The evaluation of LLMs' creativity represents a crucial research domain, though challenges such as data contamination and costly human assessments often impede progress. Drawing inspiration from human creativity assessment, we propose PACE, asking LLMs to generate Parallel Association Chains to Evaluate their creativity. PACE minimizes the risk of data contamination and offers a straightforward, highly efficient evaluation, as evidenced by its strong correlation with Chatbot Arena Creative Writing rankings (Spearman's $ρ= 0.739$, $p < 0.001$) across various proprietary and open-source models. A comparative analysis of associative creativity between LLMs and humans reveals that while high-performing LLMs achieve scores comparable to average human performance, professional humans consistently outperform LLMs. Furthermore, linguistic analysis reveals that both humans and LLMs exhibit a trend of decreasing concreteness in their associations, and humans demonstrating a greater diversity of associative patterns.

How does visual information included in training affect language processing in audio- and text-based deep learning models? We explore how such visual grounding affects model-internal representations of words, and find substantially different effects in speech- vs. text-based language encoders. Firstly, global representational comparisons reveal that visual grounding increases alignment between representations of spoken and written language, but this effect seems mainly driven by enhanced encoding of word identity rather than meaning. We then apply targeted clustering analyses to probe for phonetic vs. semantic discriminability in model representations. Speech-based representations remain phonetically dominated with visual grounding, but in contrast to text-based representations, visual grounding does not improve semantic discriminability. Our findings could usefully inform the development of more efficient methods to enrich speech-based models with visually-informed semantics.

Engagement and motivation are crucial for second-language acquisition, yet maintaining learner interest in educational conversations remains a challenge. While prior research has explored what makes educational texts interesting, still little is known about the linguistic features that drive engagement in conversations. To address this gap, we introduce IntrEx, the first large dataset annotated for interestingness and expected interestingness in teacher-student interactions. Built upon the Teacher-Student Chatroom Corpus (TSCC), IntrEx extends prior work by incorporating sequence-level annotations, allowing for the study of engagement beyond isolated turns to capture how interest evolves over extended dialogues. We employ a rigorous annotation process with over 100 second-language learners, using a comparison-based rating approach inspired by reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) to improve agreement. We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can predict human interestingness judgments. We find that LLMs (7B/8B parameters) fine-tuned on interestingness ratings outperform larger proprietary models like GPT-4o, demonstrating the potential for specialised datasets to model engagement in educational settings. Finally, we analyze how linguistic and cognitive factors, such as concreteness, comprehensibility (readability), and uptake, influence engagement in educational dialogues.

Persona-prompting is a growing strategy to steer LLMs toward simulating particular perspectives or linguistic styles through the lens of a specified identity. While this method is often used to personalize outputs, its impact on how LLMs represent social groups remains underexplored. In this paper, we investigate whether persona-prompting leads to different levels of linguistic abstraction - an established marker of stereotyping - when generating short texts linking socio-demographic categories with stereotypical or non-stereotypical attributes. Drawing on the Linguistic Expectancy Bias framework, we analyze outputs from six open-weight LLMs under three prompting conditions, comparing 11 persona-driven responses to those of a generic AI assistant. To support this analysis, we introduce Self-Stereo, a new dataset of self-reported stereotypes from Reddit. We measure abstraction through three metrics: concreteness, specificity, and negation. Our results highlight the limits of persona-prompting in modulating abstraction in language, confirming criticisms about the ecology of personas as representative of socio-demographic groups and raising concerns about the risk of propagating stereotypes even when seemingly evoking the voice of a marginalized group.

We investigate how word meanings are represented in the transformer language models. Specifically, we focus on whether transformer models employ something analogous to a lexical store - where each word has an entry that contains semantic information. To do this, we extracted the token embedding space of RoBERTa-base and k-means clustered it into 200 clusters. In our first study, we then manually inspected the resultant clusters to consider whether they are sensitive to semantic information. In our second study, we tested whether the clusters are sensitive to five psycholinguistic measures: valence, concreteness, iconicity, taboo, and age of acquisition. Overall, our findings were very positive - there is a wide variety of semantic information encoded within the token embedding space. This serves to rule out certain "meaning eliminativist" hypotheses about how transformer LLMs process semantic information.

Imageability (potential of text to evoke a mental image) and concreteness (perceptibility of text) are two psycholinguistic properties that link visual and semantic spaces. It is little surprise that computational methods that estimate them do so using parallel visual and semantic spaces, such as collections of image-caption pairs or multi-modal models. In this paper, we work on the supposition that text itself in an image-caption dataset offers sufficient signals to accurately estimate these properties. We hypothesize, in particular, that the peakedness of the neighborhood of a word in the semantic embedding space reflects its degree of imageability and concreteness. We then propose an unsupervised, distribution-free measure, which we call Neighborhood Stability Measure (NSM), that quantifies the sharpness of peaks. Extensive experiments show that NSM correlates more strongly with ground-truth ratings than existing unsupervised methods, and is a strong predictor of these properties for classification. Our code and data are available on GitHub (https://github.com/Artificial-Memory-Lab/imageability).

Application systems using natural language interfaces to databases (NLIDBs) have democratized data analysis. This positive development has also brought forth an urgent challenge to help users who might use these systems without a background in statistical analysis to formulate bias-free analytical questions. Although significant research has focused on text-to-SQL generation accuracy, addressing cognitive biases in analytical questions remains underexplored. We present VeriMinder, https://veriminder.ai, an interactive system for detecting and mitigating such analytical vulnerabilities. Our approach introduces three key innovations: (1) a contextual semantic mapping framework for biases relevant to specific analysis contexts (2) an analytical framework that operationalizes the Hard-to-Vary principle and guides users in systematic data analysis (3) an optimized LLM-powered system that generates high-quality, task-specific prompts using a structured process involving multiple candidates, critic feedback, and self-reflection. User testing confirms the merits of our approach. In direct user experience evaluation, 82.5% participants reported positively impacting the quality of the analysis. In comparative evaluation, VeriMinder scored significantly higher than alternative approaches, at least 20% better when considered for metrics of the analysis's concreteness, comprehensiveness, and accuracy. Our system, implemented as a web application, is set to help users avoid "wrong question" vulnerability during data analysis. VeriMinder code base with prompts, https://reproducibility.link/veriminder, is available as an MIT-licensed open-source software to facilitate further research and adoption within the community.

The evaluation of LLMs has so far focused primarily on how well they can perform different tasks such as reasoning, question-answering, paraphrasing, or translating. For most of these tasks, performance can be measured with objective metrics, such as the number of correct answers. However, other language features are not easily quantified. For example, arousal, concreteness, or gender associated with a given word, as well as the extent to which we experience words with senses and relate them to a specific sense. Those features have been studied for many years by psycholinguistics, conducting large-scale experiments with humans to produce ratings for thousands of words. This opens an opportunity to evaluate how well LLMs align with human ratings on these word features, taking advantage of existing studies that cover many different language features in a large number of words. In this paper, we evaluate the alignment of a representative group of LLMs with human ratings on two psycholinguistic datasets: the Glasgow and Lancaster norms. These datasets cover thirteen features over thousands of words. The results show that alignment is \textcolor{black}{generally} better in the Glasgow norms evaluated (arousal, valence, dominance, concreteness, imageability, familiarity, and gender) than on the Lancaster norms evaluated (introceptive, gustatory, olfactory, haptic, auditory, and visual). This suggests a potential limitation of current LLMs in aligning with human sensory associations for words, which may be due to their lack of embodied cognition present in humans and illustrates the usefulness of evaluating LLMs with psycholinguistic datasets.

The nouns of our language refer to either concrete entities (like a table) or abstract concepts (like justice or love), and cognitive psychology has established that concreteness influences how words are processed. Accordingly, understanding how concreteness is represented in our mind and brain is a central question in psychology, neuroscience, and computational linguistics. While the advent of powerful language models has allowed for quantitative inquiries into the nature of semantic representations, it remains largely underexplored how they represent concreteness. Here, we used behavioral judgments to estimate semantic distances implicitly used by humans, for a set of carefully selected abstract and concrete nouns. Using Representational Similarity Analysis, we find that the implicit representational space of participants and the semantic representations of language models are significantly aligned. We also find that both representational spaces are implicitly aligned to an explicit representation of concreteness, which was obtained from our participants using an additional concreteness rating task. Importantly, using ablation experiments, we demonstrate that the human-to-model alignment is substantially driven by concreteness, but not by other important word characteristics established in psycholinguistics. These results indicate that humans and language models converge on the concreteness dimension, but not on other dimensions.

This research investigates the use of customized GPT models to enhance prompting proficiency among architecture students when generating AI-driven images. Prompt engineering is increasingly essential in architectural education due to the widespread adoption of generative AI tools. This study utilized a mixed-methods experimental design involving architecture students divided into three distinct groups: a control group receiving no structured support, a second group provided with structured prompting guides, and a third group supported by both structured guides and interactive AI personas. Students engaged in reverse engineering tasks, first guessing provided image prompts and then generating their own prompts, aiming to boost critical thinking and prompting skills. Variables examined included time spent prompting, word count, prompt similarity, and concreteness. Quantitative analysis involved correlation assessments between these variables and a one-way ANOVA to evaluate differences across groups. While several correlations showed meaningful relationships, not all were statistically significant. ANOVA results indicated statistically significant improvements in word count, similarity, and concreteness, especially in the group supported by AI personas and structured prompting guides. Qualitative feedback complemented these findings, revealing enhanced confidence and critical thinking skills in students. These results suggest tailored GPT interactions substantially improve students' ability to communicate architectural concepts clearly and effectively.