Academic citation integrity faces persistent challenges, with research indicating 20% of citations contain errors and manual verification requiring months of expert time. This paper presents a novel AI-powered methodology for systematic, comprehensive reference auditing using agentic AI with tool-use capabilities. We develop a zero-assumption verification protocol that independently validates every reference against multiple academic databases (Semantic Scholar, Google Scholar, CrossRef) without assuming any citation is correct. The methodology was validated across 30 academic documents (2,581 references) spanning undergraduate projects to doctoral theses and peer-reviewed publications. Results demonstrate 91.7% average verification rate on published PLOS papers, with successful detection of fabricated references, retracted articles, orphan citations, and predatory journals. Time efficiency improved dramatically: 90-minute audits for 916-reference doctoral theses versus months of manual review. The system achieved <0.5% false positive rate while identifying critical issues manual review might miss. This work establishes the first validated AI-agent methodology for academic citation integrity, demonstrating practical applicability for supervisors, students, and institutional quality assurance.

Generative AI (GenAI) has recently emerged as a groundbreaking force in Software Engineering, capable of generating code, identifying bugs, recommending fixes, and supporting quality assurance. While its use in coding tasks shows considerable promise, applying GenAI across the entire Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) has not yet been fully explored. Critical uncertainties in areas such as reliability, accountability, security, and data privacy demand deeper investigation and coordinated action. The GENIUS project, comprising over 30 European industrial and academic partners, aims to address these challenges by advancing AI integration across all SDLC phases. It focuses on GenAI's potential, the development of innovative tools, and emerging research challenges, actively shaping the future of software engineering. This vision paper presents a shared perspective on the future of GenAI-driven software engineering, grounded in cross-sector dialogue as well as experiences and findings within the GENIUS consortium. The paper explores four central elements: (1) a structured overview of current challenges in GenAI adoption across the SDLC; (2) a forward-looking vision outlining key technological and methodological advances expected over the next five years; (3) anticipated shifts in the roles and required skill sets of software professionals; and (4) the contribution of GENIUS in realising this transformation through practical tools and industrial validation. This paper focuses on aligning technical innovation with business relevance. It aims to inform both research agendas and industrial strategies, providing a foundation for reliable, scalable, and industry-ready GenAI solutions for software engineering teams.

Evaluating factual accuracy in Large Language Model (LLM)-generated clinical text is a critical barrier to adoption, as expert review is unscalable for the continuous quality assurance these systems require. We address this challenge with two complementary contributions. First, we introduce MedFactEval, a framework for scalable, fact-grounded evaluation where clinicians define high-salience key facts and an "LLM Jury"--a multi-LLM majority vote--assesses their inclusion in generated summaries. Second, we present MedAgentBrief, a model-agnostic, multi-step workflow designed to generate high-quality, factual discharge summaries. To validate our evaluation framework, we established a gold-standard reference using a seven-physician majority vote on clinician-defined key facts from inpatient cases. The MedFactEval LLM Jury achieved almost perfect agreement with this panel (Cohen's kappa=81%), a performance statistically non-inferior to that of a single human expert (kappa=67%, P < 0.001). Our work provides both a robust evaluation framework (MedFactEval) and a high-performing generation workflow (MedAgentBrief), offering a comprehensive approach to advance the responsible deployment of generative AI in clinical workflows.

Applications of Large Language Models~(LLMs) have evolved from simple text generators into complex software systems that integrate retrieval augmentation, tool invocation, and multi-turn interactions. Their inherent non-determinism, dynamism, and context dependence pose fundamental challenges for quality assurance. This paper decomposes LLM applications into a three-layer architecture: \textbf{\textit{System Shell Layer}}, \textbf{\textit{Prompt Orchestration Layer}}, and \textbf{\textit{LLM Inference Core}}. We then assess the applicability of traditional software testing methods in each layer: directly applicable at the shell layer, requiring semantic reinterpretation at the orchestration layer, and necessitating paradigm shifts at the inference core. A comparative analysis of Testing AI methods from the software engineering community and safety analysis techniques from the AI community reveals structural disconnects in testing unit abstraction, evaluation metrics, and lifecycle management. We identify four fundamental differences that underlie 6 core challenges. To address these, we propose four types of collaborative strategies (\emph{Retain}, \emph{Translate}, \emph{Integrate}, and \emph{Runtime}) and explore a closed-loop, trustworthy quality assurance framework that combines pre-deployment validation with runtime monitoring. Based on these strategies, we offer practical guidance and a protocol proposal to support the standardization and tooling of LLM application testing. We propose a protocol \textbf{\textit{Agent Interaction Communication Language}} (AICL) that is used to communicate between AI agents. AICL has the test-oriented features and is easily integrated in the current agent framework.

Traditional quality assurance (QA) methods face significant challenges in addressing the complexity, scale, and rapid iteration cycles of modern software systems and are strained by limited resources available, leading to substantial costs associated with poor quality. The object of this research is the Quality Assurance processes for modern distributed software applications. The subject of the research is the assessment of the benefits, challenges, and prospects of integrating modern AI-oriented tools into quality assurance processes. We performed comprehensive analysis of implications on both verification and validation processes covering exploratory test analyses, equivalence partitioning and boundary analyses, metamorphic testing, finding inconsistencies in acceptance criteria (AC), static analyses, test case generation, unit test generation, test suit optimization and assessment, end to end scenario execution. End to end regression of sample enterprise application utilizing AI-agents over generated test scenarios was implemented as a proof of concept highlighting practical use of the study. The results, with only 8.3% flaky executions of generated test cases, indicate significant potential for the proposed approaches. However, the study also identified substantial challenges for practical adoption concerning generation of semantically identical coverage, "black box" nature and lack of explainability from state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs), the tendency to correct mutated test cases to match expected results, underscoring the necessity for thorough verification of both generated artifacts and test execution results. The research demonstrates AI's transformative potential for QA but highlights the importance of a strategic approach to implementing these technologies, considering the identified limitations and the need for developing appropriate verification methodologies.

High-quality datasets are fundamental to training and evaluating machine learning models, yet their creation-especially with accurate human annotations-remains a significant challenge. Many dataset paper submissions lack originality, diversity, or rigorous quality control, and these shortcomings are often overlooked during peer review. Submissions also frequently omit essential details about dataset construction and properties. While existing tools such as datasheets aim to promote transparency, they are largely descriptive and do not provide standardized, measurable methods for evaluating data quality. Similarly, metadata requirements at conferences promote accountability but are inconsistently enforced. To address these limitations, this position paper advocates for the integration of systematic, rubric-based evaluation metrics into the dataset review process-particularly as submission volumes continue to grow. We also explore scalable, cost-effective methods for synthetic data generation, including dedicated tools and LLM-as-a-judge approaches, to support more efficient evaluation. As a call to action, we introduce DataRubrics, a structured framework for assessing the quality of both human- and model-generated datasets. Leveraging recent advances in LLM-based evaluation, DataRubrics offers a reproducible, scalable, and actionable solution for dataset quality assessment, enabling both authors and reviewers to uphold higher standards in data-centric research. We also release code to support reproducibility of LLM-based evaluations at https://github.com/datarubrics/datarubrics.

Emergency response services are critical to public safety, with 9-1-1 call-takers playing a key role in ensuring timely and effective emergency operations. To ensure call-taking performance consistency, quality assurance is implemented to evaluate and refine call-takers' skillsets. However, traditional human-led evaluations struggle with high call volumes, leading to low coverage and delayed assessments. We introduce LogiDebrief, an AI-driven framework that automates traditional 9-1-1 call debriefing by integrating Signal-Temporal Logic (STL) with Large Language Models (LLMs) for fully-covered rigorous performance evaluation. LogiDebrief formalizes call-taking requirements as logical specifications, enabling systematic assessment of 9-1-1 calls against procedural guidelines. It employs a three-step verification process: (1) contextual understanding to identify responder types, incident classifications, and critical conditions; (2) STL-based runtime checking with LLM integration to ensure compliance; and (3) automated aggregation of results into quality assurance reports. Beyond its technical contributions, LogiDebrief has demonstrated real-world impact. Successfully deployed at Metro Nashville Department of Emergency Communications, it has assisted in debriefing 1,701 real-world calls, saving 311.85 hours of active engagement. Empirical evaluation with real-world data confirms its accuracy, while a case study and extensive user study highlight its effectiveness in enhancing call-taking performance.

In this paper, we present a system that uses a Large Language Model (LLM) to perform grammar and spelling correction as a component of Quality Assurance (QA) for texts generated by NLG systems, which is important for text production in real-world scenarios. Evaluating the results of the system on work-in-progress sports news texts in three languages, we show that it is able to deliver acceptable corrections.

Measurement quality assurance (QA) practices play a key role in the safe use of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapies (IMRT) for cancer treatment. These practices have reduced measurement-based IMRT QA failure below 1%. However, these practices are time and labor intensive which can lead to delays in patient care. In this study, we examine how conformal prediction methodologies can be used to robustly triage plans. We propose a new training-aware conformal risk control method by combining the benefit of conformal risk control and conformal training. We incorporate the decision making thresholds based on the gamma passing rate, along with the risk functions used in clinical evaluation, into the design of the risk control framework. Our method achieves high sensitivity and specificity and significantly reduces the number of plans needing measurement without generating a huge confidence interval. Our results demonstrate the validity and applicability of conformal prediction methods for improving efficiency and reducing the workload of the IMRT QA process.

Cancer clinical trials often face challenges in recruitment and engagement due to a lack of participant-facing informational and educational resources. This study investigated the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs), specifically GPT4, in generating patient-friendly educational content from clinical trial informed consent forms. Using data from ClinicalTrials.gov, we employed zero-shot learning for creating trial summaries and one-shot learning for developing multiple-choice questions, evaluating their effectiveness through patient surveys and crowdsourced annotation. Results showed that GPT4-generated summaries were both readable and comprehensive, and may improve patients' understanding and interest in clinical trials. The multiple-choice questions demonstrated high accuracy and agreement with crowdsourced annotators. For both resource types, hallucinations were identified that require ongoing human oversight. The findings demonstrate the potential of LLMs "out-of-the-box" to support the generation of clinical trial education materials with minimal trial-specific engineering, but implementation with a human-in-the-loop is still needed to avoid misinformation risks.