The growing use of unstructured text in business research makes topic modeling a central tool for constructing explanatory variables from reviews, social media, and open-ended survey responses, yet existing approaches function poorly as measurement instruments. Prior work shows that textual content predicts outcomes such as sales, satisfaction, and firm performance, but probabilistic models often generate conceptually diffuse topics, neural topic models are difficult to interpret in theory-driven settings, and large language model approaches lack standardization, stability, and alignment with document-level representations. We introduce LX Topic, a neural topic method that conceptualizes topics as latent linguistic constructs and produces calibrated document-level topic proportions for empirical analysis. LX Topic builds on FASTopic to ensure strong document representativeness and integrates large language model refinement at the topic-word level using alignment and confidence-weighting mechanisms that enhance semantic coherence without distorting document-topic distributions. Evaluations on large-scale Amazon and Yelp review datasets demonstrate that LX Topic achieves the highest overall topic quality relative to leading models while preserving clustering and classification performance. By unifying topic discovery, refinement, and standardized output in a web-based system, LX Topic establishes topic modeling as a reproducible, interpretable, and measurement-oriented instrument for marketing research and practice.
Image aesthetic assessment (IAA) has extensive applications in content creation, album management, and recommendation systems, etc. In such applications, it is commonly needed to pick out the most aesthetically pleasing image from a series of images with subtle aesthetic variations, a topic we refer to as fine-grained IAA. Unfortunately, state-of-the-art IAA models are typically designed for coarse-grained evaluation, where images with notable aesthetic differences are evaluated independently on an absolute scale. These models are inherently limited in discriminating fine-grained aesthetic differences. To address the dilemma, we contribute FGAesthetics, a fine-grained IAA database with 32,217 images organized into 10,028 series, which are sourced from diverse categories including Natural, AIGC, and Cropping. Annotations are collected via pairwise comparisons within each series. We also devise Series Refinement and Rank Calibration to ensure the reliability of data and labels. Based on FGAesthetics, we further propose FGAesQ, a novel IAA framework that learns discriminative aesthetic scores from relative ranks through Difference-preserved Tokenization (DiffToken), Comparative Text-assisted Alignment (CTAlign), and Rank-aware Regression (RankReg). FGAesQ enables accurate aesthetic assessment in fine-grained scenarios while still maintains competitive performance in coarse-grained evaluation. Extensive experiments and comparisons demonstrate the superiority of the proposed method.
Language models deployed in online communities must adapt to norms that vary across social, cultural, and domain-specific contexts. Prior alignment approaches rely on explicit preference supervision or predefined principles, which are effective for well-resourced settings but exclude most online communities -- particularly those without institutional backing, annotation infrastructure, or organized around sensitive topics -- where preference elicitation is costly, ethically fraught, or culturally misaligned. We observe that communities already express preferences implicitly through what content they accept, engage with, and allow to persist. We show that this acceptance behavior induces measurable geometric structure in representation space: accepted responses occupy coherent, high-density regions that reflect community-specific norms, while rejected content falls in sparser or misaligned areas. We operationalize this structure as an implicit preference signal for alignment and introduce density-guided response optimization (DGRO), a method that aligns language models to community norms without requiring explicit preference labels. Using labeled preference data, we demonstrate that local density recovers pairwise community judgments, indicating that geometric structure encodes meaningful preference signal. We then apply DGRO in annotation-scarce settings across diverse communities spanning platform, topic, and language. DGRO-aligned models consistently produce responses preferred by human annotators, domain experts, and model-based judges over supervised and prompt-based baselines. We position DGRO as a practical alignment alternative for communities where explicit preference supervision is unavailable or misaligned with situated practices, and discuss the implications and risks of learning from emergent acceptance behavior.
Scholarly data are largely fragmented across siloed databases with divergent metadata and missing linkages among them. We present the Science Data Lake, a locally-deployable infrastructure built on DuckDB and simple Parquet files that unifies eight open sources - Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, SciSciNet, Papers with Code, Retraction Watch, Reliance on Science, a preprint-to-published mapping, and Crossref - via DOI normalization while preserving source-level schemas. The resource comprises approximately 960GB of Parquet files spanning ~293 million uniquely identifiable papers across ~22 schemas and ~153 SQL views. An embedding-based ontology alignment using BGE-large sentence embeddings maps 4,516 OpenAlex topics to 13 scientific ontologies (~1.3 million terms), yielding 16,150 mappings covering 99.8% of topics ($\geq 0.65$ threshold) with $F1 = 0.77$ at the recommended $\geq 0.85$ operating point, outperforming TF-IDF, BM25, and Jaro-Winkler baselines on a 300-pair gold-standard evaluation. We validate through 10 automated checks, cross-source citation agreement analysis (pairwise Pearson $r = 0.76$ - $0.87$), and stratified manual annotation. Four vignettes demonstrate cross-source analyses infeasible with any single database. The resource is open source, deployable on a single drive or queryable remotely via HuggingFace, and includes structured documentation suitable for large language model (LLM) based research agents.
Exponential growth in the quantity of digital news, social media, and other textual sources makes it difficult for humans to keep up with rapidly evolving narratives about world events. Various visualisation techniques have been touted to help people to understand such discourse by exposing relationships between texts (such as news articles) as topics and themes evolve over time. Arguably, the understandability of such visualisations hinges on the assumption that people will be able to easily interpret the relationships in such visual network structures. To test this assumption, we begin by defining an abstract model of time-dependent text visualisation based on directed graph structures. From this model we distill motifs that capture the set of possible ways that texts can be linked across changes in time. We also develop a controlled synthetic text generation methodology that leverages the power of modern LLMs to create fictional, yet structured sets of time-dependent texts that fit each of our patterns. Therefore, we create a clean user study environment (n=30) for participants to identify patterns that best represent a given set of synthetic articles. We find that it is a challenging task for the user to identify and recover the predefined motif. We analyse qualitative data to map an unexpectedly rich variety of user rationales when divergences from expected interpretation occur. A deeper analysis also points to unexpected complexities inherent in the formation of synthetic datasets with LLMs that undermine the study control in some cases. Furthermore, analysis of individual decision-making in our study hints at a future where text discourse visualisation may need to dispense with a one-size-fits-all approach and, instead, should be more adaptable to the specific user who is exploring the visualisation in front of them.
Interactive articles help readers engage with complex ideas through exploration, yet creating them remains costly, requiring both domain expertise and web development skills. Recent LLM-based agents can automate content creation, but naively applying them yields uncontrollable and unverifiable outputs. We present ViviDoc, a human-agent collaborative system that generates interactive educational documents from a single topic input. ViviDoc introduces a multi-agent pipeline (Planner, Executor, Evaluator) and the Document Specification (DocSpec), a human-readable intermediate representation that decomposes each interactive visualization into State, Render, Transition, and Constraint components. The DocSpec enables educators to review and refine generation plans before code is produced, bridging the gap between pedagogical intent and executable output. Expert evaluation and a user study show that ViviDoc substantially outperforms naive agentic generation and provides an intuitive editing experience. Our project homepage is available at https://vividoc-homepage.vercel.app/.
Detecting anomalies in link streams that represent various kinds of interactions is an important research topic with crucial applications. Because of the lack of ground truth data, proposed methods are mostly evaluated through their ability to detect randomly injected links. In contrast with most proposed methods, that rely on complex approaches raising computational and/or interpretability issues, we show here that trivial graph features and classical learning techniques are sufficient to detect such anomalies extremely well. This basic approach has very low computational costs and it leads to easily interpretable results. It also has many other desirable properties that we study through an extensive set of experiments. We conclude that detection methods should now target more complex kinds of anomalies.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world applications where users engage in extended, mixed-topic conversations that depend on prior context. Yet, their reliability under realistic multi-turn interactions remains poorly understood. We conduct a systematic evaluation of conversational reliability through three representative tasks that reflect practical interaction challenges: (1) maintaining global constraints across topic shifts, (2) selecting the correct tool or agent amid interleaved intents, and (3) tracking structured entities under revisions and distractions. Each task pairs single-turn and multi-turn settings, allowing us to quantify reliability degradation under extended dialogue. Across both commercial and open-source models, we observe substantial declines in reliability, particularly for smaller models. Error analyses reveal recurring failure modes such as instruction drift, intent confusion, and contextual overwriting, which compromise dependable behavior in operational systems. Our findings highlight the need for stress-testing LLMs for conversational reliability and developing more robust evaluation methods for trustworthy deployment.
This report details our submission to the CHiME-9 MCoRec Challenge on recognizing and clustering multiple concurrent natural conversations within indoor social settings. Unlike conventional meetings centered on a single shared topic, this scenario contains multiple parallel dialogues--up to eight speakers across up to four simultaneous conversations--with a speech overlap rate exceeding 90%. To tackle this, we propose a multimodal cascaded system that leverages per-speaker visual streams extracted from synchronized 360 degree video together with single-channel audio. Our system improves three components of the pipeline by leveraging enhanced audio-visual pretrained models: Active Speaker Detection (ASD), Audio-Visual Target Speech Extraction (AVTSE), and Audio-Visual Speech Recognition (AVSR). The AVSR module further incorporates Whisper and LLM techniques to boost transcription accuracy. Our best single cascaded system achieves a Speaker Word Error Rate (WER) of 32.44% on the development set. By further applying ROVER to fuse outputs from diverse front-end and back-end variants, we reduce Speaker WER to 31.40%. Notably, our LLM-based zero-shot conversational clustering achieves a speaker clustering F1 score of 1.0, yielding a final Joint ASR-Clustering Error Rate (JACER) of 15.70%.
Topic models uncover latent thematic structures in text corpora, yet evaluating their quality remains challenging, particularly in specialized domains. Existing methods often rely on automated metrics like topic coherence and diversity, which may not fully align with human judgment. Human evaluation tasks, such as word intrusion, provide valuable insights but are costly and primarily validated on general-domain corpora. This paper introduces Topic Word Mixing (TWM), a novel human evaluation task assessing inter-topic distinctness by testing whether annotators can distinguish between word sets from single or mixed topics. TWM complements word intrusion's focus on intra-topic coherence and provides a human-grounded counterpart to diversity metrics. We evaluate six topic models - both statistical and embedding-based (LDA, NMF, Top2Vec, BERTopic, CFMF, CFMF-emb) - comparing automated metrics with human evaluation methods based on nearly 4,000 annotations from a domain-specific corpus of philosophy of science publications. Our findings reveal that word intrusion and coherence metrics do not always align, particularly in specialized domains, and that TWM captures human-perceived distinctness while appearing to align with diversity metrics. We release the annotated dataset and task generation code. This work highlights the need for evaluation frameworks bridging automated and human assessments, particularly for domain-specific corpora.