Is Grokipedia Right-Leaning? Comparing Political Framing in Wikipedia and Grokipedia on Controversial Topics

Online encyclopedias are central to contemporary information infrastructures and have become focal points of debates over ideological bias. Wikipedia, in particular, has long been accused of left-leaning bias, while Grokipedia, an AI-generated encyclopedia launched by xAI, has been framed as a right-leaning alternative. This paper presents a comparative analysis of Wikipedia and Grokipedia on well-established politically contested topics. Specifically, we examine differences in semantic framing, political orientation, and content prioritization. We find that semantic similarity between the two platforms decays across article sections and diverges more strongly on controversial topics than on randomly sampled ones. Additionally, we show that both encyclopedias predominantly exhibit left-leaning framings, although Grokipedia exhibits a more bimodal distribution with increased prominence of right-leaning content. The experimental code is publicly available.

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.

Reflecting in the Reflection: Integrating a Socratic Questioning Framework into Automated AI-Based Question Generation

Designing good reflection questions is pedagogically important but time-consuming and unevenly supported across teachers. This paper introduces a reflection-in-reflection framework for automated generation of reflection questions with large language models (LLMs). Our approach coordinates two role-specialized agents, a Student-Teacher and a Teacher-Educator, that engage in a Socratic multi-turn dialogue to iteratively refine a single question given a teacher-specified topic, key concepts, student level, and optional instructional materials. The Student-Teacher proposes candidate questions with brief rationales, while the Teacher-Educator evaluates them along clarity, depth, relevance, engagement, and conceptual interconnections, responding only with targeted coaching questions or a fixed signal to stop the dialogue. We evaluate the framework in an authentic lower-secondary ICT setting on the topic, using GPT-4o-mini as the backbone model and a stronger GPT- 4-class LLM as an external evaluator in pairwise comparisons of clarity, relevance, depth, and overall quality. First, we study how interaction design and context (dynamic vs.fixed iteration counts; presence or absence of student level and materials) affect question quality. Dynamic stopping combined with contextual information consistently outperforms fixed 5- or 10-step refinement, with very long dialogues prone to drift or over-complication. Second, we show that our two-agent protocol produces questions that are judged substantially more relevant and deeper, and better overall, than a one-shot baseline using the same backbone model.

DS@GT at TREC TOT 2025: Bridging Vague Recollection with Fusion Retrieval and Learned Reranking

We develop a two-stage retrieval system that combines multiple complementary retrieval methods with a learned reranker and LLM-based reranking, to address the TREC Tip-of-the-Tongue (ToT) task. In the first stage, we employ hybrid retrieval that merges LLM-based retrieval, sparse (BM25), and dense (BGE-M3) retrieval methods. We also introduce topic-aware multi-index dense retrieval that partitions the Wikipedia corpus into 24 topical domains. In the second stage, we evaluate both a trained LambdaMART reranker and LLM-based reranking. To support model training, we generate 5000 synthetic ToT queries using LLMs. Our best system achieves recall of 0.66 and NDCG@1000 of 0.41 on the test set by combining hybrid retrieval with Gemini-2.5-flash reranking, demonstrating the effectiveness of fusion retrieval.

Large-Scale Multidimensional Knowledge Profiling of Scientific Literature

The rapid expansion of research across machine learning, vision, and language has produced a volume of publications that is increasingly difficult to synthesize. Traditional bibliometric tools rely mainly on metadata and offer limited visibility into the semantic content of papers, making it hard to track how research themes evolve over time or how different areas influence one another. To obtain a clearer picture of recent developments, we compile a unified corpus of more than 100,000 papers from 22 major conferences between 2020 and 2025 and construct a multidimensional profiling pipeline to organize and analyze their textual content. By combining topic clustering, LLM-assisted parsing, and structured retrieval, we derive a comprehensive representation of research activity that supports the study of topic lifecycles, methodological transitions, dataset and model usage patterns, and institutional research directions. Our analysis highlights several notable shifts, including the growth of safety, multimodal reasoning, and agent-oriented studies, as well as the gradual stabilization of areas such as neural machine translation and graph-based methods. These findings provide an evidence-based view of how AI research is evolving and offer a resource for understanding broader trends and identifying emerging directions. Code and dataset: https://github.com/xzc-zju/Profiling_Scientific_Literature

Circadian Modulation of Semantic Exploration in Social Media Language

Human cognition exhibits strong circadian modulation, yet its influence on high-dimensional semantic behavior remains poorly understood. Using large-scale Reddit data, we quantify time-of-day variation in language use by embedding text into a pretrained transformer model and measuring semantic entropy as an index of linguistic exploration-exploitation, for which we show a robust circadian rhythmicity that could be entrained by seasonal light cues. Distinguishing between local and global semantic entropy reveals a systematic temporal dissociation: local semantic exploration peaks in the morning, reflecting broader exploration of semantic space, whereas global semantic diversity peaks later in the day as submissions accumulate around already established topics, consistent with "rich-get-richer" dynamics. These patterns are not explained by sentiment or affective valence, indicating that semantic exploration captures a cognitive dimension distinct from mood. The observed temporal structure aligns with known diurnal patterns in neuromodulatory systems, suggesting that biological circadian rhythms extend to the semantic domain.

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.

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.

Truth with a Twist: The Rhetoric of Persuasion in Professional vs. Community-Authored Fact-Checks

This study presents the first large-scale comparison of persuasion techniques present in crowd- versus professionally-written debunks. Using extensive datasets from Community Notes (CNs), EUvsDisinfo, and the Database of Known Fakes (DBKF), we quantify the prevalence and types of persuasion techniques across these fact-checking ecosystems. Contrary to prior hypothesis that community-produced debunks rely more heavily on subjective or persuasive wording, we find no evidence that CNs contain a higher average number of persuasion techniques than professional fact-checks. We additionally identify systematic rhetorical differences between CNs and professional debunking efforts, reflecting differences in institutional norms and topical coverage. Finally, we examine how the crowd evaluates persuasive language in CNs and show that, although notes with more persuasive elements receive slightly higher overall helpfulness ratings, crowd raters are effective at penalising the use of particular problematic rhetorical means