In the context of global sustainability mandates, corporate carbon disclosure has emerged as a critical mechanism for aligning business strategy with environmental responsibility. The Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) hosts the world's largest longitudinal dataset of climate-related survey responses, combining structured indicators with open-ended narratives, but the heterogeneity and free-form nature of these disclosures present significant analytical challenges for benchmarking, compliance monitoring, and investment screening. This paper proposes a novel decision-support framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) to assess corporate climate disclosure quality at scale. It develops a master rubric that harmonizes narrative scoring across 11 years of CDP data (2010-2020), enabling cross-sector and cross-country benchmarking. By integrating rubric-guided scoring with percentile-based normalization, our method identifies temporal trends, strategic alignment patterns, and inconsistencies in disclosure across industries and regions. Results reveal that sectors such as technology and countries like Germany consistently demonstrate higher rubric alignment, while others exhibit volatility or superficial engagement, offering insights that inform key decision-making processes for investors, regulators, and corporate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) strategists. The proposed LLM-based approach transforms unstructured disclosures into quantifiable, interpretable, comparable, and actionable intelligence, advancing the capabilities of AI-enabled decision support systems (DSSs) in the domain of climate governance.

Evaluating long-form answers in high-stakes domains such as law or medicine remains a fundamental challenge. Standard metrics like BLEU and ROUGE fail to capture semantic correctness, and current LLM-based evaluators often reduce nuanced aspects of answer quality into a single undifferentiated score. We introduce DeCE, a decomposed LLM evaluation framework that separates precision (factual accuracy and relevance) and recall (coverage of required concepts), using instance-specific criteria automatically extracted from gold answer requirements. DeCE is model-agnostic and domain-general, requiring no predefined taxonomies or handcrafted rubrics. We instantiate DeCE to evaluate different LLMs on a real-world legal QA task involving multi-jurisdictional reasoning and citation grounding. DeCE achieves substantially stronger correlation with expert judgments ($r=0.78$), compared to traditional metrics ($r=0.12$), pointwise LLM scoring ($r=0.35$), and modern multidimensional evaluators ($r=0.48$). It also reveals interpretable trade-offs: generalist models favor recall, while specialized models favor precision. Importantly, only 11.95% of LLM-generated criteria required expert revision, underscoring DeCE's scalability. DeCE offers an interpretable and actionable LLM evaluation framework in expert domains.

The transnational ivory trade continues to drive the decline of elephant populations across Africa, and trafficking networks remain difficult to disrupt. Tusks seized by law enforcement officials carry forensic information on the traffickers responsible for their export, including DNA evidence and handwritten markings made by traffickers. For 20 years, analyses of tusk DNA have identified where elephants were poached and established connections among shipments of ivory. While the links established using genetic evidence are extremely conclusive, genetic data is expensive and sometimes impossible to obtain. But though handwritten markings are easy to photograph, they are rarely documented or analyzed. Here, we present an AI-driven pipeline for extracting and analyzing handwritten markings on seized elephant tusks, offering a novel, scalable, and low-cost source of forensic evidence. Having collected 6,085 photographs from eight large seizures of ivory over a 6-year period (2014-2019), we used an object detection model to extract over 17,000 individual markings, which were then labeled and described using state-of-the-art AI tools. We identified 184 recurring "signature markings" that connect the tusks on which they appear. 20 signature markings were observed in multiple seizures, establishing forensic links between these seizures through traffickers involved in both shipments. This work complements other investigative techniques by filling in gaps where other data sources are unavailable. The study demonstrates the transformative potential of AI in wildlife forensics and highlights practical steps for integrating handwriting analysis into efforts to disrupt organized wildlife crime.

Organizations increasingly use Large Language Models (LLMs) to improve supply chain processes and reduce environmental impacts. However, LLMs have been shown to reproduce biases regarding the prioritization of sustainable business strategies. Thus, it is important to identify underlying training data biases that LLMs pertain regarding the importance and role of sustainable business and supply chain practices. This study investigates how different LLMs respond to validated surveys about the role of ethics and responsibility for businesses, and the importance of sustainable practices and relations with suppliers and customers. Using standardized questionnaires, we systematically analyze responses generated by state-of-the-art LLMs to identify variations. We further evaluate whether differences are augmented by four organizational culture types, thereby evaluating the practical relevance of identified biases. The findings reveal significant systematic differences between models and demonstrate that organizational culture prompts substantially modify LLM responses. The study holds important implications for LLM-assisted decision-making in sustainability contexts.

The character of the "AI assistant" persona generated by modern chatbot large language models influences both surface-level behavior and apparent values, beliefs, and ethics. These all affect interaction quality, perceived intelligence, and alignment with both developer and user intentions. The shaping of this persona, known as character training, is a critical component of industry post-training, yet remains effectively unstudied in the academic literature. We introduce the first open implementation of character training, leveraging Constitutional AI and a new data pipeline using synthetic introspective data to shape the assistant persona in a more effective and controlled manner than alternatives such as constraining system prompts or activation steering. Specifically, we fine-tune three popular open-weights models using 11 example personas, such as humorous, deeply caring, or even malevolent. To track the effects of our approach, we introduce a method which analyzes revealed preferences, uncovering clear and holistic changes in character. We find these changes are more robust to adversarial prompting than the above two alternatives, while also leading to more coherent and realistic generations. Finally, we demonstrate this fine-tuning has little to no effect on general capabilities as measured by common benchmarks. We describe and open-source our full post-training method, the implementation of which can be found at https://github.com/maiush/OpenCharacterTraining.

In this work, we investigate the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) within a graph-based Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) architecture for Energy Efficiency (EE) Question Answering. First, the system automatically extracts a Knowledge Graph (KG) from guidance and regulatory documents in the energy field. Then, the generated graph is navigated and reasoned upon to provide users with accurate answers in multiple languages. We implement a human-based validation using the RAGAs framework properties, a validation dataset comprising 101 question-answer pairs, and domain experts. Results confirm the potential of this architecture and identify its strengths and weaknesses. Validation results show how the system correctly answers in about three out of four of the cases (75.2 +- 2.7%), with higher results on questions related to more general EE answers (up to 81.0 +- 4.1%), and featuring promising multilingual abilities (4.4% accuracy loss due to translation).

The performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) and the associated dollar costs of API calls can fluctuate over time, potentially invalidating conclusions drawn in prior research. To address this, we propose a Fair Evaluation protocol for Test-Time Compute (FEval-TTC), designed to ensure consistent assessment of test-time compute (TTC) methods, regardless of such fluctuations. FEval-TTC focuses on the evaluation of TTC methods that utilize underlying Chains-of-Thought (CoT). It supports evaluations across multiple LLMs on a diverse set of mathematical and commonsense reasoning datasets. The few-shot prompting and answer extraction processes are standardized across datasets, reducing both time and monetary overhead for researchers. Furthermore, we provide a cost modelling procedure that estimates both the token and dollar cost per query, facilitating equitable comparisons of prevalent TTC methods. We open-source FEval-TTC for public use at https://github.com/networkslab/feval_ttc .

Large language models (LLMs) are widely deployed for open-ended communication, yet most bias evaluations still rely on English, classification-style tasks. We introduce DebateBias-8K, a new multilingual, debate-style benchmark designed to reveal how narrative bias appears in realistic generative settings. Our dataset includes 8,400 structured debate prompts spanning four sensitive domains: women's rights, socioeconomic development, terrorism, and religion, across seven languages ranging from high-resource (English, Chinese) to low-resource (Swahili, Nigerian Pidgin). Using four flagship models (GPT-4o, Claude 3, DeepSeek, and LLaMA 3), we generate and automatically classify over 100,000 responses. Results show that all models reproduce entrenched stereotypes despite safety alignment: Arabs are overwhelmingly linked to terrorism and religion (>=95%), Africans to socioeconomic "backwardness" (up to <=77%), and Western groups are consistently framed as modern or progressive. Biases grow sharply in lower-resource languages, revealing that alignment trained primarily in English does not generalize globally. Our findings highlight a persistent divide in multilingual fairness: current alignment methods reduce explicit toxicity but fail to prevent biased outputs in open-ended contexts. We release our DebateBias-8K benchmark and analysis framework to support the next generation of multilingual bias evaluation and safer, culturally inclusive model alignment.

Reasoning over temporal and numerical data, such as time series, is a crucial aspect of fact-checking. While many systems have recently been developed to handle this form of evidence, their evaluation remains limited by existing datasets, which often lack structured evidence, provide insufficient justifications for verdicts, or rely on synthetic claims. In this paper, we introduce TSVer, a new benchmark dataset for fact verification focusing on temporal and numerical reasoning with time-series evidence. TSVer contains 287 real-world claims sourced from 38 fact-checking organizations and a curated database of 400 time series covering diverse domains. Each claim is annotated with time frames across all pertinent time series, along with a verdict and justifications reflecting how the evidence is used to reach the verdict. Using an LLM-assisted multi-step annotation process, we improve the quality of our annotations and achieve an inter-annotator agreement of kappa=0.745 on verdicts. We also develop a baseline for verifying claims against time-series evidence and show that even the state-of-the-art reasoning models like Gemini-2.5-Pro are challenged by time series, achieving a 63.37 accuracy score on verdicts and an Ev2R score of 48.63 on verdict justifications.

This position paper challenges the "scaling fundamentalism" dominating AI research, where unbounded growth in model size and computation has led to unsustainable environmental impacts and widening resource inequality. We argue that LLM development should be fundamentally reoriented toward capability-per-resource rather than capability alone. We present a theoretical framework demonstrating that resource-allocation decisions guided by gradient influence patterns can dramatically improve efficiency throughout the AI lifecycle. Our analysis shows that in transformer-based models, where a small fraction of parameters exert outsized influence (following heavy-tailed distributions), three critical insights emerge: (1) updating only high-influence parameters strictly outperforms full-parameter tuning on a performance-per-resource basis; (2) simple gradient norms provide computationally efficient proxies for identifying these high-influence components; and (3) coordinated parameter and data selection yields multiplicative efficiency gains, potentially reducing resource requirements by orders of magnitude. Building on these theoretical foundations, we propose a two stage paradigm marginal-return pretraining for foundation developers and influence guided adaptation for downstream users bridged by gradient blueprints, metadata describing which parameters matter most for various tasks. This capability-per-resource perspective transforms what were once considered pragmatic hardware workarounds into theoretically optimal strategies, democratizing access to cutting-edge AI capabilities while significantly reducing environmental impact. By embedding resource consciousness into how we develop, adapt, and evaluate models, we can reshape AI progress toward a more sustainable and equitable future.