Abstract--This survey provides an analysis of current methodologies integrating legal and logical specifications into the perception, prediction, and planning modules of automated driving systems. We systematically explore techniques ranging from logic-based frameworks to computational legal reasoning approaches, emphasizing their capability to ensure regulatory compliance and interpretability in dynamic and uncertain driving environments. A central finding is that significant challenges arise at the intersection of perceptual reliability, legal compliance, and decision-making justifiability. T o systematically analyze these challenges, we introduce a taxonomy categorizing existing approaches by their theoretical foundations, architectural implementations, and validation strategies. We particularly focus on methods that address perceptual uncertainty and incorporate explicit legal norms, facilitating decisions that are both technically robust and legally defensible. The review covers neural-symbolic integration methods for perception, logic-driven rule representation, and norm-aware prediction strategies, all contributing toward transparent and accountable autonomous vehicle operation. We highlight critical open questions and practical trade-offs that must be addressed, offering multidisci-plinary insights from engineering, logic, and law to guide future developments in legally compliant autonomous driving systems.

Forecasting transformative technologies remains a critical but challenging task, particularly in fast-evolving domains such as Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). Traditional expert-based methods struggle to keep pace with short innovation cycles and ambiguous early-stage terminology. In this work, we propose a novel, data-driven pipeline to monitor the emergence of transformative technologies by identifying patterns of technological convergence. Our approach leverages advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) to extract semantic triples from unstructured text and construct a large-scale graph of technology-related entities and relations. We introduce a new method for grouping semantically similar technology terms (noun stapling) and develop graph-based metrics to detect convergence signals. The pipeline includes multi-stage filtering, domain-specific keyword clustering, and a temporal trend analysis of topic co-occurence. We validate our methodology on two complementary datasets: 278,625 arXiv preprints (2017--2024) to capture early scientific signals, and 9,793 USPTO patent applications (2018-2024) to track downstream commercial developments. Our results demonstrate that the proposed pipeline can identify both established and emerging convergence patterns, offering a scalable and generalizable framework for technology forecasting grounded in full-text analysis.

Legal interpretation frequently involves assessing how a legal text, as understood by an 'ordinary' speaker of the language, applies to the set of facts characterizing a legal dispute in the U.S. judicial system. Recent scholarship has proposed that legal practitioners add large language models (LLMs) to their interpretive toolkit. This work offers an empirical argument against LLM interpretation as recently practiced by legal scholars and federal judges. Our investigation in English shows that models do not provide stable interpretive judgments: varying the question format can lead the model to wildly different conclusions. Moreover, the models show weak to moderate correlation with human judgment, with large variance across model and question variant, suggesting that it is dangerous to give much credence to the conclusions produced by generative AI.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in agentic frameworks to assist individual users, there is a growing need for agents that can proactively manage complex, multi-party collaboration. Systematic evaluation methods for such proactive agents remain scarce, limiting progress in developing AI that can effectively support multiple people together. Negotiation offers a demanding testbed for this challenge, requiring socio-cognitive intelligence to navigate conflicting interests between multiple participants and multiple topics and build consensus. Here, we present ProMediate, the first framework for evaluating proactive AI mediator agents in complex, multi-topic, multi-party negotiations. ProMediate consists of two core components: (i) a simulation testbed based on realistic negotiation cases and theory-driven difficulty levels (ProMediate-Easy, ProMediate-Medium, and ProMediate-Hard), with a plug-and-play proactive AI mediator grounded in socio-cognitive mediation theories, capable of flexibly deciding when and how to intervene; and (ii) a socio-cognitive evaluation framework with a new suite of metrics to measure consensus changes, intervention latency, mediator effectiveness, and intelligence. Together, these components establish a systematic framework for assessing the socio-cognitive intelligence of proactive AI agents in multi-party settings. Our results show that a socially intelligent mediator agent outperforms a generic baseline, via faster, better-targeted interventions. In the ProMediate-Hard setting, our social mediator increases consensus change by 3.6 percentage points compared to the generic baseline (10.65\% vs 7.01\%) while being 77\% faster in response (15.98s vs. 3.71s). In conclusion, ProMediate provides a rigorous, theory-grounded testbed to advance the development of proactive, socially intelligent agents.

The future of Requirements Engineering (RE) is increasingly driven by artificial intelligence (AI), reshaping how we elicit, analyze, and validate requirements. Traditional RE is based on labor-intensive manual processes prone to errors and complexity. AI-powered approaches, specifically large language models (LLMs), natural language processing (NLP), and generative AI, offer transformative solutions and reduce inefficiencies. However, the use of AI in RE also brings challenges like algorithmic bias, lack of explainability, and ethical concerns related to automation. To address these issues, this study introduces the Human-AI RE Synergy Model (HARE-SM), a conceptual framework that integrates AI-driven analysis with human oversight to improve requirements elicitation, analysis, and validation. The model emphasizes ethical AI use through transparency, explainability, and bias mitigation. We outline a multi-phase research methodology focused on preparing RE datasets, fine-tuning AI models, and designing collaborative human-AI workflows. This preliminary study presents the conceptual framework and early-stage prototype implementation, establishing a research agenda and practical design direction for applying intelligent data science techniques to semi-structured and unstructured RE data in collaborative environments.

Introduction In April 2025, sixteen - year - old Adam Raine committed suicide . Over the course of several months, the teen confided his suicidal thoughts to Open AI's ChatGPT chatbot . ChatGPT is not designed or developed to provide therapy, but it did not respond to Adam's prompts with suggestions that he obtain professional help . Moreover, w hen Adam expressed concern that his parents would blame themselves if he died, ChatGPT reportedly responded, "That doesn't mean you owe them survival," and offered to help draft his suicide note. Adam's death was not the only example of chatbot misbehavior. OpenAI claims it doesn't permit ChatGPT "to generate hateful, harassing, violent, or adult content." In July 2025, a reporter documented ChatGPT providing users with detailed instructions for self - mutilation, murder, and satanic rituals. O penAI has also acknowledged that individuals can misuse its systems. But the company has taken some responsibility.

Patent examination remains an ongoing challenge in the NLP literature even after the advent of large language models (LLMs), as it requires an extensive yet nuanced human judgment on whether a submitted claim meets the statutory standards of novelty and non-obviousness against previously granted claims -- prior art -- in expert domains. Previous NLP studies have approached this challenge as a prediction task (e.g., forecasting grant outcomes) with high-level proxies such as similarity metrics or classifiers trained on historical labels. However, this approach often overlooks the step-by-step evaluations that examiners must make with profound information, including rationales for the decisions provided in office actions documents, which also makes it harder to measure the current state of techniques in patent review processes. To fill this gap, we construct PANORAMA, a dataset of 8,143 U.S. patent examination records that preserves the full decision trails, including original applications, all cited references, Non-Final Rejections, and Notices of Allowance. Also, PANORAMA decomposes the trails into sequential benchmarks that emulate patent professionals' patent review processes and allow researchers to examine large language models' capabilities at each step of them. Our findings indicate that, although LLMs are relatively effective at retrieving relevant prior art and pinpointing the pertinent paragraphs, they struggle to assess the novelty and non-obviousness of patent claims. We discuss these results and argue that advancing NLP, including LLMs, in the patent domain requires a deeper understanding of real-world patent examination. Our dataset is openly available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/LG-AI-Research/PANORAMA.

The escalating complexity of modern codebases has intensified the need for retrieval systems capable of interpreting cross-component change intents, a capability fundamentally absent in conventional function-level search paradigms. While recent studies have improved the alignment between natural language queries and code snippets, retrieving contextually relevant code for specific change requests remains largely underexplored. To address this gap, we introduce RepoAlign-Bench, the first benchmark specifically designed to evaluate repository-level code retrieval under change request driven scenarios, encompassing 52k annotated instances. This benchmark shifts the retrieval paradigm from function-centric matching to holistic repository-level reasoning. Furthermore, we propose ReflectCode, an adversarial reflection augmented dual-tower architecture featuring disentangled code_encoder and doc_encoder components. ReflectCode dynamically integrates syntactic patterns, function dependencies, and semantic expansion intents through large language model guided reflection. Comprehensive experiments demonstrate that ReflectCode achieves 12.2% improvement in Top-5 Accuracy and 7.1% in Recall over state-of-the-art baselines, establishing a new direction for context-aware code retrieval.

Large Language Models (LLMs) generate fluent, plausible text that can mislead users into mistaking simulated coherence for genuine understanding. This paper introduces the Epistemic Suite, a post-foundational diagnostic methodology for surfacing the epistemic conditions under which AI outputs are produced and received. Rather than determining truth or falsity, the Suite operates through twenty diagnostic lenses, applied by practitioners as context warrants, to reveal patterns such as confidence laundering, narrative compression, displaced authority, and temporal drift. It is grounded in three design principles: diagnosing production before evaluating claims, preferring diagnostic traction over foundational settlement, and embedding reflexivity as a structural requirement rather than an ethical ornament. When enacted, the Suite shifts language models into a diagnostic stance, producing inspectable artifacts-flags, annotations, contradiction maps, and suspension logs (the FACS bundle)-that create an intermediary layer between AI output and human judgment. A key innovation is epistemic suspension, a practitioner-enacted circuit breaker that halts continuation when warrant is exceeded, with resumption based on judgment rather than rule. The methodology also includes an Epistemic Triage Protocol and a Meta-Governance Layer to manage proportionality and link activation to relational accountability, consent, historical context, and pluralism safeguards. Unlike internalist approaches that embed alignment into model architectures (e.g., RLHF or epistemic-integrity proposals), the Suite operates externally as scaffolding, preserving expendability and refusal as safeguards rather than failures. It preserves the distinction between performance and understanding, enabling accountable deliberation while maintaining epistemic modesty.

Is an LLM telling you different facts than it's telling me? This paper introduces ConsistencyAI, an independent benchmark for measuring the factual consistency of large language models (LLMs) for different personas. ConsistencyAI tests whether, when users of different demographics ask identical questions, the model responds with factually inconsistent answers. Designed without involvement from LLM providers, this benchmark offers impartial evaluation and accountability. In our experiment, we queried 19 LLMs with prompts that requested 5 facts for each of 15 topics. We repeated this query 100 times for each LLM, each time adding prompt context from a different persona selected from a subset of personas modeling the general population. We processed the responses into sentence embeddings, computed cross-persona cosine similarity, and computed the weighted average of cross-persona cosine similarity to calculate factual consistency scores. In 100-persona experiments, scores ranged from 0.9065 to 0.7896, and the mean was 0.8656, which we adopt as a benchmark threshold. xAI's Grok-3 is most consistent, while several lightweight models rank lowest. Consistency varies by topic: the job market is least consistent, G7 world leaders most consistent, and issues like vaccines or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict diverge by provider. These results show that both the provider and the topic shape the factual consistency. We release our code and interactive demo to support reproducible evaluation and encourage persona-invariant prompting strategies.