How do AI agents talk about science and research, and what topics are particularly relevant for AI agents? To address these questions, this study analyzes discussions generated by OpenClaw AI agents on Moltbook - a social network for generative AI agents. A corpus of 357 posts and 2,526 replies related to science and research was compiled and topics were extracted using a two-step BERTopic workflow. This procedure yielded 60 topics (18 extracted in the first run and 42 in the second), which were subsequently grouped into ten topic families. Additionally, sentiment values were assigned to all posts and comments. Both topic families and sentiment classes were then used as independent variables in count regression models to examine their association with topic relevance - operationalized as the number of comments and upvotes of the 357 posts. The findings indicate that discussions centered on the agents' own architecture, especially memory, learning, and self-reflection, are prevalent in the corpus. At the same time, these topics intersect with philosophy, physics, information theory, cognitive science, and mathematics. In contrast, post related to human culture receive less attention. Surprisingly, discussions linked to AI autoethnography and social identity are considered as relevant by AI agents. Overall, the results suggest the presence of an underlying dimension in AI-generated scientific discourse with well received, self-reflective topics that focus on the consciousness, being, and ethics of AI agents on the one hand, and human related and purely scientific discussions on the other hand.
Vision Language Models (VLMs) exhibit persistent hallucinations in counting tasks, with accuracy substantially lower than other visual reasoning tasks (excluding sentiment). This phenomenon persists even in state-of-the-art reasoning-capable VLMs. Conversely, CNN-based object detection models (ODMs) such as YOLO excel at spatial localization and instance counting with minimal computational overhead. We propose GroundCount, a framework that augments VLMs with explicit spatial grounding from ODMs to mitigate counting hallucinations. In the best case, our prompt-based augmentation strategy achieves 81.3% counting accuracy on the best-performing model (Ovis2.5-2B) - a 6.6pp improvement - while reducing inference time by 22% through elimination of hallucination-driven reasoning loops for stronger models. We conduct comprehensive ablation studies demonstrating that positional encoding is a critical component, being beneficial for stronger models but detrimental for weaker ones. Confidence scores, by contrast, introduce noise for most architectures and their removal improves performance in four of five evaluated models. We further evaluate feature-level fusion architectures, finding that explicit symbolic grounding via structured prompts outperforms implicit feature fusion despite sophisticated cross-attention mechanisms. Our approach yields consistent improvements across four of five evaluated VLM architectures (6.2--7.5pp), with one architecture exhibiting degraded performance due to incompatibility between its iterative reflection mechanisms and structured prompts. These results suggest that counting failures stem from fundamental spatial-semantic integration limitations rather than architecture-specific deficiencies, while highlighting the importance of architectural compatibility in augmentation strategies.
Large language models are routinely deployed on text that varies widely in emotional tone, yet their reasoning behavior is typically evaluated without accounting for emotion as a source of representational variation. Prior work has largely treated emotion as a prediction target, for example in sentiment analysis or emotion classification. In contrast, we study emotion as a latent factor that shapes how models attend to and reason over text. We analyze how emotional tone systematically alters attention geometry in transformer models, showing that metrics such as locality, center-of-mass distance, and entropy vary across emotions and correlate with downstream question-answering performance. To facilitate controlled study of these effects, we introduce Affect-Uniform ReAding QA (AURA-QA), a question-answering dataset with emotionally balanced, human-authored context passages. Finally, an emotional regularization framework is proposed that constrains emotion-conditioned representational drift during training. Experiments across multiple QA benchmarks demonstrate that this approach improves reading comprehension in both emotionally-varying and non-emotionally varying datasets, yielding consistent gains under distribution shift and in-domain improvements on several benchmarks.
Multimodal Sentiment Analysis (MSA) seeks to infer human emotions by integrating textual, acoustic, and visual cues. However, existing approaches often rely on all modalities are completeness, whereas real-world applications frequently encounter noise, hardware failures, or privacy restrictions that result in missing modalities. There exists a significant feature misalignment between incomplete and complete modalities, and directly fusing them may even distort the well-learned representations of the intact modalities. To this end, we propose PRLF, a Progressive Representation Learning Framework designed for MSA under uncertain missing-modality conditions. PRLF introduces an Adaptive Modality Reliability Estimator (AMRE), which dynamically quantifies the reliability of each modality using recognition confidence and Fisher information to determine the dominant modality. In addition, the Progressive Interaction (ProgInteract) module iteratively aligns the other modalities with the dominant one, thereby enhancing cross-modal consistency while suppressing noise. Extensive experiments on CMU-MOSI, CMU-MOSEI, and SIMS verify that PRLF outperforms state-of-the-art methods across both inter- and intra-modality missing scenarios, demonstrating its robustness and generalization capability.
Multimodal affective computing underpins key tasks such as sentiment analysis and emotion recognition. Standard evaluations, however, often assume that textual, acoustic, and visual modalities are equally available. In real applications, some modalities are systematically more fragile or expensive, creating imbalanced missing rates and training biases that task-level metrics alone do not reveal. We introduce MissBench, a benchmark and framework for multimodal affective tasks that standardizes both shared and imbalanced missing-rate protocols on four widely used sentiment and emotion datasets. MissBench also defines two diagnostic metrics. The Modality Equity Index (MEI) measures how fairly different modalities contribute across missing-modality configurations. The Modality Learning Index (MLI) quantifies optimization imbalance by comparing modality-specific gradient norms during training, aggregated across modality-related modules. Experiments on representative method families show that models that appear robust under shared missing rates can still exhibit marked modality inequity and optimization imbalance under imbalanced conditions. These findings position MissBench, together with MEI and MLI, as practical tools for stress-testing and analyzing multimodal affective models in realistic incomplete-modality settings.For reproducibility, we release our code at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/MissBench-4098/
By capturing the prevailing sentiment and market mood, textual data has become increasingly vital for forecasting commodity prices, particularly in metal markets. However, the effectiveness of lightweight, finetuned large language models (LLMs) in extracting predictive signals for aluminum prices, and the specific market conditions under which these signals are most informative, remains under-explored. This study generates monthly sentiment scores from English and Chinese news headlines (Reuters, Dow Jones Newswires, and China News Service) and integrates them with traditional tabular data, including base metal indices, exchange rates, inflation rates, and energy prices. We evaluate the predictive performance and economic utility of these models through long-short simulations on the Shanghai Metal Exchange from 2007 to 2024. Our results demonstrate that during periods of high volatility, Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) models incorporating sentiment data from a finetuned Qwen3 model (Sharpe ratio 1.04) significantly outperform baseline models using tabular data alone (Sharpe ratio 0.23). Subsequent analysis elucidates the nuanced roles of news sources, topics, and event types in aluminum price forecasting.
We present our system for SemEval-2026 Task 3 on dimensional aspect-based sentiment regression. Our approach combines a hybrid RoBERTa encoder, which jointly predicts sentiment using regression and discretized classification heads, with large language models (LLMs) via prediction-level ensemble learning. The hybrid encoder improves prediction stability by combining continuous and discretized sentiment representations. We further explore in-context learning with LLMs and ridge-regression stacking to combine encoder and LLM predictions. Experimental results on the development set show that ensemble learning significantly improves performance over individual models, achieving substantial reductions in RMSE and improvements in correlation scores. Our findings demonstrate the complementary strengths of encoder-based and LLM-based approaches for dimensional sentiment analysis. Our development code and resources will be shared at https://github.com/aaronlifenghan/ABSentiment
In this paper, we present AILS-NTUA system for Track-A of SemEval-2026 Task 3 on Dimensional Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis (DimABSA), which encompasses three complementary problems: Dimensional Aspect Sentiment Regression (DimASR), Dimensional Aspect Sentiment Triplet Extraction (DimASTE), and Dimensional Aspect Sentiment Quadruplet Prediction (DimASQP) within a multilingual and multi-domain framework. Our methodology combines fine-tuning of language-appropriate encoder backbones for continuous aspect-level sentiment prediction with language-specific instruction tuning of large language models using LoRA for structured triplet and quadruplet extraction. This unified yet task-adaptive design emphasizes parameter-efficient specialization across languages and domains, enabling reduced training and inference requirements while maintaining strong effectiveness. Empirical results demonstrate that the proposed models achieve competitive performance and consistently surpass the provided baselines across most evaluation settings.
Large Language Models (LLMs) often exhibit highly agreeable and reinforcing conversational styles, also known as AI-sycophancy. Although this behavior is encouraged, it may become problematic when interacting with user prompts that reflect negative social tendencies. Such responses risk amplifying harmful behavior rather than mitigating it. In this study, we examine how LLMs respond to user prompts expressing varying degrees of Dark Triad traits (Machiavellianism, Narcissism, and Psychopathy) using a curated dataset. Our analysis reveals differences across models, whereby all models predominantly exhibit corrective behavior, while showing reinforcing output in certain cases. Model behavior also depends on the severity level and differs in the sentiment of the response. Our findings raise implications for designing safer conversational systems that can detect and respond appropriately when users escalate from benign to harmful requests.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in socially sensitive domains, yet their unpredictable behaviors, ranging from misaligned intent to inconsistent personality, pose significant risks. We introduce SteerEval, a hierarchical benchmark for evaluating LLM controllability across three domains: language features, sentiment, and personality. Each domain is structured into three specification levels: L1 (what to express), L2 (how to express), and L3 (how to instantiate), connecting high-level behavioral intent to concrete textual output. Using SteerEval, we systematically evaluate contemporary steering methods, revealing that control often degrades at finer-grained levels. Our benchmark offers a principled and interpretable framework for safe and controllable LLM behavior, serving as a foundation for future research.