Large Language Models (LLMs) are transforming language sciences. However, their widespread deployment currently suffers from methodological fragmentation and a lack of systematic soundness. This study proposes two comprehensive methodological frameworks designed to guide the strategic and responsible application of LLMs in language sciences. The first method-selection framework defines and systematizes three distinct, complementary approaches, each linked to a specific research goal: (1) prompt-based interaction with general-use models for exploratory analysis and hypothesis generation; (2) fine-tuning of open-source models for confirmatory, theory-driven investigation and high-quality data generation; and (3) extraction of contextualized embeddings for further quantitative analysis and probing of model internal mechanisms. We detail the technical implementation and inherent trade-offs of each method, supported by empirical case studies. Based on the method-selection framework, the second systematic framework proposed provides constructed configurations that guide the practical implementation of multi-stage research pipelines based on these approaches. We then conducted a series of empirical experiments to validate our proposed framework, employing retrospective analysis, prospective application, and an expert evaluation survey. By enforcing the strategic alignment of research questions with the appropriate LLM methodology, the frameworks enable a critical paradigm shift in language science research. We believe that this system is fundamental for ensuring reproducibility, facilitating the critical evaluation of LLM mechanisms, and providing the structure necessary to move traditional linguistics from ad-hoc utility to verifiable, robust science.

Today, with the growing obsession with applying Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly Machine Learning (ML), to software across various contexts, much of the focus has been on the effectiveness of AI models, often measured through common metrics such as F1- score, while fairness receives relatively little attention. This paper presents a review of existing gray literature, examining fairness requirements in AI context, with a focus on how they are defined across various application domains, managed throughout the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC), and the causes, as well as the corresponding consequences of their violation by AI models. Our gray literature investigation shows various definitions of fairness requirements in AI systems, commonly emphasizing non-discrimination and equal treatment across different demographic and social attributes. Fairness requirement management practices vary across the SDLC, particularly in model training and bias mitigation, fairness monitoring and evaluation, and data handling practices. Fairness requirement violations are frequently linked, but not limited, to data representation bias, algorithmic and model design bias, human judgment, and evaluation and transparency gaps. The corresponding consequences include harm in a broad sense, encompassing specific professional and societal impacts as key examples, stereotype reinforcement, data and privacy risks, and loss of trust and legitimacy in AI-supported decisions. These findings emphasize the need for consistent frameworks and practices to integrate fairness into AI software, paying as much attention to fairness as to effectiveness.

-- Prompt engineering has emerged as a useful way studying the algorithmic tendencies and biases of large language models (LLMs). Meanwhile c reatives and academics have leveraged LLMs to develop creative works and explore the boundaries of their writing capabilities through text - generation and code. This study suggests that creative text prompting, specifically "Poetry Prompt Patterns," may be a useful addition to the prompt engineer's toolbox, and outlines the process by which this approach may be taken. Then, the paper uses poetic prompts to assess three models' descriptions and evaluations of a renowned poet and test the consequences of models' willingness to adapt or rewrite original creative works for presumed audiences. Since the release of public - facing chat - style large language model (LLM) natural language generators (NLGs) like ChatGPT and Claude, public debate has acknowledged their great potential for creativity, as well as the ways in which they can be leveraged to make representations that don't reflect reality.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional capabilities in natural language understanding and generation. Based on these LLMs, businesses have started to provide Embeddings-as-a-Service (EaaS), offering feature extraction capabilities (in the form of text embeddings) that benefit downstream natural language processing tasks. However, prior research has demonstrated that EaaS is vulnerable to imitation attacks, where an attacker clones the service's model in a black-box manner without access to the model's internal workings. In response, watermarks have been added to the text embeddings to protect the intellectual property of EaaS providers by allowing them to check for model ownership. This thesis focuses on defending against imitation attacks by investigating EaaS watermarks. To achieve this goal, we unveil novel attacks and propose and validate new watermarking techniques. Firstly, we show that existing EaaS watermarks can be removed through paraphrasing the input text when attackers clone the model during imitation attacks. Our study illustrates that paraphrasing can effectively bypass current state-of-the-art EaaS watermarks across various attack setups (including different paraphrasing techniques and models) and datasets in most instances. This demonstrates a new vulnerability in recent EaaS watermarking techniques. Subsequently, as a countermeasure, we propose a novel watermarking technique, WET (Watermarking EaaS with Linear Transformation), which employs linear transformation of the embeddings. Watermark verification is conducted by applying a reverse transformation and comparing the similarity between recovered and original embeddings. We demonstrate its robustness against paraphrasing attacks with near-perfect verifiability. We conduct detailed ablation studies to assess the significance of each component and hyperparameter in WET.

Scaling the distribution of automated vehicles requires handling various unexpected and possibly dangerous situations, termed corner cases (CC). Since many modules of automated driving systems are based on machine learning (ML), CC are an essential part of the data for their development. However, there is only a limited amount of CC data in large-scale data collections, which makes them challenging in the context of ML. With a better understanding of CC, offline applications, e.g., dataset analysis, and online methods, e.g., improved performance of automated driving systems, can be improved. While there are knowledge-based descriptions and taxonomies for CC, there is little research on machine-interpretable descriptions. In this extended abstract, we will give a brief overview of the challenges and goals of such a description.

The evaluation of academic theses is a cornerstone of higher education, ensuring rigor and integrity. Traditional methods, though effective, are time-consuming and subject to evaluator variability. This paper presents RubiSCoT, an AI-supported framework designed to enhance thesis evaluation from proposal to final submission. Using advanced natural language processing techniques, including large language models, retrieval-augmented generation, and structured chain-of-thought prompting, RubiSCoT offers a consistent, scalable solution. The framework includes preliminary assessments, multidimensional assessments, content extraction, rubric-based scoring, and detailed reporting. We present the design and implementation of RubiSCoT, discussing its potential to optimize academic assessment processes through consistent, scalable, and transparent evaluation.

In this work we focus on testing weather models can systematically reason over implicit knowledge. Below we answer all questions and provide results for requested additional experiments. R1: The quality and usefulness of the distractors is unclear. Thank you for your comment. Without distractors the models find biases in the data that hurt generalization.

As generative AI increasingly outperforms students in producing academic writing, a critical question arises: how can we preserve the motivation, creativity, and intellectual growth of novice researchers in an age of automated academic achievement? This paper introduces GAMER PAT (GAme MastER, Paper Authoring Tutor), a prompt-engineered AI chatbot that reframes research paper writing as a serious game. Through role-playing mechanics, users interact with a co-author NPC and anonymous reviewer NPCs, turning feedback into "missions" and advancing through a narrative-driven writing process. Our study reports on 26+ gameplay chat logs, including both autoethnography and use by graduate students under supervision. Using qualitative log analysis with SCAT (Steps for Coding and Theorization), we identified an emergent four-phase scaffolding pattern: (1) question posing, (2) meta-perspective, (3) structuring, and (4) recursive reflection. These results suggest that GAMER PAT supports not only the structural development of research writing but also reflective and motivational aspects. We present this work as a descriptive account of concept and process, not a causal evaluation. We also include a speculative outlook envisioning how humans may continue to cultivate curiosity and agency alongside AI-driven research. This arXiv version thus provides both a descriptive report of design and usage, and a forward-looking provocation for future empirical studies.

In recent years, the research focus of large language models (LLMs) and agents has shifted increasingly from demonstrating novel capabilities to complex reasoning and tackling challenging tasks. However, existing evaluations focus mainly on math/code contests or general tasks, while existing multi-domain academic benchmarks lack sufficient reasoning depth, leaving the field without a rigorous benchmark for high-level reasoning. To fill this gap, we introduce the Acadreason benchmark, designed to evaluate the ability of LLMs and agents to acquire and reason over academic knowledge. It consists of 50 expert-annotated academic problems across five high-reasoning domains, including computer science, economics, law, mathematics, and philosophy. All questions are sourced from top-tier publications in recent years and undergo rigorous annotation and quality control to ensure they are both challenging and answerable. We conduct systematic evaluations of over 10 mainstream LLMs and agents. The results show that most LLMs scored below 20 points, with even the cutting-edge GPT-5 achieving only 16 points. While agents achieved higher scores, none exceeded 40 points. This demonstrates the current capability gap between LLMs and agents in super-intelligent academic research tasks and highlights the challenges of Acadreason.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being integrated into software development processes, with the potential to transform team workflows and productivity. This paper investigates how LLMs affect team collaboration throughout the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC). We reframe and update a prior study with recent developments as of 2025, incorporating new literature and case studies. We outline the problem of collaboration hurdles in SDLC and explore how LLMs can enhance productivity, communication, and decision-making in a team context. Through literature review, industry examples, a team survey, and two case studies, we assess the impact of LLM-assisted tools (such as code generation assistants and AI-powered project management agents) on collaborative software engineering practices. Our findings indicate that LLMs can significantly improve efficiency (by automating repetitive tasks and documentation), enhance communication clarity, and aid cross-functional collaboration, while also introducing new challenges like model limitations and privacy concerns. We discuss these benefits and challenges, present research questions guiding the investigation, evaluate threats to validity, and suggest future research directions including domain-specific model customization, improved integration into development tools, and robust strategies for ensuring trust and security.