Topic modeling is a type of statistical modeling for discovering the abstract topics that occur in a collection of documents.
With massive texts on social media, users and analysts often rely on topic modeling techniques to quickly extract key themes and gain insights. Traditional topic modeling techniques, such as Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), provide valuable insights but are computationally expensive, making them impractical for real-time data analysis. Although recent advances in distributed training and fast sampling methods have improved efficiency, real-time topic exploration remains a significant challenge. In this paper, we present MLego, an interactive query framework designed to support real-time topic modeling analysis by leveraging model materialization and reuse. Instead of retraining models from scratch, MLego efficiently merges materialized topic models to construct approximate results at interactive speeds. To further enhance efficiency, we introduce a hierarchical plan search strategy for single queries and an optimized query reordering technique for batch queries. We integrate MLego into a visual analytics prototype system, enabling users to explore large-scale textual datasets through interactive queries. Extensive experiments demonstrate that MLego significantly reduces computation costs while maintaining high-quality topic modeling results. MLego enhances existing visual analytics approaches, which primarily focus on user-driven topic modeling, by enabling real-time, query-driven exploration. This complements traditional methods and bridges the gap between scalable topic modeling and interactive data analysis.
Explainable AI (XAI) has become an increasingly important topic for understanding and attributing the predictions made by complex Time Series Classification (TSC) models. Among attribution methods, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) is widely regarded as an excellent attribution method; but its computational complexity, which scales exponentially with the number of features, limits its practicality for long time series. To address this, recent studies have shown that aggregating features via segmentation, to compute a single attribution value for a group of consecutive time points, drastically reduces SHAP running time. However, the choice of the optimal segmentation strategy remains an open question. In this work, we investigated eight different Time Series Segmentation algorithms to understand how segment compositions affect the explanation quality. We evaluate these approaches using two established XAI evaluation methodologies: InterpretTime and AUC Difference. Through experiments on both Multivariate (MTS) and Univariate Time Series (UTS), we find that the number of segments has a greater impact on explanation quality than the specific segmentation method. Notably, equal-length segmentation consistently outperforms most of the custom time series segmentation algorithms. Furthermore, we introduce a novel attribution normalisation technique that weights segments by their length and we show that it consistently improves attribution quality.
Migration has been a core topic in German political debate, from millions of expellees post World War II over labor migration to refugee movements in the recent past. Studying political speech regarding such wide-ranging phenomena in depth traditionally required extensive manual annotations, limiting the scope of analysis to small subsets of the data. Large language models (LLMs) have the potential to partially automate even complex annotation tasks. We provide an extensive evaluation of a multiple LLMs in annotating (anti-)solidarity subtypes in German parliamentary debates compared to a large set of thousands of human reference annotations (gathered over a year). We evaluate the influence of model size, prompting differences, fine-tuning, historical versus contemporary data; and we investigate systematic errors. Beyond methodological evaluation, we also interpret the resulting annotations from a social science lense, gaining deeper insight into (anti-)solidarity trends towards migrants in the German post-World War II period and recent past. Our data reveals a high degree of migrant-directed solidarity in the postwar period, as well as a strong trend towards anti-solidarity in the German parliament since 2015, motivating further research. These findings highlight the promise of LLMs for political text analysis and the importance of migration debates in Germany, where demographic decline and labor shortages coexist with rising polarization.
Driven by autonomous driving's demands for precise 3D perception, 3D semantic occupancy prediction has become a pivotal research topic. Unlike bird's-eye-view (BEV) methods, which restrict scene representation to a 2D plane, occupancy prediction leverages a complete 3D voxel grid to model spatial structures in all dimensions, thereby capturing semantic variations along the vertical axis. However, most existing approaches overlook height-axis information when processing voxel features. And conventional SENet-style channel attention assigns uniform weight across all height layers, limiting their ability to emphasize features at different heights. To address these limitations, we propose SliceSemOcc, a novel vertical slice based multimodal framework for 3D semantic occupancy representation. Specifically, we extract voxel features along the height-axis using both global and local vertical slices. Then, a global local fusion module adaptively reconciles fine-grained spatial details with holistic contextual information. Furthermore, we propose the SEAttention3D module, which preserves height-wise resolution through average pooling and assigns dynamic channel attention weights to each height layer. Extensive experiments on nuScenes-SurroundOcc and nuScenes-OpenOccupancy datasets verify that our method significantly enhances mean IoU, achieving especially pronounced gains on most small-object categories. Detailed ablation studies further validate the effectiveness of the proposed SliceSemOcc framework.
Objectivity in journalism has long been contested, oscillating between ideals of neutral, fact-based reporting and the inevitability of subjective framing. With the advent of large language models (LLMs), these tensions are now mediated by algorithmic systems whose training data and design choices may themselves embed cultural or ideological biases. This study investigates geopolitical parallax-systematic divergence in news quality and subjectivity assessments-by comparing article-level embeddings from Chinese-origin (Qwen, BGE, Jina) and Western-origin (Snowflake, Granite) model families. We evaluate both on a human-annotated news quality benchmark spanning fifteen stylistic, informational, and affective dimensions, and on parallel corpora covering politically sensitive topics, including Palestine and reciprocal China-United States coverage. Using logistic regression probes and matched-topic evaluation, we quantify per-metric differences in predicted positive-class probabilities between model families. Our findings reveal consistent, non-random divergences aligned with model origin. In Palestine-related coverage, Western models assign higher subjectivity and positive emotion scores, while Chinese models emphasize novelty and descriptiveness. Cross-topic analysis shows asymmetries in structural quality metrics Chinese-on-US scoring notably lower in fluency, conciseness, technicality, and overall quality-contrasted by higher negative emotion scores. These patterns align with media bias theory and our distinction between semantic, emotional, and relational subjectivity, and extend LLM bias literature by showing that geopolitical framing effects persist in downstream quality assessment tasks. We conclude that LLM-based media evaluation pipelines require cultural calibration to avoid conflating content differences with model-induced bias.
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) equipped with step-by-step thinking capabilities have demonstrated remarkable performance on complex reasoning problems. However, this thinking process is redundant for simple problems solvable without complex reasoning. To address this inefficiency, we propose R-4B, an auto-thinking MLLM, which can adaptively decide when to think based on problem complexity. The central idea of R-4B is to empower the model with both thinking and non-thinking capabilities using bi-mode annealing, and apply Bi-mode Policy Optimization~(BPO) to improve the model's accuracy in determining whether to activate the thinking process. Specifically, we first train the model on a carefully curated dataset spanning various topics, which contains samples from both thinking and non-thinking modes. Then it undergoes a second phase of training under an improved GRPO framework, where the policy model is forced to generate responses from both modes for each input query. Experimental results show that R-4B achieves state-of-the-art performance across 25 challenging benchmarks. It outperforms Qwen2.5-VL-7B in most tasks and achieves performance comparable to larger models such as Kimi-VL-A3B-Thinking-2506 (16B) on reasoning-intensive benchmarks with lower computational cost.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in enterprise applications, yet their reliability remains limited by hallucinations, i.e., confident but factually incorrect information. Existing detection approaches, such as SelfCheckGPT and MetaQA, primarily target standalone LLMs and do not address the unique challenges of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems, where responses must be consistent with retrieved evidence. We therefore present MetaRAG, a metamorphic testing framework for hallucination detection in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems. MetaRAG operates in a real-time, unsupervised, black-box setting, requiring neither ground-truth references nor access to model internals, making it suitable for proprietary and high-stakes domains. The framework proceeds in four stages: (1) decompose answers into atomic factoids, (2) generate controlled mutations of each factoid using synonym and antonym substitutions, (3) verify each variant against the retrieved context (synonyms are expected to be entailed and antonyms contradicted), and (4) aggregate penalties for inconsistencies into a response-level hallucination score. Crucially for identity-aware AI, MetaRAG localizes unsupported claims at the factoid span where they occur (e.g., pregnancy-specific precautions, LGBTQ+ refugee rights, or labor eligibility), allowing users to see flagged spans and enabling system designers to configure thresholds and guardrails for identity-sensitive queries. Experiments on a proprietary enterprise dataset illustrate the effectiveness of MetaRAG for detecting hallucinations and enabling trustworthy deployment of RAG-based conversational agents. We also outline a topic-based deployment design that translates MetaRAG's span-level scores into identity-aware safeguards; this design is discussed but not evaluated in our experiments.
Retrievability of a document is a collection-based statistic that measures its expected (reciprocal) rank of being retrieved within a specific rank cut-off. A collection with uniformly distributed retrievability scores across documents is an indicator of fair document exposure. While retrievability scores have been used to quantify the fairness of exposure for a collection, in our work, we use the distribution of retrievability scores to measure the exposure bias of retrieval models. We hypothesise that an uneven distribution of retrievability scores across the entire collection may not accurately reflect exposure bias but rather indicate variations in topical relevance. As a solution, we propose a topic-focused localised retrievability measure, which we call \textit{T-Retrievability} (topic-retrievability), which first computes retrievability scores over multiple groups of topically-related documents, and then aggregates these localised values to obtain the collection-level statistics. Our analysis using this proposed T-Retrievability measure uncovers new insights into the exposure characteristics of various neural ranking models. The findings suggest that this localised measure provides a more nuanced understanding of exposure fairness, offering a more reliable approach for assessing document accessibility in IR systems.
Modern information retrieval (IR) must bridge short, ambiguous queries and ever more diverse, rapidly evolving corpora. Query Expansion (QE) remains a key mechanism for mitigating vocabulary mismatch, but the design space has shifted markedly with pre-trained language models (PLMs) and large language models (LLMs). This survey synthesizes the field from three angles: (i) a four-dimensional framework of query expansion - from the point of injection (explicit vs. implicit QE), through grounding and interaction (knowledge bases, model-internal capabilities, multi-turn retrieval) and learning alignment, to knowledge graph-based argumentation; (ii) a model-centric taxonomy spanning encoder-only, encoder-decoder, decoder-only, instruction-tuned, and domain/multilingual variants, highlighting their characteristic affordances for QE (contextual disambiguation, controllable generation, zero-/few-shot reasoning); and (iii) practice-oriented guidance on where and how neural QE helps in first-stage retrieval, multi-query fusion, re-ranking, and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). We compare traditional query expansion with PLM/LLM-based methods across seven key aspects, and we map applications across web search, biomedicine, e-commerce, open-domain QA/RAG, conversational and code search, and cross-lingual settings. The review distills design grounding and interaction, alignment/distillation (SFT/PEFT/DPO), and KG constraints - as robust remedies to topic drift and hallucination. We conclude with an agenda on quality control, cost-aware invocation, domain/temporal adaptation, evaluation beyond end-task metrics, and fairness/privacy. Collectively, these insights provide a principled blueprint for selecting and combining QE techniques under real-world constraints.
Access to diverse perspectives is essential for understanding real-world events, yet most news retrieval systems prioritize textual relevance, leading to redundant results and limited viewpoint exposure. We propose NEWSCOPE, a two-stage framework for diverse news retrieval that enhances event coverage by explicitly modeling semantic variation at the sentence level. The first stage retrieves topically relevant content using dense retrieval, while the second stage applies sentence-level clustering and diversity-aware re-ranking to surface complementary information. To evaluate retrieval diversity, we introduce three interpretable metrics, namely Average Pairwise Distance, Positive Cluster Coverage, and Information Density Ratio, and construct two paragraph-level benchmarks: LocalNews and DSGlobal. Experiments show that NEWSCOPE consistently outperforms strong baselines, achieving significantly higher diversity without compromising relevance. Our results demonstrate the effectiveness of fine-grained, interpretable modeling in mitigating redundancy and promoting comprehensive event understanding. The data and code are available at https://github.com/tangyixuan/NEWSCOPE.