions, while trustee models can promote welfare on well-understood issues yet risk paternalism and bias on subjective topics.




Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at general tasks but underperform in specialized domains like economics and psychology, which require deep, principled understanding. To address this, we introduce ACER (Automated Curriculum-Enhanced Regimen) that transforms generalist models into domain experts without sacrificing their broad capabilities. ACER first synthesizes a comprehensive, textbook-style curriculum by generating a table of contents for a subject and then creating question-answer (QA) pairs guided by Bloom's taxonomy. This ensures systematic topic coverage and progressively increasing difficulty. The resulting synthetic corpus is used for continual pretraining with an interleaved curriculum schedule, aligning learning across both content and cognitive dimensions. Experiments with Llama 3.2 (1B and 3B) show significant gains in specialized MMLU subsets. In challenging domains like microeconomics, where baselines struggle, ACER boosts accuracy by 5 percentage points. Across all target domains, we observe a consistent macro-average improvement of 3 percentage points. Notably, ACER not only prevents catastrophic forgetting but also facilitates positive cross-domain knowledge transfer, improving performance on non-target domains by 0.7 points. Beyond MMLU, ACER enhances performance on knowledge-intensive benchmarks like ARC and GPQA by over 2 absolute points, while maintaining stable performance on general reasoning tasks. Our results demonstrate that ACER offers a scalable and effective recipe for closing critical domain gaps in LLMs.