Human Values in a Single Sentence: Moral Presence, Hierarchies, and Transformer Ensembles on the Schwartz Continuum

We study sentence-level identification of the 19 values in the Schwartz motivational continuum as a concrete formulation of human value detection in text. The setting - out-of-context sentences from news and political manifestos - features sparse moral cues and severe class imbalance. This combination makes fine-grained sentence-level value detection intrinsically difficult, even for strong modern neural models. We first operationalize a binary moral presence task ("does any value appear?") and show that it is learnable from single sentences (positive-class F1 $\approx$ 0.74 with calibrated thresholds). We then compare a presence-gated hierarchy to a direct multi-label classifier under matched compute, both based on DeBERTa-base and augmented with lightweight signals (prior-sentence context, LIWC-22/eMFD/MJD lexica, and topic features). The hierarchy does not outperform direct prediction, indicating that gate recall limits downstream gains. We also benchmark instruction-tuned LLMs - Gemma 2 9B, Llama 3.1 8B, Mistral 8B, and Qwen 2.5 7B - in zero-/few-shot and QLoRA setups and build simple ensembles; a soft-vote supervised ensemble reaches macro-F1 0.332, significantly surpassing the best single supervised model and exceeding prior English-only baselines. Overall, in this scenario, lightweight signals and small ensembles yield the most reliable improvements, while hierarchical gating offers limited benefit. We argue that, under an 8 GB single-GPU constraint and at the 7-9B scale, carefully tuned supervised encoders remain a strong and compute-efficient baseline for structured human value detection, and we outline how richer value structure and sentence-in-document context could further improve performance.

ALIGNAgent: Adaptive Learner Intelligence for Gap Identification and Next-step guidance

Personalized learning systems have emerged as a promising approach to enhance student outcomes by tailoring educational content, pacing, and feedback to individual needs. However, most existing systems remain fragmented, specializing in either knowledge tracing, diagnostic modeling, or resource recommendation, but rarely integrating these components into a cohesive adaptive cycle. In this paper, we propose ALIGNAgent (Adaptive Learner Intelligence for Gap Identification and Next-step guidance), a multi-agent educational framework designed to deliver personalized learning through integrated knowledge estimation, skill-gap identification, and targeted resource recommendation.ALIGNAgent begins by processing student quiz performance, gradebook data, and learner preferences to generate topic-level proficiency estimates using a Skill Gap Agent that employs concept-level diagnostic reasoning to identify specific misconceptions and knowledge deficiencies. After identifying skill gaps, the Recommender Agent retrieves preference-aware learning materials aligned with diagnosed deficiencies, implementing a continuous feedback loop where interventions occur before advancing to subsequent topics. Extensive empirical evaluation on authentic datasets from two undergraduate computer science courses demonstrates ALIGNAgent's effectiveness, with GPT-4o-based agents achieving precision of 0.87-0.90 and F1 scores of 0.84-0.87 in knowledge proficiency estimation validated against actual exam performance.

Predicting Retrieval Utility and Answer Quality in Retrieval-Augmented Generation

The quality of answers generated by large language models (LLMs) in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is largely influenced by the contextual information contained in the retrieved documents. A key challenge for improving RAG is to predict both the utility of retrieved documents -- quantified as the performance gain from using context over generation without context -- and the quality of the final answers in terms of correctness and relevance. In this paper, we define two prediction tasks within RAG. The first is retrieval performance prediction (RPP), which estimates the utility of retrieved documents. The second is generation performance prediction (GPP), which estimates the final answer quality. We hypothesise that in RAG, the topical relevance of retrieved documents correlates with their utility, suggesting that query performance prediction (QPP) approaches can be adapted for RPP and GPP. Beyond these retriever-centric signals, we argue that reader-centric features, such as the LLM's perplexity of the retrieved context conditioned on the input query, can further enhance prediction accuracy for both RPP and GPP. Finally, we propose that features reflecting query-agnostic document quality and readability can also provide useful signals to the predictions. We train linear regression models with the above categories of predictors for both RPP and GPP. Experiments on the Natural Questions (NQ) dataset show that combining predictors from multiple feature categories yields the most accurate estimates of RAG performance.

AI-exhibited Personality Traits Can Shape Human Self-concept through Conversations

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.

Can Deep Research Agents Find and Organize? Evaluating the Synthesis Gap with Expert Taxonomies

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.

NLP-Based Review for Toxic Comment Detection Tailored to the Chinese Cyberspace

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.

Detecting Winning Arguments with Large Language Models and Persuasion Strategies

Detecting persuasion in argumentative text is a challenging task with important implications for understanding human communication. This work investigates the role of persuasion strategies - such as Attack on reputation, Distraction, and Manipulative wording - in determining the persuasiveness of a text. We conduct experiments on three annotated argument datasets: Winning Arguments (built from the Change My View subreddit), Anthropic/Persuasion, and Persuasion for Good. Our approach leverages large language models (LLMs) with a Multi-Strategy Persuasion Scoring approach that guides reasoning over six persuasion strategies. Results show that strategy-guided reasoning improves the prediction of persuasiveness. To better understand the influence of content, we organize the Winning Argument dataset into broad discussion topics and analyze performance across them. We publicly release this topic-annotated version of the dataset to facilitate future research. Overall, our methodology demonstrates the value of structured, strategy-aware prompting for enhancing interpretability and robustness in argument quality assessment.

Measuring the State of Open Science in Transportation Using Large Language Models

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.

From Quotes to Concepts: Axial Coding of Political Debates with Ensemble LMs

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.

Combating Spurious Correlations in Graph Interpretability via Self-Reflection

Interpretable graph learning has recently emerged as a popular research topic in machine learning. The goal is to identify the important nodes and edges of an input graph that are crucial for performing a specific graph reasoning task. A number of studies have been conducted in this area, and various benchmark datasets have been proposed to facilitate evaluation. Among them, one of the most challenging is the Spurious-Motif benchmark, introduced at ICLR 2022. The datasets in this synthetic benchmark are deliberately designed to include spurious correlations, making it particularly difficult for models to distinguish truly relevant structures from misleading patterns. As a result, existing methods exhibit significantly worse performance on this benchmark compared to others. In this paper, we focus on improving interpretability on the challenging Spurious-Motif datasets. We demonstrate that the self-reflection technique, commonly used in large language models to tackle complex tasks, can also be effectively adapted to enhance interpretability in datasets with strong spurious correlations. Specifically, we propose a self-reflection framework that can be integrated with existing interpretable graph learning methods. When such a method produces importance scores for each node and edge, our framework feeds these predictions back into the original method to perform a second round of evaluation. This iterative process mirrors how large language models employ self-reflective prompting to reassess their previous outputs. We further analyze the reasons behind this improvement from the perspective of graph representation learning, which motivates us to propose a fine-tuning training method based on this feedback mechanism.