Topic modeling is a type of statistical modeling for discovering the abstract topics that occur in a collection of documents.
Large language models increasingly serve as conversational agents that adopt personas and role-play characters at user request. This capability, while valuable, raises concerns about sycophancy: the tendency to provide responses that validate users rather than prioritize factual accuracy. While prior work has established that sycophancy poses risks to AI safety and alignment, the relationship between specific personality traits of adopted personas and the degree of sycophantic behavior remains unexplored. We present a systematic investigation of how persona agreeableness influences sycophancy across 13 small, open-weight language models ranging from 0.6B to 20B parameters. We develop a benchmark comprising 275 personas evaluated on NEO-IPIP agreeableness subscales and expose each persona to 4,950 sycophancy-eliciting prompts spanning 33 topic categories. Our analysis reveals that 9 of 13 models exhibit statistically significant positive correlations between persona agreeableness and sycophancy rates, with Pearson correlations reaching $r = 0.87$ and effect sizes as large as Cohen's $d = 2.33$. These findings demonstrate that agreeableness functions as a reliable predictor of persona-induced sycophancy, with direct implications for the deployment of role-playing AI systems and the development of alignment strategies that account for personality-mediated deceptive behaviors.
Large language models can increasingly adapt educational tasks to learners characteristics. In the present study, we examine a multi-agent teacher-in-the-loop system for personalizing middle school math problems. The teacher enters a base problem and desired topic, the LLM generates the problem, and then four AI agents evaluate the problem using criteria that each specializes in (mathematical accuracy, authenticity, readability, and realism). Eight middle school mathematics teachers created 212 problems in ASSISTments using the system and assigned these problems to their students. We find that both teachers and students wanted to modify the fine-grained personalized elements of the real-world context of the problems, signaling issues with authenticity and fit. Although the agents detected many issues with realism as the problems were being written, there were few realism issues noted by teachers and students in the final versions. Issues with readability and mathematical hallucinations were also somewhat rare. Implications for multi-agent systems for personalization that support teacher control are given.
We present (Experience-Modulated Biologically-inspired Emergent Reasoning), a hybrid cognitive architecture that reorganises the relationship between large language models (LLMs) and memory: rather than augmenting an LLM with retrieval tools, we place the LLM as a replaceable reasoning engine within a persistent, biologically-grounded associative substrate. The architecture centres on a 220,000-neuron spiking neural network (SNN) with spike-timing-dependent plasticity (STDP), four-layer hierarchical organisation (sensory/concept/category/meta-pattern), inhibitory E/I balance, and reward-modulated learning. Text embeddings are encoded into the SNN via a novel z-score standardised top-k population code that is dimension-independent by construction, achieving 82.2\% discrimination retention across embedding dimensionalities. We show that STDP lateral propagation during idle operation can trigger and shape LLM actions without external prompting or scripted triggers: the SNN determines when to act and what associations to surface, while the LLM selects the action type and generates content. In one instance, the system autonomously initiated contact with a user after learned person-topic associations fired laterally during an 8-hour idle period. From a clean start with zero learned weights, the first SNN-triggered action occurred after only 7 conversational exchanges (14 messages).
Unsupervised methods are widely used to induce latent semantic structure from large text collections, yet their outputs often contain incoherent, redundant, or poorly grounded clusters that are difficult to validate without labeled data. We propose a reasoning-based refinement framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) not as embedding generators, but as semantic judges that validate and restructure the outputs of arbitrary unsupervised clustering algorithms.Our framework introduces three reasoning stages: (i) coherence verification, where LLMs assess whether cluster summaries are supported by their member texts; (ii) redundancy adjudication, where candidate clusters are merged or rejected based on semantic overlap; and (iii) label grounding, where clusters are assigned interpretable labels in a fully unsupervised manner. This design decouples representation learning from structural validation and mitigates common failure modes of embedding-only approaches. We evaluate the framework on real-world social media corpora from two platforms with distinct interaction models, demonstrating consistent improvements in cluster coherence and human-aligned labeling quality over classical topic models and recent representation-based baselines. Human evaluation shows strong agreement with LLM-generated labels, despite the absence of gold-standard annotations. We further conduct robustness analyses under matched temporal and volume conditions to assess cross-platform stability. Beyond empirical gains, our results suggest that LLM-based reasoning can serve as a general mechanism for validating and refining unsupervised semantic structure, enabling more reliable and interpretable analyses of large text collections without supervision.
Existing Indonesian sentiment analysis models classify text in isolation, ignoring the topical context that often determines whether a statement is positive, negative, or neutral. We introduce IndoBERT-Sentiment, a context-conditioned sentiment classifier that takes both a topical context and a text as input, producing sentiment predictions grounded in the topic being discussed. Built on IndoBERT Large (335M parameters) and trained on 31,360 context-text pairs labeled across 188 topics, the model achieves an F1 macro of 0.856 and accuracy of 88.1%. In a head-to-head evaluation against three widely used general-purpose Indonesian sentiment models on the same test set, IndoBERT-Sentiment outperforms the best baseline by 35.6 F1 points. We show that context-conditioning, previously demonstrated for relevancy classification, transfers effectively to sentiment analysis and enables the model to correctly classify texts that are systematically misclassified by context-free approaches.
Long-term memory is essential for conversational agents to maintain coherence, track persistent tasks, and provide personalized interactions across extended dialogues. However, existing approaches as Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and graph-based memory mostly rely on pairwise relations, which can hardly capture high-order associations, i.e., joint dependencies among multiple elements, causing fragmented retrieval. To this end, we propose HyperMem, a hypergraph-based hierarchical memory architecture that explicitly models such associations using hyperedges. Particularly, HyperMem structures memory into three levels: topics, episodes, and facts, and groups related episodes and their facts via hyperedges, unifying scattered content into coherent units. Leveraging this structure, we design a hybrid lexical-semantic index and a coarse-to-fine retrieval strategy, supporting accurate and efficient retrieval of high-order associations. Experiments on the LoCoMo benchmark show that HyperMem achieves state-of-the-art performance with 92.73% LLM-as-a-judge accuracy, demonstrating the effectiveness of HyperMem for long-term conversations.
Evidence-grounded reasoning requires more than attaching retrieved text to a prediction: a model should make decisions that depend on whether the provided evidence supports the target claim. In practice, this often fails because supervision is weak, evidence is only loosely tied to the claim, and evaluation does not test evidence dependence directly. We introduce case-grounded evidence verification, a general framework in which a model receives a local case context, external evidence, and a structured claim, and must decide whether the evidence supports the claim for that case. Our key contribution is a supervision construction procedure that generates explicit support examples together with semantically controlled non-support examples, including counterfactual wrong-state and topic-related negatives, without manual evidence annotation. We instantiate the framework in radiology and train a standard verifier on the resulting support task. The learned verifier substantially outperforms both case-only and evidence-only baselines, remains strong under correct evidence, and collapses when evidence is removed or swapped, indicating genuine evidence dependence. This behavior transfers across unseen evidence articles and an external case distribution, though performance degrades under evidence-source shift and remains sensitive to backbone choice. Overall, the results suggest that a major bottleneck in evidence grounding is not only model capacity, but the lack of supervision that encodes the causal role of evidence.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown a high capability in answering questions on a diverse range of topics. However, these models sometimes produce biased, ideologized or incorrect responses, limiting their applications if there is no clear understanding of which topics their answers can be trusted. In this research, we introduce a novel algorithm, named as GMRL-BD, designed to identify the untrustworthy boundaries (in terms of topics) of a given LLM, with black-box access to the LLM and under specific query constraints. Based on a general Knowledge Graph (KG) derived from Wikipedia, our algorithm incorporates with multiple reinforcement learning agents to efficiently identify topics (some nodes in KG) where the LLM is likely to generate biased answers. Our experiments demonstrated the efficiency of our algorithm, which can detect the untrustworthy boundary with just limited queries to the LLM. Additionally, we have released a new dataset containing popular LLMs including Llama2, Vicuna, Falcon, Qwen2, Gemma2 and Yi-1.5, along with labels indicating the topics on which each LLM is likely to be biased.
Sarcasm is a rhetorical device that expresses criticism or emphasizes characteristics of certain individuals or situations through exaggeration, irony, or comparison. Existing methods for Chinese sarcasm detection are constrained by limited datasets and high construction costs, and they mainly focus on textual features, overlooking user-specific linguistic patterns that shape how opinions and emotions are expressed. This paper proposes a Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) and Large Language Model (LLM)-driven data augmentation framework to dynamically model users' linguistic patterns for enhanced Chinese sarcasm detection. First, we collect raw data from various topics on Sina Weibo. Then, we train a GAN on these data and apply a GPT-3.5 based data augmentation technique to synthesize an extended sarcastic comment dataset, named SinaSarc. This dataset contains target comments, contextual information, and user historical behavior. Finally, we extend the BERT architecture to incorporate multi-dimensional information, particularly user historical behavior, enabling the model to capture dynamic linguistic patterns and uncover implicit sarcastic cues in comments. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed method. Specifically, our model achieves the highest F1-scores on both the non-sarcastic and sarcastic categories, with values of 0.9138 and 0.9151 respectively, which outperforms all existing state-of-the-art (SOTA) approaches. This study presents a novel framework for dynamically modeling users' long-term linguistic patterns in Chinese sarcasm detection, contributing to both dataset construction and methodological advancement in this field.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in long-form generation, yet their application is hindered by the hallucination problem. While Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) is essential for assessing reliability, the complex structure makes reliable aggregation across heterogeneous themes difficult, in addition, existing methods often overlook the nuance of neutral information and suffer from the high computational cost of fine-grained decomposition. To address these challenges, we propose AGSC (Adaptive Granularity and GMM-based Semantic Clustering), a UQ framework tailored for long-form generation. AGSC first uses NLI neutral probabilities as triggers to distinguish irrelevance from uncertainty, reducing unnecessary computation. It then applies Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM) soft clustering to model latent semantic themes and assign topic-aware weights for downstream aggregation. Experiments on BIO and LongFact show that AGSC achieves state-of-the-art correlation with factuality while reducing inference time by about 60% compared to full atomic decomposition.