Conversational agents have made significant progress since ELIZA, expanding their role across various domains, including healthcare, education, and customer service. As these agents become increasingly integrated into daily human interactions, the need for emotional intelligence, particularly empathetic listening, becomes increasingly essential. In this study, we explore how Large Language Models (LLMs) respond when tasked with generating emotionally rich interactions. Starting from a small dataset manually crafted by an expert to reflect empathic behavior, we extended the conversations using two LLMs: ChatGPT and Gemini. We analyzed the emotional progression of the dialogues using both sentiment analysis (via VADER) and expert assessments. While the generated conversations often mirrored the intended emotional structure, human evaluation revealed important differences in the perceived empathy and coherence of the responses. These findings suggest that emotion modeling in dialogues requires not only structural alignment in the expressed emotions but also qualitative depth, highlighting the importance of combining automated and humancentered methods in the development of emotionally competent agents.

This study examines cultural value alignment in large language models (LLMs) by analyzing how Gemini, ChatGPT, and DeepSeek prioritize values from Schwartz's value framework. Using the 40-item Portrait Values Questionnaire, we assessed whether DeepSeek, trained on Chinese-language data, exhibits distinct value preferences compared to Western models. Results of a Bayesian ordinal regression model show that self-transcendence values (e.g., benevolence, universalism) were highly prioritized across all models, reflecting a general LLM tendency to emphasize prosocial values. However, DeepSeek uniquely downplayed self-enhancement values (e.g., power, achievement) compared to ChatGPT and Gemini, aligning with collectivist cultural tendencies. These findings suggest that LLMs reflect culturally situated biases rather than a universal ethical framework. To address value asymmetries in LLMs, we propose multi-perspective reasoning, self-reflective feedback, and dynamic contextualization. This study contributes to discussions on AI fairness, cultural neutrality, and the need for pluralistic AI alignment frameworks that integrate diverse moral perspectives.

As leading examples of large language models, ChatGPT and Gemini claim to provide accurate and unbiased information, emphasizing their commitment to political neutrality and avoidance of personal bias. This research investigates the political tendency of large language models and the existence of differentiation according to the query language. For this purpose, ChatGPT and Gemini were subjected to a political axis test using 14 different languages. The findings of the study suggest that these large language models do exhibit political tendencies, with both models demonstrating liberal and leftist biases. A comparative analysis revealed that Gemini exhibited a more pronounced liberal and left-wing tendency compared to ChatGPT. The study also found that these political biases varied depending on the language used for inquiry. The study delves into the factors that constitute political tendencies and linguistic differentiation, exploring differences in the sources and scope of educational data, structural and grammatical features of languages, cultural and political contexts, and the model's response to linguistic features. From this standpoint, and an ethical perspective, it is proposed that artificial intelligence tools should refrain from asserting a lack of political tendencies and neutrality, instead striving for political neutrality and executing user queries by incorporating these tendencies.

-- The Copilot for Real-world Experimental Scientist (CRESt) system empowers researchers to control autonomous laboratories through conversational AI, providing a seamless interface for managing complex experimental workflows. We have enhanced CRESt by integrating a multi-agent collaboration mechanism that utilizes the complementary strengths of the ChatGPT and Gemini models for precise image analysis in materials science. This innovative approach significantly improves the accuracy of experimental outcomes by fostering structured debates between the AI models, which enhances decision-making processes in materials phase analysis. Additionally, to evaluate the generalizability of this approach, we tested it on a quantitative task of counting particles. Here, the collaboration between the AI models also led to improved results, demonstrating the versatility and robustness of this method. By harnessing this dual-AI framework, this approach stands as a pioneering method for enhancing experimental accuracy and efficiency in materials research, with applications extending beyond CRESt to broader scientific experimentation and analysis. I. INTRODUCTION In recent years, the field of image analysis has undergone transformative changes, primarily driven by advances in artificial intelligence (AI).

The launch of a new chatbot by Chinese artificial intelligence firm DeepSeek triggered a plunge in US tech stocks as it appeared to perform as well as OpenAI's ChatGPT and other AI models, but using fewer resources. By Monday, DeepSeek's AI assistant had rapidly overtaken ChatGPT as the most popular free app in Apple's US and UK app stores. Despite its popularity with international users, the app appears to censor answers to sensitive questions about China and its government. Chinese generative AI must not contain content that violates the country's "core socialist values", according to a technical document published by the national cybersecurity standards committee. That includes content that "incites to subvert state power and overthrow the socialist system", or "endangers national security and interests and damages the national image".

I never thought I'd say this but … I cheated on you, ChatGPT, and Gemini. It was just the right thing to do. But hear me out: I was paying two separate subscription fees to get help writing and generating images for my blog when I heard about this all-in-one AI tool, 1minAI. Everyone was talking about how it does everything ChatGPT and Gemini do, but more. I didn't believe it because I'd never heard of it.

I made a controversial decision recently: I cheated on ChatGPT and Gemini. It was scary, but it was the right thing to do. I was paying two separate subscription fees to get help writing and generating images for my blog when I heard about this all-in-one AI tool, 1minAI. They said it could do everything ChatGPT and Gemini do, and more. I didn't believe it because I'd never heard of it.

I made a controversial decision recently: I cheated on ChatGPT and Gemini. It was scary, but it was the right thing to do. I was paying two separate subscription fees to get help writing and generating images for my blog when I heard about this all-in-one AI tool, 1minAI. They said it could do everything ChatGPT and Gemini do, and more. I didn't believe it because I'd never heard of it.

Vision language models (VLMs) have recently emerged and gained the spotlight for their ability to comprehend the dual modality of image and textual data. VLMs such as LLaVA, ChatGPT-4, and Gemini have recently shown impressive performance on tasks such as natural image captioning, visual question answering (VQA), and spatial reasoning. Additionally, a universal segmentation model by Meta AI, Segment Anything Model (SAM) shows unprecedented performance at isolating objects from unforeseen images. Since medical experts, biologists, and materials scientists routinely examine microscopy or medical images in conjunction with textual information in the form of captions, literature, or reports, and draw conclusions of great importance and merit, it is indubitably essential to test the performance of VLMs and foundation models such as SAM, on these images. In this study, we charge ChatGPT, LLaVA, Gemini, and SAM with classification, segmentation, counting, and VQA tasks on a variety of microscopy images. We observe that ChatGPT and Gemini are impressively able to comprehend the visual features in microscopy images, while SAM is quite capable at isolating artefacts in a general sense. However, the performance is not close to that of a domain expert - the models are readily encumbered by the introduction of impurities, defects, artefact overlaps and diversity present in the images.

The growing prominence of large language models (LLMs) necessitates the exploration of their capabilities beyond English. This research investigates the Telugu language proficiency of ChatGPT and Gemini, two leading LLMs. Through a designed set of 20 questions encompassing greetings, grammar, vocabulary, common phrases, task completion, and situational reasoning, the study delves into their strengths and weaknesses in handling Telugu. The analysis aims to identify the LLM that demonstrates a deeper understanding of Telugu grammatical structures, possesses a broader vocabulary, and exhibits superior performance in tasks like writing and reasoning. By comparing their ability to comprehend and use everyday Telugu expressions, the research sheds light on their suitability for real-world language interaction. Furthermore, the evaluation of adaptability and reasoning capabilities provides insights into how each LLM leverages Telugu to respond to dynamic situations. This comparative analysis contributes to the ongoing discussion on multilingual capabilities in AI and paves the way for future research in developing LLMs that can seamlessly integrate with Telugu-speaking communities.