The video games industry is unpredictable. If you'd told us this time last year that a previously unknown French studio would claim game of the year, Battlefield 6 would knock Call of Duty off the top of the annual charts and that Saudi Arabia would buy gaming giant Electronic Arts (EA) we'd have been... sceptical. So you'd have to be very sure of yourself - or very foolish - to try and predict what's going to happen in the year ahead. Luckily, we're not in the crystal ball business here at BBC Newsbeat, but there are a few things we can be confident video game fans should keep an eye on in 2026. GTA 6: Will it actually arrive in 2026?

The dynamic nature of interactions between students and GenAI, as well as their relationship to writing quality, remains underexplored. While most research has examined how general-purpose GenAI can support writing, fewer studies have investigated how students interact with pedagogically designed systems across different phases of the writing process. To address this gap, we evaluated a GenAI-driven essay-writing assistant (EWA) designed to support higher education students in argumentative writing. Drawing on 1,282 interaction logs from 32 undergraduates during a two-hour writing session, Sequential Pattern Mining and K-Means clustering were used to identify behavioral patterns. Two clusters emerged: Cluster 1 emphasized outline planning and essay structure, while Cluster 2 focused on content development. A Mann-Whitney U test revealed a moderate effect size (r = 0.36) in the essay Organization dimension, with Cluster 1 showing higher scores. Qualitative analysis indicated that students with better performance actively wrote and shared essay sections with EWA for feedback, rather than interacted passively by asking questions. These findings suggest implications for teaching and system design. Teachers can encourage active engagement, while future EWAs may integrate automatic labeling and monitoring to prompt students to move from questioning to writing, enabling fuller benefits from GenAI-supported learning.

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has garnered considerable attention for its potential utility in research and scholarship. A growing body of work in sociology and related fields demonstrates both the potential advantages and risks of GenAI, but these studies are largely proof-of-concept or specific audits of models and products. We know comparatively little about how sociologists actually use GenAI in their research practices and how they view its present and future role in the discipline. In this paper, we describe the current landscape of GenAI use in sociological research based on a survey of authors in 50 sociology journals. Our sample includes both computational sociologists and non-computational sociologists and their collaborators. We find that sociologists primarily use GenAI to assist with writing tasks: revising, summarizing, editing, and translating their own work. Respondents report that GenAI saves time and that they are curious about its capabilities, but they do not currently feel strong institutional or field-level pressure to adopt it. Overall, respondents are wary of GenAI's social and environmental impacts and express low levels of trust in its outputs, but many believe that GenAI tools will improve over the next several years. We do not find large differences between computational and non-computational scholars in terms of GenAI use, attitudes, and concern; nor do we find strong patterns by familiarity or frequency of use. We discuss what these findings suggest about the future of GenAI in sociology and highlight challenges for developing shared norms around its use in research practice.

STEAM education in many parts of the Global South remains abstract and weakly connected to learners sociocultural realities. This study examines how human experts evaluate the capacity of Generative AI (GenAI) to contextualize STEAM instruction in these settings. Using a convergent mixed-methods design grounded in human-centered and culturally responsive pedagogy, four STEAM education experts reviewed standardized Ghana NaCCA lesson plans and GenAI-generated lessons created with a customized Culturally Responsive Lesson Planner (CRLP). Quantitative data were collected with a validated 25-item Culturally Responsive Pedagogy Rubric assessing bias awareness, cultural representation, contextual relevance, linguistic responsiveness, and teacher agency. Qualitative reflections provided additional insight into the pedagogical and cultural dynamics of each lesson. Findings show that GenAI, especially through the CRLP, improved connections between abstract standards and learners lived experiences. Teacher Agency was the strongest domain, while Cultural Representation was the weakest. CRLP-generated lessons were rated as more culturally grounded and pedagogically engaging. However, GenAI struggled to represent Ghana's cultural diversity, often producing surface-level references, especially in Mathematics and Computing. Experts stressed the need for teacher mediation, community input, and culturally informed refinement of AI outputs. Future work should involve classroom trials, broader expert participation, and fine-tuning with Indigenous corpora.

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly used in education, posing significant challenges for teachers adapting to these changes. GenAI offers unprecedented opportunities for accessibility, scalability and productivity in educational tasks. However, the automation of teaching tasks through GenAI raises concerns about reduced teacher agency, potential cognitive atrophy, and the broader deprofessionalisation of teaching. Drawing findings from prior literature on AI in Education, and refining through a recent systematic literature review, this chapter presents a conceptualisation of five levels of teacher-AI teaming: transactional, situational, operational, praxical and synergistic teaming. The framework aims to capture the nuanced dynamics of teacher-AI interactions, particularly with GenAI, that may lead to the replacement, complementarity, or augmentation of teachers' competences and professional practice. GenAI technological affordances required in supporting teaming, along with empirical studies, are discussed. Drawing on empirical observations, we outline a future vision that moves beyond individual teacher agency toward collaborative decision-making between teachers and AI, in which both agents engage in negotiation, constructive challenge, and co-reasoning that enhance each other's capabilities and enable outcomes neither could realise independently. Further discussion of socio-technical factors beyond teacher-AI teaming is also included to streamline the synergy of teachers and AI in education ethically and practically.

While recent research suggests Large Language Models match human creative performance in divergent thinking tasks, visual creativity remains underexplored. This study compared image generation in human participants (Visual Artists and Non Artists) and using an image generation AI model (two prompting conditions with varying human input: high for Human Inspired, low for Self Guided). Human raters (N=255) and GPT4o evaluated the creativity of the resulting images. We found a clear creativity gradient, with Visual Artists being the most creative, followed by Non Artists, then Human Inspired generative AI, and finally Self Guided generative AI. Increased human guidance strongly improved GenAI's creative output, bringing its productions close to those of Non Artists. Notably, human and AI raters also showed vastly different creativity judgment patterns. These results suggest that, in contrast to language centered tasks, GenAI models may face unique challenges in visual domains, where creativity depends on perceptual nuance and contextual sensitivity, distinctly human capacities that may not be readily transferable from language models.

What AI doesn't know: we could be creating a global'knowledge collapse' As GenAI becomes the primary way to find information, local and traditional wisdom is being lost. And we are only beginning to realise what we're missing This article was originally published as'Holes in the web' on Aeon.co A few years back, my dad was diagnosed with a tumour on his tongue - which meant we had some choices to weigh up. My family has an interesting dynamic when it comes to medical decisions. While my older sister is a trained doctor in western allopathic medicine, my parents are big believers in traditional remedies. Having grown up in a small town in India, I am accustomed to rituals. My dad had a ritual, too. Every time we visited his home village in southern Tamil Nadu, he'd get a bottle of thick, pungent, herb-infused oil from a vaithiyar, a traditional doctor practising Siddha medicine. It was his way of maintaining his connection with the kind of medicine he had always known and trusted.

We present NoLBERT, a lightweight, timestamped foundational language model for empirical research -- particularly for forecasting in economics, finance, and the social sciences. By pretraining exclusively on text from 1976 to 1995, NoLBERT avoids both lookback and lookahead biases (information leakage) that can undermine econometric inference. It exceeds domain-specific baselines on NLP benchmarks while maintaining temporal consistency. Applied to patent texts, NoLBERT enables the construction of firm-level innovation networks and shows that gains in innovation centrality predict higher long-run profit growth.

These authors contributed equally to this work. For decades, the dominance of English has created a substantial barrier in global science, disadvantaging non-native speakers. The recent rise of generative AI (GenAI) offers a potential technological response to this long-standing inequity. We provide the first large-scale evidence testing whether GenAI acts as a linguistic equalizer in global science. Drawing on 5.65 million scientific articles published from 2021 to 2024, we compare GenAI-assisted and non-assisted publications from authors in non-English-speaking countries. Using text embeddings derived from a pretrained large language model (SciBERT), we measure each publication's linguistic similarity to a benchmark of scientific writing from U.S.-based authors and track stylistic convergence over time. We find significant and growing convergence for GenAI-assisted publications after the release of ChatGPT in late 2022. The effect is strongest for domestic coauthor teams from countries linguistically distant from English. These findings provide large-scale evidence that GenAI is beginning to reshape global science communication by reducing language barriers in research. The rapid rise of generative AI (GenAI) has sparked an important debate regarding its role in science--raising questions of whether it homogenizes writing and erodes authorship norms (1,2) or whether it acts as a "linguistic equalizer" that lowers barriers for non-native English speakers (3,4). This debate is especially salient because English has long dominated global science, which gives native speakers a structural advantage (5-7) by creating larger writing burdens and unique peer review bias risks for researchers from non-Anglophone countries (8-12). As a result, many of these researchers have historically spent time in the U.S. or the UK to learn how to write in English or have hired (expensive) language experts (13, 14). Against this backdrop, the release of ChatGPT in late 2022, a chatbot based on a large language model (LLM), marked a turning point. This widely accessible, low-cost, and human-like tool offers a potential means of reducing longstanding linguistic imbalances (15, 16).

Abstract--The rise of Generative AI (GenAI) tools like Chat-GPT has created new opportunities and challenges for computing education. Existing research has primarily focused on GenAI's ability to complete educational tasks and its impact on student performance, often overlooking its effects on knowledge gains. In this study, we investigate how GenAI assistance compares to conventional online resources in supporting knowledge gains across different proficiency levels. We conducted a controlled user experiment with 24 undergraduate students of two different levels of programming experience (beginner, intermediate) to examine how students interact with ChatGPT while solving programming tasks. We analyzed task performance, conceptual understanding, and interaction behaviors. Our findings reveal that generating complete solutions with GenAI significantly improves task performance, especially for beginners, but does not consistently result in knowledge gains. Importantly, usage strategies differ by experience: beginners tend to rely heavily on GenAI toward task completion often without knowledge gain in the process, while intermediates adopt more selective approaches. We find that both over-reliance and minimal use result in weaker knowledge gains overall. Based on our results, we call on students and educators to adopt GenAI as a learning rather than a problem solving tool. Our study highlights the urgent need for guidance when integrating GenAI into programming education to foster deeper understanding. The rapid development of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) has led to its widespread adoption across various domains to boost productivity and streamline workflows. Large Language Models (LLMs), such as OpenAI's ChatGPT and Codex, Google Gemini, and GitHub Copilot, have been integrated into domains including software engineering [1], [2], healthcare [3], education [4], creative writing [5], [6], and digital music [7], offering capabilities such as code generation, question answering, and image generation. These authors contributed equally to this work. Some studies evaluated GenAI's performance on programming tasks [8], user interface design education [9], and computer vision coursework [10]. Others focused on assessing the accuracy and usability of GenAIgenerated responses [11], [12].