Media framing refers to the emphasis on specific aspects of perceived reality to shape how an issue is defined and understood. Its primary purpose is to shape public perceptions often in alignment with the authors' opinions and stances. However, the interaction between stance and media frame remains largely unexplored. In this work, we apply an interdisciplinary approach to conceptualize and computationally explore this interaction with internet memes on climate change. We curate CLIMATEMEMES, the first dataset of climate-change memes annotated with both stance and media frames, inspired by research in communication science. CLIMATEMEMES includes 1,184 memes sourced from 47 subreddits, enabling analysis of frame prominence over time and communities, and sheds light on the framing preferences of different stance holders. We propose two meme understanding tasks: stance detection and media frame detection. We evaluate LLaVA-NeXT and Molmo in various setups, and report the corresponding results on their LLM backbone. Human captions consistently enhance performance. Synthetic captions and human-corrected OCR also help occasionally. Our findings highlight that VLMs perform well on stance, but struggle on frames, where LLMs outperform VLMs. Finally, we analyze VLMs' limitations in handling nuanced frames and stance expressions on climate change internet memes.

Prompt optimization aims to systematically refine prompts to enhance a language model's performance on specific tasks. Fairness detection in Terms of Service (ToS) clauses is a challenging legal NLP task that demands carefully crafted prompts to ensure reliable results. However, existing prompt optimization methods are often computationally expensive due to inefficient search strategies and costly prompt candidate scoring. In this paper, we propose a framework that combines Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) with a proxy prompt evaluator to more effectively explore the prompt space while reducing evaluation costs. Experiments demonstrate that our approach achieves higher classification accuracy and efficiency than baseline methods under a constrained computation budget.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being deployed as autonomous agents in real-world environments. As these deployments scale, multi-agent interactions become inevitable, making it essential to understand strategic behavior in such systems. A central open question is whether LLM agents, like reinforcement learning agents, can shape the learning dynamics and influence the behavior of others through interaction alone. In this paper, we present the first investigation of opponent shaping (OS) with LLM-based agents. Existing OS algorithms cannot be directly applied to LLMs, as they require higher-order derivatives, face scalability constraints, or depend on architectural components that are absent in transformers. To address this gap, we introduce ShapeLLM, an adaptation of model-free OS methods tailored for transformer-based agents. Using ShapeLLM, we examine whether LLM agents can influence co-players' learning dynamics across diverse game-theoretic environments. We demonstrate that LLM agents can successfully guide opponents toward exploitable equilibria in competitive games (Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma, Matching Pennies, and Chicken) and promote coordination and improve collective welfare in cooperative games (Iterated Stag Hunt and a cooperative version of the Prisoner's Dilemma). Our findings show that LLM agents can both shape and be shaped through interaction, establishing opponent shaping as a key dimension of multi-agent LLM research.

Using LLMs to evaluate text, that is, LLM-as-a-judge, is increasingly being used at scale to augment or even replace human annotations. As such, it is imperative that we understand the potential biases and risks of doing so. In this work, we propose an approach for extracting high-level concept-based global policies from LLM-as-a-Judge. Our approach consists of two algorithms: 1) CLoVE (Contrastive Local Verifiable Explanations), which generates verifiable, concept-based, contrastive local explanations and 2) GloVE (Global Verifiable Explanations), which uses iterative clustering, summarization and verification to condense local rules into a global policy. We evaluate GloVE on seven standard benchmarking datasets for content harm detection. We find that the extracted global policies are highly faithful to decisions of the LLM-as-a-Judge. Additionally, we evaluated the robustness of global policies to text perturbations and adversarial attacks. Finally, we conducted a user study to evaluate user understanding and satisfaction with global policies.

The rise of influencer marketing has blurred boundaries between organic content and sponsored content, making the enforcement of legal rules relating to transparency challenging. Effective regulation requires applying legal knowledge with a clear purpose and reason, yet current detection methods of undisclosed sponsored content generally lack legal grounding or operate as opaque "black boxes". Using 1,143 Instagram posts, we compare gpt-5-nano and gemini-2.5-flash-lite under three prompting strategies with controlled levels of legal knowledge provided. Both models perform strongly in classifying content as sponsored or not (F1 up to 0.93), though performance drops by over 10 points on ambiguous cases. We further develop a taxonomy of reasoning errors, showing frequent citation omissions (28.57%), unclear references (20.71%), and hidden ads exhibiting the highest miscue rate (28.57%). While adding regulatory text to the prompt improves explanation quality, it does not consistently improve detection accuracy. The contribution of this paper is threefold. First, it makes a novel addition to regulatory compliance technology by providing a taxonomy of common errors in LLM-generated legal reasoning to evaluate whether automated moderation is not only accurate but also legally robust, thereby advancing the transparent detection of influencer marketing content. Second, it features an original dataset of LLM explanations annotated by two students who were trained in influencer marketing law. Third, it combines quantitative and qualitative evaluation strategies for LLM explanations and critically reflects on how these findings can support advertising regulatory bodies in automating moderation processes on a solid legal foundation.

This paper presents a framework for provably fair AI that overcomes the limits of current bias mitigation methods by systematically removing all sensitive information and its proxies. Using ontology engineering in OWL 2 QL, it formally defines sensitive attributes and infers their proxies through logical reasoning, constructing a sigma algebra G that captures the full structure of biased patterns. Fair representations are then obtained via Delbaen Majumdar optimal transport, which generates variables independent of G while minimizing L2 distance to preserve accuracy. This guarantees true independence rather than mere decorrelation. By modeling bias as dependence between sigma algebras, compiling ontological knowledge into measurable structures, and using optimal transport as the unique fair transformation, the approach ensures complete fairness in tasks like loan approval, where proxies such as ZIP code reveal race. The result is a certifiable and mathematically grounded method for trustworthy AI.

Evaluating modern machine learning models has become prohibitively expensive. Benchmarks such as LMMs-Eval and HELM demand thousands of GPU hours per model. Costly evaluation reduces inclusivity, slows the cycle of innovation, and worsens environmental impact. The typical approach follows two steps. First, select an anchor subset of data. Second, train a mapping from the accuracy on this subset to the final test result. The drawback is that anchor selection depends on clustering, which can be complex and sensitive to design choices. We argue that promoting diversity among samples is not essential; what matters is to select samples that $\textit{maximise diversity in model responses}$. Our method, $\textbf{Diversifying Sample Condensation (DISCO)}$, selects the top-k samples with the greatest model disagreements. This uses greedy, sample-wise statistics rather than global clustering. The approach is conceptually simpler. From a theoretical view, inter-model disagreement provides an information-theoretically optimal rule for such greedy selection. $\textbf{DISCO}$ shows empirical gains over prior methods, achieving state-of-the-art results in performance prediction across MMLU, Hellaswag, Winogrande, and ARC. Code is available here: https://github.com/arubique/disco-public.

Artificial intelligence has become a part of the provision of governmental services, from making decisions about benefits to issuing fines for parking violations. However, AI systems rarely live up to the promise of neutral optimisation, creating biased or incorrect outputs and reducing the agency of both citizens and civic workers to shape the way decisions are made. Transparency is a principle that can both help subjects understand decisions made about them and shape the processes behind those decisions. However, transparency as practiced around AI systems tends to focus on the production of technical objects that represent algorithmic aspects of decision making. These are often difficult for publics to understand, do not connect to potential for action, and do not give insight into the wider socio-material context of decision making. In this paper, we build on existing approaches that take a human-centric view on AI transparency, combined with a socio-technical systems view, to develop the concept of meaningful transparency for civic AI systems: transparencies that allow publics to engage with AI systems that affect their lives, connecting understanding with potential for action.

High-throughput toxicity testing offers a fast and cost-effective way to test large amounts of compounds. A key component for such systems is the automated evaluation via machine learning models. In this paper, we address critical challenges in this domain and demonstrate how representations learned via self-supervised learning can effectively identify toxicant-induced changes. We provide a proof-of-concept that utilizes the publicly available EmbryoNet dataset, which contains ten zebrafish embryo phenotypes elicited by various chemical compounds targeting different processes in early embryonic development. Our analysis shows that the learned representations using self-supervised learning are suitable for effectively distinguishing between the modes-of-action of different compounds. Finally, we discuss the integration of machine learning models in a physical toxicity testing device in the context of the TOXBOX project.

In the Generative Age, the nature of knowledge work is transforming. Traditional models that emphasise the organisation and retrieval of pre-existing information are increasingly inadequate in the face of generative AI (GenAI) systems capable of autonomous content creation. This paper introduces the Knowledge Sculptor (KS), a new professional archetype for Human-GenAI collaboration that transforms raw AI output into trustworthy, actionable knowledge. Grounded in a socio-technical perspective, the KS is conceptualised through a framework of competencies, including architecting a vision, iterative dialogue, information sculpting, and curiosity-driven synthesis. A practice-based vignette illustrates the KS role in action, and in a self-referential approach, the paper itself serves as an artefact of the sculpting process it describes.