Papers

While fairness has become a central concern in research on algorithmic systems, the field remains predominantly shaped by Computer Science, resulting in a strong emphasis on formal fairness metrics and bias mitigation strategies. Nevertheless, this focus may obscure a fundamental challenge: fairness is not merely a technical property, but a subjective, context-sensitive human judgment shaped by cognitive heuristics, mental models, normative expectations, and sociotechnical factors. Crucially, users' perceptions of fairness may diverge substantially from the fairness criteria an algorithm formally satisfies; a system may meet predefined technical fairness requirements yet still be perceived as unjust by decision-affected stakeholders. In such cases, the system fails on a fundamental dimension: it will not be trusted, accepted, or considered legitimate. Taking a user-centered design perspective, this paper presents a work-in-progress conceptual framework that bridges Computer Science approaches to formal algorithmic fairness with normative and Social Science fairness approaches regarding perceived fairness, trust, and technology acceptance, embedding both within the sociotechnical conditions that shape human judgment. Through (1) theoretical literature synthesis, (2) interdisciplinary workshops, and (3) stakeholder interviews, the project aims to inform evaluation approaches that integrate computational fairness audits with user-centered assessments and guide the design of fairness-aware, human-centered algorithmic systems that support informed, well-calibrated fairness judgments by those affected.

Institutions practising outcome-based education compute learning outcome attainment routinely, while reviews of curriculum analytics report an absence of evidence on how that computation informs decisions. This paper presents OBER+, an extension of a deployed institutional attainment platform that computes the step from a measured shortfall to an evaluated corrective action. Five connected stages accumulate attainment across deliveries of a course, signal a shortfall and a persistent shortfall, grade it on cutoffs the regulator already uses, record the decision against a catalogue of practices annotated with their evidence, log the change, and quantify the subsequent movement in the shortfall. A further rule compares successive statements of an outcome, so attainment is never read as a series across a point at which the outcome changed. Applying the rules to the live record of two real courses produced three results. Every outcome of a core course was substantively redefined between consecutive deliveries, with subject matter moving between outcome numbers, so a naive reading would have reported a twenty-five point collapse between quantities that do not refer to the same learning. Recomputing the platform's figures from its documented rule showed six of ten differing by more than rounding explains, in a pattern that identified a defect since reported to the institution. Across fifteen statement pairs from three transitions, five were identical character for character, and among the ten that were not, the outcome carrying a given number was nearest to a differently numbered earlier outcome in six, a result resting on an ordering of similarities and requiring no threshold and no labelling. The contribution is a computational design for outcome-based reporting, stated as rules any attainment platform can implement, with evidence of what they make visible in a live institutional record.

The Metaverse is often framed as a persistent, interoperable, and embodied network of virtual and augmented environments. Yet, most contemporary XR applications are developed through commercial game engines and distributed through proprietary app stores, creating tensions between openness and platform dependency. This paper critically examines open WebXR technologies with conventional commercial game-engine pipelines, with particular attention to XR hardware, software architectures, developer workflows, governance, ethics, interoperability, and sustainability. We argue that WebXR may provide a viable route toward a more accessible, device-independent, and institutionally sustainable Metaverse, especially for education, research, cultural heritage, prototyping, and public-interest applications. At the same time, commercial engines remain advantageous for graphically intensive, low-latency, deeply integrated, and large-scale XR products. The paper concludes that the choice should not be framed as WebXR versus engines, but as a continuum: WebXR is preferable when accessibility, interoperability, low-friction deployment, and long-term maintainability are primary goals, whereas native engines remain preferable when performance, platform-specific hardware access, and production-grade tooling dominate.

Policy analysis requires more than predicting whether a proposal will pass: it requires identifying who will be affected, how those actors respond, and what follows. LLM-based policy simulations model these processes at scale, but their validity is hard to establish when plausible behaviour is never compared with observed outcomes. We introduce GPS-Bench, an evidence-grounded benchmark for governance policy simulation that links policies to relevant actors, actor actions and downstream impacts using legislative records, lobbying disclosures, regulatory documents, corporate filings, economic data and other public evidence. Actors are reconstructed from the dated record rather than prompted as archetypes, so a persona is an evidence object with provenance; a human-annotated pool forms the Gold evaluation set, while cases labelled by a separate LLM from retrieved evidence are treated as Silver supervision and never as test labels. Because every inference mode reads the same grounded state and emits the same schema, GPS-Bench turns "does multi-agent simulation help?" into a controlled comparison: we contrast joint reasoning, independent and communicating actor agents, graph-based methods and weight-level fine-tuning over one policy state. Fine-tuning on the grounded record gives the strongest actor-level impact prediction, and decomposition does not beat it; what decomposition adds is mechanism. Agents hold private, non-identical evidence, each seeing its own exposure clause, and address named partners with concrete joint proposals, what they offer, what they need in return, and why acting together beats acting alone, so the coalitions that form can be checked against the commitments the record holds. GPS-Bench therefore gives a common empirical setting for studying when evidence, actor modelling and multi-agent interaction improve the prediction and interpretation of policy outcomes.

Contributions: A reflection model suitable for the era of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is introduced. The proposed model is an integrated model that extracts features from various existing models and also incorporates technological aspects of GenAI. Background: Universities worldwide are facing challenges in adopting GenAI into their curricula, as it has impacted academic integrity and the scholarship of teaching and research. Traditional reflection models are struggling to authenticate student reflection as GenAI is incorporated in education. This requires a GenAI-aware model to enable the opportunities that address the associated challenges with GenAI. Research Questions: Does the academic ecosystem require a GenAI-aware reflection model to adopt GenAI into education? How to make a reflection model structured to ensure student authenticity and cognitive engagement within a GenAI-aware learning environment? Methodology: This study employs a design-based research methodology, assisted by a critical inquiry approach, to analyse existing reflection models in the era of GenAI and examine the technological aspects of GenAI. Additionally, it identifies a gap and the absence of a comprehensive reflection model that enhances reflection in the era of GenAI and supports the effective integration of GenAI in education. Findings: The literature survey indicates there is a greater need for reflection in the era of GenAI to ensure learning, but the existing reflection models lack proper strategies to manage the problem introduced by GenAI. A standard GenAI-aware reflection model, called 5P (Purpose, Process, Product, Pitfalls and Plan), is proposed i) to manage greater demand for reflection, ii) to address the limitations of the existing reflection models, iii) to consider technological aspects of GenAI.

Accountability means a decision can be examined, justified, and contested. LLMs make this hard: fluent output may be ungrounded, incomplete, or unfaithful to the decision process. Achieving accountability requires verified rationales (how was the decision reached), assumptions (what was assumed rather than known), policy consistency (the same treatment for the same facts), and pivotal conditions (what would change the outcome). We introduce self-faithfulness as an automatic test of accountability: changing the pivotal conditions should change the decision. We examine accountable AI through clinical trial matching, a high-stakes task central to evidence-based medicine. Although LLM-based matchers match patients to trials reasonably accurately, they apply decision policies inconsistently and produce rationales that are unfaithful to their own decisions. We introduce VERDICT, an LLM-based agent that translates a decision task, its constraints, and its policy into Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT), then derives the decision with SMT and MaxSMT solvers – so policies are applied consistently and decisions are accountable by construction. Across a SIGIR 2016-derived dataset and TREC 2021, VERDICT achieves the strongest decision accuracy among LLM-only and neurosymbolic baselines, applies policies with perfect consistency, and produces clinician-preferred rationales grounded in explicit assumptions and pivotal conditions, with improved counterfactual self-faithfulness.

Large-language models (LLMs) are rapidly becoming part of human culture, reshaping how information is produced, transmitted, and used. Here we propose that their diffusion can be understood through a viral analogy, with LLM use spreading through populations, becoming embedded in cognitive and cultural practices. We model transitions among uncoupled, coupled, and persistently dependent users, and show that the interplay between social transmission, recovery, and collective reinforcement can generate tipping points and technological lock-in. A central consequence is the possibility of runaway dynamics: once a critical threshold is crossed, small increases in adoption can trigger rapid population-level shifts toward persistent dependence, with abrupt losses in cognitive competence. The same framework, however, identifies conditions for cognitive immunization, based on reducing transmission and facilitating reversibility. Our results highlight how LLM adoption may involve nonlinear collective transitions with important consequences for cognitive autonomy.

Moral language plays a central role in shaping online endorsement and the diffusion of information, yet existing moral foundation detection systems often suffer from poor cross-domain generalization, weak rationale grounding, and reliance on costly prompting-based large language models (LLMs). We introduce CHARM, a MAC- and Hate-speech-Aware Rationalealigned Moral foundation detection framework built on a lightweight fine-tuned LLM, which integrates complementary moral grounding, rationale alignment, and polarity-aware hate speech signals to support more robust and faithful moral prediction. Unlike prior dictionary-, fine-tune-, or prompt-based detectors, which decouple computation from psychological theory, CHARM is built so that each component – MAC cross-attention, rationale alignment, and hate-speech modulation – operationalizes a distinct psychological construct. Using a 30% subsample of the MFTC, MFRC, and News training pools together with the richer supervision in MFTCXplain, CHARM improves AUC by up to 15.3% in-domain, surpasses the supervised baselines on every out-of-domain dataset in both AUC and F1, and offers a scalable, low-cost alternative to prompting-based LLM detectors. We further apply CHARM to large-scale COVID-19 discourse on Twitter and show that moral value alignment is strongly associated with online endorsement behavior. By making moral framing measurable at scale, CHARM offers a practical tool for studying the spread of morally charged misinformation. Code and additional materials: https://github.com/HuixiangF/CHARM/.

Wildfire seasons have become 84 days longer in the current days than in the 1970s, causing enormous threats to one's financial status and short- and long-term health. During the fire, public agencies send out emergency messages to provide warnings and orders. Although 26 million people in the US have limited English proficiency, over 80% of those messages are only delivered in English, which can cause disproportionate information distribution and awareness. In order to better serve marginalized communities during emergencies, the authors developed BEACON, a service that provides comprehensive and personalized evacuation guidance, including navigation routes, personalized checklists, and a chatbot in the language that a user uses. Our current system ingests data including fire perimeter information, evacuation order status, and shelter information from Watch Duty. When a user is within a certain proximity from the fire, the system utilizes real-time GPS locations and nearby weather data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to predict fire danger levels. The assessment model refreshment are dynamically scheduled based on fire progress and trends using XGBoost. If the location has a likelihood of fire danger, the system sends alerts with evacuation routes outputted from a polygon-avoidant routing pipeline. The application provides a context-aware multilingual agent that users can communicate with and is tightly connected to other features of the application. In addition, based on data that the user entered, the system dynamically generates and checks off personalized reminder items to provide an organized evacuation plan. The system's user interface dynamically changes its language settings based on the language the user most recently used in either setting or chatbot conversation for all the application elements.

What is the emotional register of Arabic YouTube's affective publics? To investigate this, we analyzed 67,725 YouTube comments collected around socio-political topics associated with Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jordan, and Syria using a unified sentiment-and-emotion pipeline. Our results profile a single regional affective public rather than five separate national ones. Sentiment is overwhelmingly negative across all five country-oriented corpora, and the country-level emotion profiles are structurally similar. This shared register still accommodates some regional variations: discourse is organized around country-level political actors and cross-border historical trauma figures, and grief singularizes Iraq from the other countries. The differences in emotional register also tracks lived political causes rather than fixed categories, which we observe from patterns of the valence of US-related content, that tracks the presence or absence of direct US military engagement. Our work shows that the emotional register of Arabic YouTube's affective publics is a shared one that is historically layered and geographically conditioned, which has implications for public diplomacy in the MENA region.

No specification says how a governed autotelic AI agent organization, where agents pursue self-generated goals inside guardrails, should be designed and evaluated. We answer in two parts. First, we synthesize the Governed Autotelic Multi-Agent Product Organization (GAMPO) framework from a document-based qualitative evidence synthesis of 321 sources, integrating agency, agile, platform, and governance theory into a runnable specification. Second, we probe a prompt-layer instantiation of GAMPO on CHI-Bench, a long-horizon healthcare benchmark, across open and frontier models. The result is a boundary condition: governance benefit is gated by a model's spare capacity and is domain- and model-specific. On capacity-constrained open models the full procedure yields no reliable benefit, whereas a single "verify your writes" sentence doubles task success (pass@1 2/20 to 4/20). At the frontier the same scaffold lifts prior-authorization 24% to 40% but nets zero on another model, a gap traced to a stable recommendation-override disposition. A second result refines the first: replacing the generic procedure with an answer-blind, per-task definition-of-done, keyed only to the case's own policy and published standards, never the hidden key, raises prior-authorization to 84% under best-of-five self-consistency (68% single-attempt, confirmed by a held-out board) and utilization-management to 44%, while care-management meets a subjective content-quality wall. The contribution is a named, auditable framework and capability-gated evidence that governance should be sized to spare capacity, and that at the frontier a case-grounded specification beats a uniform procedure. Findings are exploratory: partial instantiation, small per-cell samples (n = 5-25), and single trials.

Counterfactual fairness audits of clinical language-model agents report a flip rate: how often an action changes when only the patient's demographic descriptor changes. Part of that rate is not demographic. A stochastic agent also changes its own action when nothing changes, and a flip rate cannot be interpreted without knowing how often. We measured it. Re-running one condition ten times over sixteen synthetic vignettes at default sampling changed a clinical agent's action in 8.7 percent of replicate pairs, from 2.2 percent for intensive-care escalation to 17.9 percent for controlled-substance caution, an output given no operational criteria. Across six models from five vendors, pooled floors ranged from 2.5 to 23.7 percent; in this panel neither disclosed size, vendor, nor hosting ordered them. The floor depends on the decoding configuration: majority voting over five draws removed 39 percent of it (95 percent confidence interval (CI) 18 to 64); at temperature 0 three of four locally served models showed no disagreement, but a hosted model still did. We also show that, for a binary action, the flip rate expected under no demographic effect equals the floor and a real effect adds only its square, so a flip rate inside the floor is not evidence of fairness, and direction must be tested with a signed paired test. We give a four-step reporting procedure and release FairMedAgent, the harness, with its protocol, vignettes and analysis scripts, so any team can measure the floor for its own agent.

This article presents a structured framework of behavioral indicators that may signal progression toward potentially catastrophic threats from artificial intelligence systems. We adopt a pragmatic approach, inspired by established methodologies in cybersecurity and national security. By establishing clear metrics, indicators, and thresholds across multiple dimensions of AI capability and behavior, this framework enables researchers and policymakers to implement evidence-based monitoring protocols.

We investigate the design of robust risk models to assess societal risks posed by advanced AI systems, an emerging area in AI governance. Many regulatory proposals increasingly require systemic risk assessment, but in the absence of rigorous quantitative methods, the question remains what state of the art risk modeling should look like in practice. We identify the key methodological and institutional challenges that currently limit the adoption of risk modeling. We review five research traditions that inform this problem: probabilistic risk assessment, catastrophic AI risk analysis, cybersecurity risk quantification, Bayesian causal inference, and threshold-based governance. We compare two leading proposals, scenario-based risk estimation and Bayesian network-based threshold setting. Drawing on a workshop with 22 experts and subsequent analysis, we identify a structured agenda of open questions concerning model structure, scope, evidence integration, validation, and governance. We close by outlining priorities for progress, arguing that it will depend on integrating quantitative modeling with independent evaluation, transparent and tiered disclosure, and institutions capable of maintaining and updating risk models over time.

Remaining control over their private data is one of the key challenges in this century for users. We know from prior work that users are often neither in a position to fully grasp the content of the usually complicated texts, nor are they motivated to spend the time necessary to do so. We report on the progress made by the PIONEER project on a privacy support tool that combines knowledge transfer and persuasive elements to increase users' privacy awareness and motivation; thus empowering them to more privacy sovereignty. Throughout the research and design process, we consider user group specifics that may result in different requirements, e.g., for children, adolescents, parents, or elderly people. We further target sustainable behavior change by addressing different states of change, precisely: spark initial motivation, facilitate the creation of new habits, and encourage habituation of these habits in the long term (volition). Finally, we provide a privacy support tool demonstrator that can be utilized for research and education purposes, e.g., in school contexts.

Planning a large data center is difficult because a facility big enough to matter changes the electricity prices it will pay. Those prices are set by market clearing, a constrained optimization problem solved anew in every operating condition. However, simulating the market tells a planner how a candidate plan performs but not how to improve it. Here we treat market clearing as a differentiable optimization layer: each forward pass solves the market, and reverse-mode automatic differentiation propagates the planning cost back through the cleared prices to the plan. After validating these gradients against finite differences, we apply them to a concrete problem: allocating 50 MW of data-center load across six candidate buses in two synthetic networks, under a fixed cost per active site, evaluated over 36 operating states. Judged against exhaustive enumeration of all site combinations, gradient optimization recovers the continuous allocations almost exactly, with worst-case objective gaps of 2.3% and 8.5% of the cost difference between the best and worst single site. Its one systematic error is instructive: near the costs at which a site should close, the smooth relaxation of the discrete site count shrinks the site rather than closing it, so discrete transitions arrive late. Differentiable market clearing thus turns market-aware planning into a problem gradients can search.

Generative AI is changing how cultural artifacts are created and circulated, and with it our understanding of creativity itself. Researchers disagree about whether these tools enrich or impoverish culture, and we argue that much of that disagreement comes from conflating two distinct components of creativity: novelty, a property of single artifacts, and diversity, a property of populations. We argue further that creativity in the context of generative AI is best understood as a property of hybrid collectives, or populations of interacting people and algorithms, rather than of individuals. AI-assisted ideation reliably raises the novelty of individual output while narrowing diversity in the aggregate, but this is not an inevitable consequence of putting machines in the loop. Because humans and models search in complementary ways, mixed groups can outperform and out-diversify groups of either kind alone, and machine-discovered solutions can enter human culture and persist there. What decides the outcome is composition: which agents are present, in what proportion, and how they are connected. The question is no longer whether AI helps or harms creativity, but which mixtures let individual gains accumulate without eroding collective diversity.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to predict the responses of human participants in survey panels. Towards that goal, persona prompting has recently emerged as a technique to inform and align large pretrained language models. Persona prompting refers to the practice of using short textual descriptions of 'personas' in prompts to steer the LLM's generations. Personas describe individuals through different attributes such as their socio-demographics, attitudes, or behaviors, with the aim of aligning LLMs to produce responses that correlate with the corresponding human responses. Yet, recent work has produced mixed and partly conflicting results of persona prompting without clear patterns of success and failure. Among the few consistent findings is that the selection of persona attributes matters, and that using more attributes does not necessarily lead to better performance. It remains unclear how different attribute selection methods perform and how to choose among them. In this paper, we propose that observed human response variation of a survey question is a potential explanation for the mixed performance observed so far. In addition, we compare the performance of persona prompting associated with different methods for selecting persona attributes. We evaluate these methods on four different (general) social surveys across two countries, six LLMs, and twenty prediction tasks per survey. Our work helps to identify when persona prompting can be expected to be useful in survey prediction tasks, and provides new insights on the effectiveness of different attribute selection methods for LLM-based survey prediction using persona prompting.

Differential privacy (DP) has emerged in the computer science literature as a measure of the impact on an individual's privacy resulting from the publication of a statistical output such as a frequency table. This paper provides an introduction to DP for official statisticians and discuss its relevance, benefits, and challenges from a National Statistical Organisation (NSO) perspective. We motivate our study by examining how privacy is evolving in the era of big data and how this might prompt a shift from traditional statistical disclosure techniques used in official statistics–which are generally applied on a cell-by-cell or table-by-table basis–to formal privacy methods, like DP, which are applied from a perspective encompassing the totality of the outputs generated from a given dataset. We identify an important interplay between DP's holistic privacy risk measure and the difficulty for NSOs in implementing DP, showing that DP's major advantage is also DP's major challenge. This paper provides new work addressing two key DP research areas for NSOs: DP's application to survey data and its incorporation within the Five Safes framework.

Digital rights increasingly exist in law but remain difficult to exercise through the information systems that mediate them. Using disciplined conceptual synthesis and problematization, this critical-conceptual IS paper explains the gap through the interaction of legal heterogeneity, conflicting organizational and commercial incentives, fragmented architectures, and asymmetrical control over rights-relevant acts. It then theorizes a human-compatible rights layer: a governed sociotechnical capability for standardized, machine-readable, bidirectional, and jurisdictionally plural communication of requests, consent, refusal, withdrawal, objection, records, and support. Comparing California-style opt-out signals, the EU's mixed lawful-basis regime, and P3P, DNT, GPC, and ADPC, the paper derives seven normative requirements, develops rights by architecture as a bounded emancipatory policy argument, and treats a proposed GDPR provision on automated and machine-readable privacy management as a policy case for moving from banner-based compliance toward rights-supporting digital infrastructure.

Machine learning (ML) education faces two persistent and connected obstacles: many educational tools present ML as an opaque black box, which leaves learners with a superficial understanding, and this same opacity prevents users from forming the calibrated trust that appropriate reliance on AI systems requires. We present ICE-T, a didactic framework that integrates three mutually reinforcing facets: intermodal transfer grounded in Bruner's enactive, iconic, and symbolic modes of representation, computational thinking operationalized through the Use-Modify-Create progression, and explanatory thinking supported by a process model. Connecting the framework to the empirical literature on algorithm aversion, AI literacy, and mental model formation, and to systematic reviews of the K-12 ML activity landscape, we argue that the three facets supply the cognitive mechanisms that the trust calibration literature identifies as drivers of appropriate reliance: representational richness, graduated process control, and the capacity to contextualize errors. On this basis, we propose that trust calibration be treated as an explicit educational objective, with ICE-T as a principled and scalable means of achieving it.

While existing work on LLM authorship attribution (AA) has made progress, available benchmarks remain limited, often focusing on English, controlled settings, or relatively outdated models, with the few multilingual studies considering only relatively short texts. We introduce MultiGhostBench, a multilingual benchmark comprising 928 books generated by five recent LLMs across six languages and three scripts, with an average length of approximately 59K words per book. The benchmark supports evaluation under domain, author, and language shifts. Evaluation of representative AA methods shows that no single method consistently performs best across settings, and performance generally degrades under distribution shifts. Transformer-based detectors can retain generator-related information across languages, although transfer effectiveness varies by language pair, whereas statistical and fingerprint-based detectors are more language-dependent. We envision MultiGhostBench as a valuable resource for the development and evaluation of robust AA methods. The dataset and code can be found at https://github.com/GrecoMT/MultiGhostBench.

A new politics of artificial intelligence and work is taking shape across party systems, but comparative politics has yet to map it. Using 1,514,950 parliamentary speeches from 33 parliaments (2023-2026), we show this politics follows a different logic than political economy expects. Research anticipates that technological disruption generates demands for compensation; instead, compensation accounts for just 2.3% of response-frame mentions, while enablement and investment dominate (55.2%), regulation and restriction follow (21.8%), and training (20.6%) appears at similar rates across families. Parties disagree instead over what AI means for work and how far this technology should be restrained. The mainstream and radical right support unrestricted enablement; the left is critical but divided on remedy. Social democrats stay adoption-oriented; greens split evenly. The radical left is the clearest force for restriction. The AI conflict thus concerns not compensation after disruption, but whether politics should enable technological change or govern its trajectory.

Automated student-attention estimation can support learning analytics, but aggregate predictive metrics can conceal demographic disparities. This study evaluates fairness-aware multimodal temporal models on DIPSER, a naturalistic classroom dataset combining facial images, wearable-sensor measurements, attention annotations, and automatically inferred demographic metadata. Three baselines are compared across 10 training seeds: a Visual GRU, a Sensor GRU, and a Residual Fusion Transformer. The multimodal model achieves the best mean test performance (MAE 0.283, RMSE 0.363) and the lowest worst-group error among the evaluated baselines, although its gain over the Visual GRU is modest. Gender- and age-targeted MAE-gap regularization reduces disparities on validation data, but these gains do not consistently transfer to held-out subjects or repeated subject-level splits. On an NVIDIA A100-SXM4-40GB GPU, the warm end-to-end pipeline averages 50.65 ms per prediction window at a one-second stride, while the temporal model itself requires 1.02 ms. The findings show that multimodal fusion can modestly improve prediction and worst-group performance, but validation-level fairness gains should not be assumed to generalize. Robust fairness assessment therefore requires subgroup-aware evaluation, repeated subject-level validation, and larger, better balanced demographic samples.

As large language model (LLM) agents shift from tools to participants in human groups, a fundamental question for collective behavior is how their growing presence reshapes consensus formation. Here we study mixed human-AI groups in a collaborative description game, in which shared conventions emerge through repeated rounds of random pairwise communication. Varying the proportions of LLM agents, we identify three distinct regimes of consensus formation: low agent proportions facilitate human-led consensus, intermediate proportions disrupt convergence, and high proportions restore strong consensus while shifting it toward agent-led conventions. Crucially, these regimes differ not only in the strength of convergence, but also in the semantic grounding and communicative form of the resulting consensus: human-led consensus is more concrete, holistic, and grounded in shared real-world analogies, whereas agent-led consensus is more abstract, less information-dense, and more geometrically segmented. Mechanistically, agent influence arises from a shared linguistic prior that places agents near one another in the expression space, combined with relatively stable expression choices across rounds; humans initially resist adopting expressions from partners perceived as AI but gradually yield to conformity pressure. These findings provide evidence that AI composition can shape the emergence, content, and perceived legitimacy of group norms, making agent proportion and transparency important design variables for human-AI systems.

Privacy policies may contain internal contradictions in which commitments are undermined by practices documented elsewhere in the same policy. We operationalize this phenomenon, privacy washing, through a four-stage pipeline: statement extraction, compatibility filtering and natural language inference screening, multi-model judge verification, and thematic analysis, with contradictions confirmed by majority vote of a three-model LLM panel. Applied to two corpora of website privacy policies, 123 collected in 2026 (OPPT) and 115 collected in 2015 (OPP-115), the pipeline finds the same category patterns recurring across the 11-year gap, with third-party sharing contradictions the majority of confirmed cases in each primary run, consistent with structural factors in policy composition rather than necessarily intentional deception. At least one panel-confirmed contradiction appears in 12.2% of OPPT companies (15/123; 9.8% excluding legacy pairs) and 36.5% of OPP-115 companies (42/115). A stability re-run seven months later, with a fully separated configuration (new extraction models, judges from three Chinese providers absent from both corpora, matched filters, no judge-submission similarity threshold), reproduces the OPPT prevalence under the original protocol (13.0% vs. 12.2%), finds sub-threshold pairs confirm at rates of the same order as those above (raising prevalence to 20.3% and 40.9%), and shows the third-party majority is panel-sensitive while the recurrence of the same category pairs is not. Two caveats govern all figures: panel verdicts are not validated against human expert judgment, so precision is unknown and prevalence figures are lower bounds; and the two primary runs used different filter configurations, so their prevalence difference is not interpretable as a corpus or era effect (the matched re-run reduces the gap to roughly twofold but does not eliminate it).

This exploratory pilot study evaluates the scope and perceived accuracy of personal information output from ongoing conversational interactions in generative AI systems using GPT-5.2 Instant and GPT-5.2 Thinking, categorized into three output types: Fact, Inference, and Confidence. Based on the evaluation results obtained from 15 Japanese participants, differences in model design have limited impact on personal information output tendencies. Compared with the Inference type, the Fact type shows a more conservative output pattern. Regarding attribute categories, the findings indicate that Core Personal attributes associated with identification are treated relatively conservatively, whereas Behavioral and Linguistic attributes show higher accuracy across both Fact and Inference outputs. Furthermore, Holistic Profile, Psychological and Cognitive, and Residual attributes are more readily inferred, even when not supported by explicit factual outputs. Notably, the lack of null outputs for these attributes in the Inference type suggests that such inferred profiles may be constructed from indirectly available contextual information. The findings may contribute to future discussions regarding privacy awareness and personal information inference in generative AI systems.

Assessments of cultural alignment have become an important part of the development and improvement of large language models (LLMs). However, the majority of the evaluations treat culture as a single snapshot, investigating only whether a model represents a society accurately at the current time. Research in cultural psychology shows that cultural values change at different rates and directions over time. Therefore, a "culturally aware" model should capture not only where a culture is today but also how it has changed over time. We examine this missing dimension of cultural awareness using more than two decades of the World Values Survey data. We compare the cultural trajectories of 40 countries with the trajectories produced by four state-of-the-art (SOTA) LLMs on the Inglehart-Welzel cultural map. Our findings show that while models generally place countries close to their most recent surveyed positions, these representations tend to lag several years behind that position. They also capture only part of the magnitude of the observed change, introduce movement where little occurred, and rarely reproduce reversals in countries' trajectories. These findings point to temporal flattening and suggest that snapshot accuracy can give an incomplete picture of cultural awareness in LLMs and have implications for model evaluation, representational harms, and the governance of culturally aware AI systems.

Recorded lecture videos, often enhanced with search and summarization features, are a standard study resource. However, students cannot easily ask course specific questions or verify answers against an instructor's lecture. We report a semester-long deployment of VideoPoints platform with a retrieval-augmented chatbot that answers from course lecture materials and returns timestamped citations. The chatbot retrieves only from the active course, uses chapter summaries to guide transcript ranking, and returns clickable timestamped citations. Students used it for quick lookups and exam review. Across 833 messages, 70.5% included citations, none crossed a course boundary, and when no lecture evidence matched, the chatbot usually declined rather than answering. Among the users, citations were the most consistently useful feature, while practice-question generation was the strongest unmet request. We also evaluated the design on the real-world test split of EduVidQA, a public multimodal benchmark for lecture-video question answering. Our design improved correct-lecture retrieval by 6.3 percentage points over dense-only retrieval. Together, the results show that effective deployment depends on course isolation, supported citations, and alignment with students' study practices.

Open geospatial standards let data, services, and systems work across platforms. But openness is not just a property of specifications. It also depends on the institutions that produce them and the infrastructures in which they operate. Standards may function as digital public goods and, once embedded in public systems, as digital public infrastructure. Those roles can diverge. This paper asks when open geospatial standards remain public infrastructure rather than becoming channels of enclosure. It makes two claims. First, standards-setting governance matters: institutional design shapes whether open specifications retain their public-good character. Second, geospatial coordination is shifting toward proprietary location stacks, APIs, and cloud platforms, where roadmaps, pricing, and service terms increasingly set the rules. Sovereign-cloud and sovereign-AI strategies relocate this power rather than remove it. These dynamics reinforce each other. Weak governance pushes coordination toward the implementation layer; platformization, in turn, reduces incentives to invest in open standardization, weakening portability and FAIR reuse. Standards bodies cannot reverse platformization, but they still control the specification layer. Where legal safeguards are limited, internal governance becomes key. We frame this through four dimensions: Purpose, Principles, People and Processes, and Policies and Practices (the 4Ps framework) while stressing the limit that internal governance cannot solve alone an external structural problem.