Large Language Models (LLMs) often struggle to deliver accurate and actionable answers when user-provided information is incomplete or ill-specified. We propose a new interaction paradigm, First Ask Then Answer (FATA), in which, through prompt words, LLMs are guided to proactively generate multidimensional supplementary questions for users prior to response generation. Subsequently, by integrating user-provided supplementary information with the original query through sophisticated prompting techniques, we achieve substantially improved response quality and relevance. In contrast to existing clarification approaches -- such as the CLAM framework oriented to ambiguity and the self-interrogation Self-Ask method -- FATA emphasizes completeness (beyond mere disambiguation) and user participation (inviting human input instead of relying solely on model-internal reasoning). It also adopts a single-turn strategy: all clarifying questions are produced at once, thereby reducing dialogue length and improving efficiency. Conceptually, FATA uses the reasoning power of LLMs to scaffold user expression, enabling non-expert users to formulate more comprehensive and contextually relevant queries. To evaluate FATA, we constructed a multi-domain benchmark and compared it with two controls: a baseline prompt (B-Prompt) and a context-enhanced expert prompt (C-Prompt). Experimental results show that FATA outperforms B-Prompt by approximately 40% in aggregate metrics and exhibits a coefficient of variation 8% lower than C-Prompt, indicating superior stability.

A significant barrier to the widespread adoption of Bayesian inference is the specification of prior distributions and likelihoods, which often requires specialized statistical expertise. This paper investigates the feasibility of using a Large Language Model (LLM) to automate this process. We introduce LLM-BI (Large Language Model-driven Bayesian Inference), a conceptual pipeline for automating Bayesian workflows. As a proof-of-concept, we present two experiments focused on Bayesian linear regression. In Experiment I, we demonstrate that an LLM can successfully elicit prior distributions from natural language. In Experiment II, we show that an LLM can specify the entire model structure, including both priors and the likelihood, from a single high-level problem description. Our results validate the potential of LLMs to automate key steps in Bayesian modeling, enabling the possibility of an automated inference pipeline for probabilistic programming.

We propose the design of novel categorical generative AI architectures (GAIAs) using topos theory, a type of category that is ``set-like": a topos has all (co)limits, is Cartesian closed, and has a subobject classifier. Previous theoretical results on the Transformer model have shown that it is a universal sequence-to-sequence function approximator, and dense in the space of all continuous functions with compact support on the Euclidean space of embeddings of tokens. Building on this theoretical result, we explore novel architectures for LLMs that exploit the property that the category of LLMs, viewed as functions, forms a topos. Previous studies of large language models (LLMs) have focused on daisy-chained linear architectures or mixture-of-experts. In this paper, we use universal constructions in category theory to construct novel LLM architectures based on new types of compositional structures. In particular, these new compositional structures are derived from universal properties of LLM categories, and include pullback, pushout, (co) equalizers, exponential objects, and subobject classifiers. We theoretically validate these new compositional structures by showing that the category of LLMs is (co)complete, meaning that all diagrams have solutions in the form of (co)limits. Building on this completeness result, we then show that the category of LLMs forms a topos, a ``set-like" category, which requires showing the existence of exponential objects as well as subobject classifiers. We use a functorial characterization of backpropagation to define a potential implementation of an LLM topos architecture.

Despite the increasing usage of Large Language Models (LLMs) in answering questions in a variety of domains, their reliability and accuracy remain unexamined for a plethora of domains including the religious domains. In this paper, we introduce a novel benchmark FiqhQA focused on the LLM generated Islamic rulings explicitly categorized by the four major Sunni schools of thought, in both Arabic and English. Unlike prior work, which either overlooks the distinctions between religious school of thought or fails to evaluate abstention behavior, we assess LLMs not only on their accuracy but also on their ability to recognize when not to answer. Our zero-shot and abstention experiments reveal significant variation across LLMs, languages, and legal schools of thought. While GPT-4o outperforms all other models in accuracy, Gemini and Fanar demonstrate superior abstention behavior critical for minimizing confident incorrect answers. Notably, all models exhibit a performance drop in Arabic, highlighting the limitations in religious reasoning for languages other than English. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to benchmark the efficacy of LLMs for fine-grained Islamic school of thought specific ruling generation and to evaluate abstention for Islamic jurisprudence queries. Our findings underscore the need for task-specific evaluation and cautious deployment of LLMs in religious applications.

Evaluating the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) is a critical yet challenging task, particularly when aiming to avoid subjective assessments. This paper proposes a framework for leveraging subjective metrics derived from the class textual materials across different semesters to assess LLM outputs across various tasks. By utilizing well-defined benchmarks, factual datasets, and structured evaluation pipelines, the approach ensures consistent, reproducible, and bias-minimized measurements. The framework emphasizes automation and transparency in scoring, reducing reliance on human interpretation while ensuring alignment with real-world applications. This method addresses the limitations of subjective evaluation methods, providing a scalable solution for performance assessment in educational, scientific, and other high-stakes domains.

The rapid increase in hate speech on social media has exposed an unprecedented impact on society, making automated methods for detecting such content important. Unlike prior black-box models, we propose a novel transparent method for automated hate and counter speech recognition, i.e., "Speech Concept Bottleneck Model" (SCBM), using adjectives as human-interpretable bottleneck concepts. SCBM leverages large language models (LLMs) to map input texts to an abstract adjective-based representation, which is then sent to a light-weight classifier for downstream tasks. Across five benchmark datasets spanning multiple languages and platforms (e.g., Twitter, Reddit, YouTube), SCBM achieves an average macro-F1 score of 0.69 which outperforms the most recently reported results from the literature on four out of five datasets. Aside from high recognition accuracy, SCBM provides a high level of both local and global interpretability. Furthermore, fusing our adjective-based concept representation with transformer embeddings, leads to a 1.8% performance increase on average across all datasets, showing that the proposed representation captures complementary information. Our results demonstrate that adjective-based concept representations can serve as compact, interpretable, and effective encodings for hate and counter speech recognition. With adapted adjectives, our method can also be applied to other NLP tasks.

Clinical language models often struggle to provide trustworthy predictions and explanations when applied to lengthy, unstructured electronic health records (EHRs). This work introduces TT-XAI, a lightweight and effective framework that improves both classification performance and interpretability through domain-aware keyword distillation and reasoning with large language models (LLMs). First, we demonstrate that distilling raw discharge notes into concise keyword representations significantly enhances BERT classifier performance and improves local explanation fidelity via a focused variant of LIME. Second, we generate chain-of-thought clinical explanations using keyword-guided prompts to steer LLMs, producing more concise and clinically relevant reasoning. We evaluate explanation quality using deletion-based fidelity metrics, self-assessment via LLaMA-3 scoring, and a blinded human study with domain experts. All evaluation modalities consistently favor the keyword-augmented method, confirming that distillation enhances both machine and human interpretability. TT-XAI offers a scalable pathway toward trustworthy, auditable AI in clinical decision support.

To improve the reading experience, many news sites organize news into topical collections, called stories. In this work, we present an approach for implementing real-time story identification for a news monitoring system that automatically collects news articles as they appear online and processes them in various ways. Story identification aims to assign each news article to a specific story that the article is covering. The process is similar to text clustering and topic modeling, but requires that articles be grouped based on particular events, places, and people, rather than general text similarity (as in clustering) or general (predefined) topics (as in topic modeling). We present an approach to story identification that is capable of functioning in real time, assigning articles to stories as they are published online. In the proposed approach, we combine text representation techniques, clustering algorithms, and online topic modeling methods. We combine various text representation methods to extract specific events and named entities necessary for story identification, showing that a mixture of online topic-modeling approaches such as BERTopic, DBStream, and TextClust can be adapted for story discovery. We evaluate our approach on a news dataset from Slovene media covering a period of 1 month. We show that our real-time approach produces sensible results as judged by human evaluators.

Large language models have become increasingly common, used by millions of people worldwide in both professional and personal contexts. As these models continue to advance, they are frequently serving as virtual assistants and companions. In human interactions, effective communication typically involves two types of empathy: cognitive empathy (understanding others' thoughts and emotions) and affective empathy (emotionally sharing others' feelings). In this study, we investigated both cognitive and affective empathy across several small (SLMs) and large (LLMs) language models using standardized psychological tests. Our results revealed that LLMs consistently outperformed humans - including psychology students - on cognitive empathy tasks. However, despite their cognitive strengths, both small and large language models showed significantly lower affective empathy compared to human participants. These findings highlight rapid advancements in language models' ability to simulate cognitive empathy, suggesting strong potential for providing effective virtual companionship and personalized emotional support. Additionally, their high cognitive yet lower affective empathy allows objective and consistent emotional support without running the risk of emotional fatigue or bias.

Virginia's seventeenth- and eighteenth-century land patents survive primarily as narrative metes-and-bounds descriptions, limiting spatial analysis. This study systematically evaluates current-generation large language models (LLMs) in converting these prose abstracts into geographically accurate latitude/longitude coordinates within a focused evaluation context. A digitized corpus of 5,471 Virginia patent abstracts (1695-1732) is released, with 43 rigorously verified test cases serving as an initial, geographically focused benchmark. Six OpenAI models across three architectures (o-series, GPT-4-class, and GPT-3.5) were tested under two paradigms: direct-to-coordinate and tool-augmented chain-of-thought invoking external geocoding APIs. Results were compared with a GIS-analyst baseline, the Stanford NER geoparser, Mordecai-3, and a county-centroid heuristic. The top single-call model, o3-2025-04-16, achieved a mean error of 23 km (median 14 km), outperforming the median LLM (37.4 km) by 37.5%, the weakest LLM (50.3 km) by 53.5%, and external baselines by 67% (GIS analyst) and 70% (Stanford NER). A five-call ensemble further reduced errors to 19 km (median 12 km) at minimal additional cost (approx. USD 0.20 per grant), outperforming the median LLM by 48.6%. A patentee-name-redaction ablation increased error by about 9%, indicating reliance on textual landmark and adjacency descriptions rather than memorization. The cost-efficient gpt-4o-2024-08-06 model maintained a 28 km mean error at USD 1.09 per 1,000 grants, establishing a strong cost-accuracy benchmark; external geocoding tools offered no measurable benefit in this evaluation. These findings demonstrate the potential of LLMs for scalable, accurate, and cost-effective historical georeferencing.