This study investigates political discourse in the German parliament, the Bundestag, by analyzing approximately 28,000 parliamentary speeches from the last five years. Two machine learning models for topic and sentiment classification were developed and trained on a manually labeled dataset. The models showed strong classification performance, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.94 for topic classification (average across topics) and 0.89 for sentiment classification. Both models were applied to assess topic trends and sentiment distributions across political parties and over time. The analysis reveals remarkable relationships between parties and their role in parliament. In particular, a change in style can be observed for parties moving from government to opposition. While ideological positions matter, governing responsibilities also shape discourse. The analysis directly addresses key questions about the evolution of topics, sentiment dynamics, and party-specific discourse strategies in the Bundestag.

With the increasing prevalence of artificial intelligence, careful evaluation of inherent biases needs to be conducted to form the basis for alleviating the effects these predispositions can have on users. Large language models (LLMs) are predominantly used by many as a primary source of information for various topics. LLMs frequently make factual errors, fabricate data (hallucinations), or present biases, exposing users to misinformation and influencing opinions. Educating users on their risks is key to responsible use, as bias, unlike hallucinations, cannot be caught through data verification. We quantify the political bias of popular LLMs in the context of the recent vote of the German Bundestag using the score produced by the Wahl-O-Mat. This metric measures the alignment between an individual's political views and the positions of German political parties. We compare the models' alignment scores to identify factors influencing their political preferences. Doing so, we discover a bias toward left-leaning parties, most dominant in larger LLMs. Also, we find that the language we use to communicate with the models affects their political views. Additionally, we analyze the influence of a model's origin and release date and compare the results to the outcome of the recent vote of the Bundestag. Our results imply that LLMs are prone to exhibiting political bias. Large corporations with the necessary means to develop LLMs, thus, knowingly or unknowingly, have a responsibility to contain these biases, as they can influence each voter's decision-making process and inform public opinion in general and at scale.

From a monarchy to a democracy, to a dictatorship and back to a democracy -- the German political landscape has been constantly changing ever since the first German national state was formed in 1871. After World War II, the Federal Republic of Germany was formed in 1949. Since then every plenary session of the German Bundestag was logged and even has been digitized over the course of the last few years. We analyze these texts using a time series variant of the topic model LDA to investigate which events had a lasting effect on the political discourse and how the political topics changed over time. This allows us to detect changes in word frequency (and thus key discussion points) in political discourse.

This paper focuses on language change based on shifting social norms, in particular with regard to the debate on language and gender. It is a recurring argument in this debate that language develops "naturally" and that "severe interventions" - such as gender-inclusive language is often claimed to be - in the allegedly "organic" language system are inappropriate and even "dangerous". Such interventions are, however, not unprecedented. Socially motivated processes of language change are neither unusual nor new. We focus in our contribution on one important political-social space in Germany, the German Bundestag. Taking other struggles about language and gender in the plenaries of the Bundestag as a starting point, our article illustrates that language and gender has been a recurring issue in the German Bundestag since the 1980s. We demonstrate how this is reflected in linguistic practices of the Bundestag, by the use of a) designations for gays and lesbians; b) pair forms such as B\"urgerinnen und B\"urger (female and male citizens); and c) female forms of addresses and personal nouns ('Pr\"asidentin' in addition to 'Pr\"asident'). Lastly, we will discuss implications of these earlier language battles for the currently very heated debate about gender-inclusive language, especially regarding new forms with gender symbols like the asterisk or the colon (Lehrer*innen, Lehrer:innen; male*female teachers) which are intended to encompass all gender identities.

We present ASR Bundestag, a dataset for automatic speech recognition in German, consisting of 610 hours of aligned audio-transcript pairs for supervised training as well as 1,038 hours of unlabeled audio snippets for self-supervised learning, based on raw audio data and transcriptions from plenary sessions and committee meetings of the German parliament. In addition, we discuss utilized approaches for the automated creation of speech datasets and assess the quality of the resulting dataset based on evaluations and finetuning of a pre-trained state of the art model. We make the dataset publicly available, including all subsets.

While the British governmenthas authorized the presence of level 3 autonomous vehicles on public roads, it is now Germany's turn to propose a first legal framework around these transport systems. On May 19, the Bundestag, the lower house of the German parliament, approved a law that would allow certain autonomous vehicles to drive on public roads. If the text is validated by the Bundesrat, the upper house of the German parliament, cars with a level 4 autonomy system could be used in certain settings. The bill entitled "The Compulsory Insurance Act – Autonomous Driving Act" was approved by the Bundestag on 19 May. With this new text, Germany wants to catch up with automated driving while encouraging further research on the subject.