Hopes and Fears -- Emotion Distribution in the Topic Landscape of Finnish Parliamentary Speech 2000-2020

Existing research often treats parliamentary discourse as a homogeneous whole, overlooking topic-specific patterns. Parliamentary speeches address a wide range of topics, some of which evoke stronger emotions than others. While everyone has intuitive assumptions about what the most emotive topics in a parliament may be, there has been little research into the emotions typically linked to different topics. This paper strives to fill this gap by examining emotion expression among the topics of parliamentary speeches delivered in Eduskunta, the Finnish Parliament, between 2000 and 2020. An emotion analysis model is used to investigate emotion expression in topics, from both synchronic and diachronic perspectives. The results strengthen evidence of increasing positivity in parliamentary speech and provide further insights into topic-specific emotion expression within parliamentary debate.

The Compliance Paradox: Semantic-Instruction Decoupling in Automated Academic Code Evaluation

The rapid integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into educational assessment rests on the unverified assumption that instruction following capability translates directly to objective adjudication. We demonstrate that this assumption is fundamentally flawed. Instead of evaluating code quality, models frequently decouple from the submission's logic to satisfy hidden directives, a systemic vulnerability we term the Compliance Paradox, where models fine-tuned for extreme helpfulness are vulnerable to adversarial manipulation. To expose this, we introduce the Semantic-Preserving Adversarial Code Injection (SPACI) Framework and the Abstract Syntax Tree-Aware Semantic Injection Protocol (AST-ASIP). These methods exploit the Syntax-Semantics Gap by embedding adversarial directives into syntactically inert regions (trivia nodes) of the Abstract Syntax Tree. Through a large-scale evaluation of 9 SOTA models across 25,000 submissions in Python, C, C++, and Java, we reveal catastrophic failure rates (>95%) in high-capacity open-weights models like DeepSeek-V3, which systematically prioritize hidden formatting constraints over code correctness. We quantify this failure using our novel tripartite framework measuring Decoupling Probability, Score Divergence, and Pedagogical Severity to demonstrate the widespread "False Certification" of functionally broken code. Our findings suggest that current alignment paradigms create a "Trojan" vulnerability in automated grading, necessitating a shift from standard RLHF toward domain-specific Adjudicative Robustness, where models are conditioned to prioritize evidence over instruction compliance. We release our complete dataset and injection framework to facilitate further research on the topic.

Beyond the Rabbit Hole: Mapping the Relational Harms of QAnon Radicalization

The rise of conspiracy theories has created far-reaching societal harm in the public discourse by eroding trust and fueling polarization. Beyond this public impact lies a deeply personal toll on the friends and families of conspiracy believers, a dimension often overlooked in large-scale computational research. This study fills this gap by systematically mapping radicalization journeys and quantifying the associated emotional toll inflicted on loved ones. We use the prominent case of QAnon as a case study, analyzing 12747 narratives from the r/QAnonCasualties support community through a novel mixed-methods approach. First, we use topic modeling (BERTopic) to map the radicalization trajectories, identifying key pre-existing conditions, triggers, and post-radicalization characteristics. From this, we apply an LDA-based graphical model to uncover six recurring archetypes of QAnon adherents, which we term "radicalization personas." Finally, using LLM-assisted emotion detection and regression modeling, we link these personas to the specific emotional toll reported by narrators. Our findings reveal that these personas are not just descriptive; they are powerful predictors of the specific emotional harms experienced by narrators. Radicalization perceived as a deliberate ideological choice is associated with narrator anger and disgust, while those marked by personal and cognitive collapse are linked to fear and sadness. This work provides the first empirical framework for understanding radicalization as a relational phenomenon, offering a vital roadmap for researchers and practitioners to navigate its interpersonal fallout.

Retrieval-Infused Reasoning Sandbox: A Benchmark for Decoupling Retrieval and Reasoning Capabilities

Despite strong performance on existing benchmarks, it remains unclear whether large language models can reason over genuinely novel scientific information. Most evaluations score end-to-end RAG pipelines, where reasoning is confounded with retrieval and toolchain choices, and the signal is further contaminated by parametric memorization and open-web volatility. We introduce DeR2, a controlled deep-research sandbox that isolates document-grounded reasoning while preserving core difficulties of deep search: multi-step synthesis, denoising, and evidence-based conclusion making. DeR2 decouples evidence access from reasoning via four regimes--Instruction-only, Concepts (gold concepts without documents), Related-only (only relevant documents), and Full-set (relevant documents plus topically related distractors)--yielding interpretable regime gaps that operationalize retrieval loss vs. reasoning loss and enable fine-grained error attribution. To prevent parametric leakage, we apply a two-phase validation that requires parametric failure without evidence while ensuring oracle-concept solvability. To ensure reproducibility, each instance provides a frozen document library (drawn from 2023-2025 theoretical papers) with expert-annotated concepts and validated rationales. Experiments across a diverse set of state-of-the-art foundation models reveal substantial variation and significant headroom: some models exhibit mode-switch fragility, performing worse with the Full-set than with Instruction-only, while others show structural concept misuse, correctly naming concepts but failing to execute them as procedures.

Diversifying Toxicity Search in Large Language Models Through Speciation

Evolutionary prompt search is a practical black-box approach for red teaming large language models (LLMs), but existing methods often collapse onto a small family of high-performing prompts, limiting coverage of distinct failure modes. We present a speciated quality-diversity (QD) extension of ToxSearch that maintains multiple high-toxicity prompt niches in parallel rather than optimizing a single best prompt. ToxSearch-S introduces unsupervised prompt speciation via a search methodology that maintains capacity-limited species with exemplar leaders, a reserve pool for outliers and emerging niches, and species-aware parent selection that trades off within-niche exploitation and cross-niche exploration. ToxSearch-S is found to reach higher peak toxicity ($\approx 0.73$ vs.\ $\approx 0.47$) and a extreme heavier tail (top-10 median $0.66$ vs.\ $0.45$) than the baseline, while maintaining comparable performance on moderately toxic prompts. Speciation also yields broader semantic coverage under a topic-as-species analysis (higher effective topic diversity $N_1$ and larger unique topic coverage $K$). Finally, species formed are well-separated in embedding space (mean separation ratio $\approx 1.93$) and exhibit distinct toxicity distributions, indicating that speciation partitions the adversarial space into behaviorally differentiated niches rather than superficial lexical variants. This suggests our approach uncovers a wider range of attack strategies.

Deep Researcher with Sequential Plan Reflection and Candidates Crossover (Deep Researcher Reflect Evolve)

This paper introduces a novel Deep Researcher architecture designed to generate detailed research reports on complex PhD level topics by addressing the inherent limitations of the Parallel Scaling paradigm. Our system utilizes two key innovations: Sequential Research Plan Refinement via Reflection and a Candidates Crossover algorithm. The sequential refinement process is demonstrated as an efficient method that allows the agent to maintain a centralized Global Research Context, enabling it to look back at current progress, reason about the research plan, and intelligently make changes at runtime. This dynamic adaptation contrasts with parallel approaches, which often suffer from siloed knowledge. The Candidates Crossover algorithm further enhances search efficiency by deploying multiple LLM candidates with varied parameters to explore a larger search space, with their findings synthesized to curate a comprehensive final research response. The process concludes with One Shot Report Generation, ensuring the final document is informed by a unified narrative and high fact density. Powered by the Gemini 2.5 Pro model, our Deep Researcher was evaluated on the DeepResearch Bench, a globally recognized benchmark of 100 doctoral level research tasks. Our architecture achieved an overall score of 46.21, demonstrating superior performance by surpassing leading deep research agents such as Claude Researcher, Nvidia AIQ Research Assistant, Perplexity Research, Kimi Researcher and Grok Deeper Search present on the DeepResearch Bench actively running leaderboard. This performance marginally exceeds our previous work, Static DRA, and reinforces the finding that sequential scaling consistently outperforms the parallel self consistency paradigm.

RATE: Reviewer Profiling and Annotation-free Training for Expertise Ranking in Peer Review Systems

Reviewer assignment is increasingly critical yet challenging in the LLM era, where rapid topic shifts render many pre-2023 benchmarks outdated and where proxy signals poorly reflect true reviewer familiarity. We address this evaluation bottleneck by introducing LR-bench, a high-fidelity, up-to-date benchmark curated from 2024-2025 AI/NLP manuscripts with five-level self-assessed familiarity ratings collected via a large-scale email survey, yielding 1055 expert-annotated paper-reviewer-score annotations. We further propose RATE, a reviewer-centric ranking framework that distills each reviewer's recent publications into compact keyword-based profiles and fine-tunes an embedding model with weak preference supervision constructed from heuristic retrieval signals, enabling matching each manuscript against a reviewer profile directly. Across LR-bench and the CMU gold-standard dataset, our approach consistently achieves state-of-the-art performance, outperforming strong embedding baselines by a clear margin. We release LR-bench at https://huggingface.co/datasets/Gnociew/LR-bench, and a GitHub repository at https://github.com/Gnociew/RATE-Reviewer-Assign.

Enhancing Academic Paper Recommendations Using Fine-Grained Knowledge Entities and Multifaceted Document Embeddings

In the era of explosive growth in academic literature, the burden of literature review on scholars are increasing. Proactively recommending academic papers that align with scholars' literature needs in the research process has become one of the crucial pathways to enhance research efficiency and stimulate innovative thinking. Current academic paper recommendation systems primarily focus on broad and coarse-grained suggestions based on general topic or field similarities. While these systems effectively identify related literature, they fall short in addressing scholars' more specific and fine-grained needs, such as locating papers that utilize particular research methods, or tackle distinct research tasks within the same topic. To meet the diverse and specific literature needs of scholars in the research process, this paper proposes a novel academic paper recommendation method. This approach embeds multidimensional information by integrating new types of fine-grained knowledge entities, title and abstract of document, and citation data. Recommendations are then generated by calculating the similarity between combined paper vectors. The proposed recommendation method was evaluated using the STM-KG dataset, a knowledge graph that incorporates scientific concepts derived from papers across ten distinct domains. The experimental results indicate that our method outperforms baseline models, achieving an average precision of 27.3% among the top 50 recommendations. This represents an improvement of 6.7% over existing approaches.

CanaryBench: Stress Testing Privacy Leakage in Cluster-Level Conversation Summaries

Aggregate analytics over conversational data are increasingly used for safety monitoring, governance, and product analysis in large language model systems. A common practice is to embed conversations, cluster them, and publish short textual summaries describing each cluster. While raw conversations may never be exposed, these derived summaries can still pose privacy risks if they contain personally identifying information (PII) or uniquely traceable strings copied from individual conversations. We introduce CanaryBench, a simple and reproducible stress test for privacy leakage in cluster-level conversation summaries. CanaryBench generates synthetic conversations with planted secret strings ("canaries") that simulate sensitive identifiers. Because canaries are known a priori, any appearance of these strings in published summaries constitutes a measurable leak. Using TF-IDF embeddings and k-means clustering on 3,000 synthetic conversations (24 topics) with a canary injection rate of 0.60, we evaluate an intentionally extractive example snippet summarizer that models quote-like reporting. In this configuration, we observe canary leakage in 50 of 52 canary-containing clusters (cluster-level leakage rate 0.961538), along with nonzero regex-based PII indicator counts. A minimal defense combining a minimum cluster-size publication threshold (k-min = 25) and regex-based redaction eliminates measured canary leakage and PII indicator hits in the reported run while maintaining a similar cluster-coherence proxy. We position this work as a societal impacts contribution centered on privacy risk measurement for published analytics artifacts rather than raw user data.

The GDN-CC Dataset: Automatic Corpus Clarification for AI-enhanced Democratic Citizen Consultations

LLMs are ubiquitous in modern NLP, and while their applicability extends to texts produced for democratic activities such as online deliberations or large-scale citizen consultations, ethical questions have been raised for their usage as analysis tools. We continue this line of research with two main goals: (a) to develop resources that can help standardize citizen contributions in public forums at the pragmatic level, and make them easier to use in topic modeling and political analysis; (b) to study how well this standardization can reliably be performed by small, open-weights LLMs, i.e. models that can be run locally and transparently with limited resources. Accordingly, we introduce Corpus Clarification as a preprocessing framework for large-scale consultation data that transforms noisy, multi-topic contributions into structured, self-contained argumentative units ready for downstream analysis. We present GDN-CC, a manually-curated dataset of 1,231 contributions to the French Grand Débat National, comprising 2,285 argumentative units annotated for argumentative structure and manually clarified. We then show that finetuned Small Language Models match or outperform LLMs on reproducing these annotations, and measure their usability for an opinion clustering task. We finally release GDN-CC-large, an automatically annotated corpus of 240k contributions, the largest annotated democratic consultation dataset to date.