Literature

The climate literature has grown faster than review teams can read it. That gap matters most for a concept like the environmental social tipping point, the threshold at which a small change triggers rapid, self-reinforcing change in a social system. Evidence of this kind of shift is usually contained in one or two paragraphs within a longer document. As a result, existing text mining tools-which categorize entire documents by topic or highlight isolated claims-leave an expanding set of important evidence without any systematic method for discovery or organization. This paper presents an open and modular transformer-based framework that detects and structures social tipping point evidence at the passage level. The framework joins five components into a single deployable workflow: a DistilBERT boundary splitter for segmentation, an iteratively augmented RoBERTa classifier for detection, a Mistral 7B model that rewrites each detected passage for clarity, a LLaMA 3.2 3B model that rates the passage against five published social tipping point criteria, and a Milvus vector store for semantic retrieval. The system is wrapped in a Streamlit interface backed by MinIO object storage. Evaluated on a 163-passage benchmark labelled by GPT-4.1 and a 51-passage set reviewed by experts, the splitter surpassed three competing methods on a nine-metric composite score (6.137). The tuned RoBERTa model achieved 71.4 percent accuracy with a Cohen's kappa of 0.337 on the full benchmark, and 87.5 percent accuracy with a kappa of 0.742 on passages with labels, outperforming both a climate-focused model and untuned language models.

Atomic layer deposition (ALD) and atomic layer etching (ALE) are reported heterogeneously across experimental and simulation literature in materials science, hindering comparison and machine-actionable reuse. We present four domain-expert-reviewed JSON Schemas for ALD and ALE experimental and simulation processes. Curated with schema-miner and grounded in QUDT using schema-miner pro, the schemas structure materials, process conditions, configurations , and measured or predicted results. We compare their scope, structure, and semantic grounding, and demonstrate their use for schema-guided literature extraction and publication of structured records through ORKG templates.

Decision trees are prized for their interpretability and strong performance on tabular data, but popular greedy top-down induction algorithms can yield suboptimal and unnecessarily complex structures. Optimal decision tree methods address this through global optimization, yet remain restricted to axis-aligned threshold splits, which limit the expressivity of each node and often force deep, complex trees to capture non-linear feature effects. Shape Generalized Trees (SGTs) generalize threshold splits to learnable univariate shape functions, improving expressivity and enabling more compact trees. However, existing SGT induction algorithms are greedy and offer no optimality guarantees. In this work, we introduce Literati, the first algorithm for optimal SGT induction. We propose a novel AND/OR graph formulation of the problem that jointly optimizes tree structure and shape function complexity. To solve this AND/OR graph, we develop an AO*-based algorithm with two enhancements that improve anytime performance while preserving optimality: a secondary heuristic for OR-node selection and a round-robin policy for AND-node exploration. Across 24 real-world datasets, Literati achieves higher training and test accuracy than state-of-the-art tree approaches.

Generative AI inverts the typical periodization of literary history: the periodizing tag Victorian can now come first and influence what is written. Generative periodization, defined and tested here, describes the use of literary-period designations in generating texts. I test this approach on 100 book-length novels produced under Victorian and Zero-Style conditions using GPT, Qwen, and Llama workflows. The Period Alignment Score (PAS), trained on nineteenth-century literature and benchmarked against human Zero-Style prose, assesses alignment using topic-reduced grammatical features. Victorian prompts produce consistent historical-direction shifts in GPT and Qwen, but not robustly in Llama. Victorian-only recalibration and harder comparison corpora preserve the GPT and Qwen effects. Cross-model transfer also shows a shared direction of grammatical change. The measurable target is the broader nineteenth century rather than the Victorian period per se.

Scientific reasoning remains challenging for open-source models, largely due to the lack of high-quality scientific reasoning data. Existing datasets are often dominated by factual recall or formulaic problem solving, with limited emphasis on mechanism understanding, evidence-grounded reasoning, and hypothesis evaluation. To address this, we introduce SPARK (Scientific Paper Abstracted Reasoning sKeleton), a paper-oriented synthesis framework built on Sci-Base, a large-scale corpus of research papers spanning 10 scientific disciplines. Instead of directly converting papers into question-answer pairs, SPARK treats the claim-evidence-derivation structure of a paper as the fundamental unit of reasoning synthesis. Specifically, SPARK (1) distills each paper into a compact reasoning skeleton capturing its central claims and supporting evidence, enabling self-contained question generation, and (2) synthesizes reasoning tasks from four scientific perspectives: mechanistic reasoning, hypothesis falsification, quantitative derivation, and boundary calibration. A final consistency verification stage further removes unsupported or contradictory outputs. Using this framework, we construct Spark-234K, a scientific reasoning dataset with substantially higher difficulty and diversity than existing resources. Experiments show that Spark-234K consistently outperforms existing scientific reasoning datasets while achieving stronger performance with significantly fewer training samples.

Personalized text generation for authors and literary writing is essential for applications such as adaptive writing assistants, creative support tools, and computational literary analysis. However, existing approaches to author modeling and personalization often represent writing behavior as independent labels, requiring large-scale corpus collection or fine-tuning for each author or stylistic category. Such formulations are costly, difficult to interpret, and poorly suited for generalizing across authors. Inspired by the Big Five model's dimensional view of personality, we propose LiteraryBigFive, a framework that reframes authorial writing characteristics as coordinates within a unified and interpretable space. In this space, we derive each interpretable axis (e.g., Classicism, Emotionality) from activation-space contrasts between author-written and neutral passages, yielding distinct stylistic dimensions that allow texts or authors to be positioned within a five-dimensional system. Beyond localizing different authors, we further introduce an interpretable steering mechanism, which adaptively guides text generation toward target coordinates to perform author-personalized writing. Experimental results show that LiteraryBigFive improves authorial expressiveness while preserving semantic fidelity. The derived author per-axis scores strongly correlate with real-world literary consensus, offering transparent and interpretable explanations of author-specific generation behavior: https://github.com/Znull-1220/LiteraryBigFive.

Attributing quotations to their speakers in literary texts remains an open challenge. Standard methods, which independently predict a speaker mention for each quotation, are efficient but still limited in accuracy. In contrast, large language model (LLM) approaches achieve strong performance, but their computational cost limits their use in large-scale literary analysis. We propose an encoder-based efficient formulation that resolves multiple quotation attributions within a shared, large context window. Using our new formulation, \textit{joint scoring}, we report state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance on the Project Dialogism Novel Corpus (PDNC), comprising more than 35,000 manually annotated quotations from 22 English novels. Our best model reaches 94.5% overall attribution accuracy while processing novels $20\times$ faster than comparable standard methods and more than $1000\times$ faster than LLM-based approaches on an A100 GPU. An analysis of models' representations suggests that joint scoring improves on challenging attribution examples by preserving long-range anaphora resolution signal, an information that we found already present in pretrained encoders. To facilitate adoption, we release ModernBookNLP, a modified fork of BookNLP that replaces its quotation attribution model with our best system available at https://github.com/gasmichel/ModernBookNLP_QA/.

This article addresses the relative scarcity of research tools for the corpus-assisted linguistic analysis of colour terms in literary texts. It describes the development of two multidimensional chromatic lexicons: one for Russian (224 entries) and one for English (141 entries). Lexicon construction involved sourcing colour vocabulary from specialised resources and research literature, comparing the two language inventories, manually checking translated candidates, and addressing language-specific morphological features. In addition to identifying colour terms and visual descriptors, the lexicons classify entries according to hue, saturation, and temperature. To demonstrate their practical application, a pilot study was conducted on purposively sampled corpora of poetry by Andrei Bely (20,373 tokens) and Emily Dickinson (28,479 tokens). All retrieved matches were checked in context and classified as Confirmed_chromatic, Ambiguous_visual, or Excluded. The analysis was implemented in two main stages: a strict analysis including confirmed chromatic lexis only, followed by a sensitivity analysis incorporating both confirmed and ambiguous chromatic lexis to determine whether coding decisions about borderline cases affected the main findings. The quantitative results indicated marked differences in the use of colour terms, visual descriptors, hue, saturation, and temperature. Specifically, the analysis revealed that confirmed chromatic terms occurred 3.4 times more frequently in the sampled Bely corpus than in the Dickinson corpus. These findings demonstrate the analytical value of a multidimensional approach, with the main contribution of this study being a transparent and reusable procedure for constructing and applying multilingual chromatic lexicons.

Creativity is often framed as the production of novelty, yet many cultural works emerge through transformation of earlier artifacts and not through isolated invention. Drawing on theories of imitation by Gabriel Tarde and James Mark Baldwin, this paper models creativity as selective transformation across multiple levels of textual representation. We introduce a multi-level framework that compares literary texts across lexical, semantic, conceptual, structural, and narrative dimensions using directional alignment and control calibrated similarity measures. Applying the model to historically documented literary relationships, we show that different pairs preserve source structure at different representational levels while diverging in others. These transformation profiles provide a quantitative method for characterizing how imitation persists and where creative divergence occurs within literary works.

Computational approaches to intertextuality have advanced from string matching to neural retrieval, yet their outputs, similarity scores and parallel-passage lists, identify where texts reuse one another without characterizing how or why. We recast fine-grained intertextuality extraction as an agentic task in which a large language model (LLM) reads two text units in full and, through a constrained tool interface, must ground each proposed reuse in exact character spans on both sides and label it under a five-dimension typology of reuse (form, aspect, source-marking, function, stance). We validate the approach on an exhaustive comparison of the Analects with the Book of Han, where three domain experts adjudicate a pooled multi-model candidate set into a benchmark of 2,533 intertextual pairs. Against this standard we study twelve LLMs, reporting precision (56%-93%), a 51$\times$ cost spread at comparable quality, and how well their confidence is calibrated. Expert agreement traces a reliability gradient: dimensions legible on the textual surface are annotated consistently, while those requiring inference of intent are contested, delimiting the claims such annotation supports. Scaling the validated extractor to the full Twenty-Four Histories (65,380 comparisons, 5,766 pairs) recovers corpus-level structure a similarity score cannot express. The interpretive composition of citation shows no systematic change across eighteen centuries, yet the same passage is quoted less and less literally. Stability in the aggregate with drift in the individual case is what a cultural-attraction account expects. We release the extraction protocol and the expert-adjudicated benchmark.

Constructing causal directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) is a core step in biomedical causal analysis, yet it remains a largely manual process. Analysts must connect study variables to prior literature, evaluate uncertain causal claims, and preserve sufficient provenance for expert review. We present EviDAG, a browser-based system for authoring causal DAGs as auditable, evidence-linked artifacts from biomedical literature. Given free-text descriptions of study concepts, EviDAG creates a reproducible literature snapshot, uses an LLM-based reasoning module to generate structured pairwise causal judgments, links literature-supported judgments to verbatim evidence excerpts, and assembles the judgments into a constraint-checked graph. Each proposed edge includes confidence estimates, provenance, and a reviewable rationale. The interface supports study specification, progress monitoring, evidence review, graph comparison, adjustment-set computation, and export. In evaluations against both compact benchmark DAGs and reference DAGs derived from published literature, EviDAG achieves high edge recall on the literature-based cohort while retaining verifiable evidence trails absent from LLM-only baselines. EviDAG thus reduces the burden of causal DAG curation while making the resulting assumptions auditable, supporting the design, analysis, and interpretation of biomedical studies.

Masculinity in nineteenth-century fiction is not a single ideal but a field of competing scripts. Drawing on 150 British and American canonical novels from the txtLAB Novel450 corpus, published between 1771 and 1930, this paper examines the changing relative prominence of competing models of masculine authority. To focus the analysis on masculine characterisation, the study extracts male-character-centred text windows by using coreference resolution to group names, nominal mentions, and pronouns into character-specific reference chains. It then fits an unsupervised structural topic model with publication year and author gender as topic-prevalence covariates. The model identifies six distinct masculine formations: aristocratic-chivalric, Christian manhood, gentlemanly respectability, country squire, professional-commercial, and imperial/adventure. Across the corpus, formations tied to inherited rank and sacred authority decline, while those organised around paid work and adventure rise. The largest increase occurs not in professional-commercial breadwinning but in imperial/adventure masculinity, particularly the frontier-wilderness register. The trajectory points to a reallocation from inherited and sacred status towards achieved, commercial, and expansionary forms of masculine authority. Adventurous and commercial formations are also more prevalent in novels by authors recorded as male. Because these formations emerge without a seeded vocabulary yet align with categories established in independent scholarship, the article offers a reproducible method for measuring the reorganisation of gendered authority across the long nineteenth century.

LLMs stage a new form of cultural encounter that is massive, automated, and monolingual. Literary disciplines have always negotiated cultural struggles with comparative reading of literature, narratological and poetic analysis, critical theory, world literature, and translation. These tools have now become indispensable for building culturally literate AI. The essay develops a layered framework toward more nuanced textual models and pluralistic interpretations of AI, emphasizing the natural intersections of literature and AI development, connecting current debates in critical theory with structural monolingualism, and suggesting a new application of world literature approaches to address global AI textuality through macrostructure, circulation, and untranslatability.

In the age of AI, what will be good knowledge? This article, which is accepted and forthcoming in a special issue of Modern Fiction Studies on "Cultural AI" in 2027, applies digital humanities methods to map epistemic virtues (like "true," "accurate," "creative") used in a corpus of 553 journal articles on AI published in 2024. "Creativity" comes in for special attention as an example. Exploring this discourse of value, the article considers how a framework might be developed for evaluating the knowledge-worth of AI -- one less locked into values formed around pre-AI "knowledge work" agents or structures, and more open to the future values of "generativity." The essay is supported by an online digital kit for exploring data models of the corpus of articles on AI it studies.

Thermal imaging is resilient to adverse conditions, such as intense illumination, low-light operation, and fog, and can therefore mitigate odometry degradation when visible-spectrum imagery becomes unreliable. Nevertheless, most thermal cameras employ automatic gain control (AGC), and thermal images often present low global contrast despite containing informative edge structures. These characteristics undermine brightness constancy and cause conventional optical flow tracking-based odometry pipelines that fundamentally rely on the brightness constancy assumption across consecutive frames. To address these issues, we propose a general LiDAR-Inertial-Thermal SLAM system that accommodates both visible-light and thermal cameras. PL-LIT combines an online photometric calibration module with a deep neural network for point-line feature extraction, enabling more stable and repeatable thermal tracking. For state estimation, we design a tightly coupled LiDAR-Inertial-Thermal formulation within an Error-State Iterated Kalman Filter (ESIKF). We further introduce a line-feature constraint scheme ensuring the reliability of geometric constraints across varying thermal appearances. In addition, PL-LIT builds a probabilistic thermal-intensity voxel map, which supports real-time thermal anomaly detection. Extensive experiments demonstrate that PL-LIT exhibits generality and robustness in visible-light environments, achieves state-of-the-art performance on long-range thermal infrared datasets, and provides practical safety inspection functionality based on thermographic mapping.

AI translation of literary works is increasingly common. While the content may be rendered adequately, we do not know enough about how readers experience it in terms of immersiveness and literary effect-aspects poorly captured by automatic metrics or human evaluation targeting fluency and adequacy. We ask 15 avid readers to compare recently published human translations (HT) to machine translations (MT) generated with an agentic language model-based pipeline, for 15 recent novels in French, Polish, and Japanese translated into English. Readers evaluated approximately 8K-word excerpts in two conditions: immersive reading of the whole excerpt (30 comparisons) and close reading of 386 aligned HT-MT chunk pairs (772 comparisons), with two readers per book. Overall, readers find MT "fine", but prefer HT (descriptively at the excerpt level, 19/30, and significantly at the chunk level, 522/772) for its ease, clarity, and immersive nature. Readers' highlights show that MT's quality varies more within one book than HT's does. Crucially, readers cannot reliably tell the two apart (17/30 guess correctly) and tend to prefer the version they believe to be human. Automatic metrics, including LLM-as-a-judge approaches, fail to recover reader preferences and favor MT. We release LAIT (Literary AI Translation), a reader-centered evaluation dataset with 1K reader comments, 2K judgments and preference ratings, and 7.2K span-level annotations, along with our evaluation protocol and supporting interface.

Literary translation poses unique challenges due to the scarcity of high-quality annotated data and the need to balance expression fluency with literary effect. We present a multi-aspect iterative refinement framework that generates high-quality translation references and preference data through specialized LLM translators, each targeting a distinct quality dimension. We leverage the generated data for supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning. Experiments show that our generated references outperform the original ground truth for SFT by 8.65 CEA100 points. For reinforcement learning, we find that DPO leads to performance degradation in this setting, while leveraging an explicit reward model for GRPO yields an additional 1.51 point improvement. We attribute this to the stability of two-stage training and GRPO's online exploration capability. Our resulting models, LitMT-8B and LitMT-14B, achieve 67.25 and 69.07 CEA100 respectively on the MetaphorTrans English-to-Chinese literary translation benchmark, competitive with Claude Sonnet 4.5 at 68.43, and demonstrate strong generalization to out-of-domain literary work (i.e., O. Henry).

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems open new possibilities for experimentation in literary studies via controlled, grounded, large-scale, low-cost simulations of cultural production. Current systems have not yet been shown to produce high-quality, book-length narrative texts that reliably reflect arbitrarily specified cultural constraints or stylistic features. But there exists substantial relevant research on each of the components required for literary-historical simulation. These include the use and validation of AI systems as proxies for differentiable human populations; the narrative and stylistic properties of AI-generated texts; the stability and coherence of multiagent, multiturn AI simulations of human actors; and technical methods through which to alter in predictable ways the knowledge and behavior of generative systems. Together, these areas could provide a starting point for more ambitious AI-based modeling of cultural systems of literary production. We describe the possibilities and challenges of simulation-based experiments in literary studies, summarize the current state of the art in relevant fields, and explain key technical aspects of the work. To provide an example directly relevant to literary scholars, we present the results of experiments on literary text generation, including comparisons to high-status, human-authored novels. Our results include the first demonstration of (limited) in-distribution outputs by AI models in this domain. We conclude with a description of future work on full counterfactual literary-historical simulations using AI.

Methods to represent literary texts as graphs or sequences of graphs mainly focus on representing character interactions, and often overlook another crucial aspect: the textual context in which characters interact. We introduce Dynamic Heterogeneous Character Networks (DHCNs), which organize long novels into temporally localized heterogeneous graphs that align characters with their textual contexts. We extract around 20,000 DHCNs from Project Gutenberg, and propose GraphLit, a self-supervised learning framework that learns rich literary representations through a masked graph autoencoder objective. Across a wide range of 12 character-related tasks, GraphLit improves over text-only, graph-only and prior hybrid baselines. Ablations over different kinds of dynamic graph structures and architectural elements show that grounding characters in their context is the main performance driver, while explicitly encoding narrative order and character relationships provide task-dependent improvements. Finally, we demonstrate the applicability of DHCNs and GraphLit for literary analysis by studying the link between narrative non-linearity and dynamic social features.

The rapid growth of scientific publishing has made it increasingly difficult to track how fast-moving areas evolve. Search engines and LLM-based assistants retrieve or summarize papers, but often hide how the corpus was selected, organized, or connected to temporal patterns. We present $\texttt{Eliot}$, a publicly deployed interactive system for traceable exploration of evolving scientific literature. Motivated by two studies on Large Language Models (LLMs) and Automated Planning and Scheduling (APS), $\texttt{Eliot}$ generalizes literature-evolution analysis beyond hand-built taxonomies and domain-specific scripts. Given explicit query terms and filters, it retrieves arXiv papers at query time, represents each paper by title and abstract, clusters the corpus into themes, assigns representative keywords, and visualizes each cluster's publication-year distribution. We evaluate $\texttt{Eliot}$ as both an applied system and an interactive research aid. An offline configuration study across eight arXiv domains compares document representations, dimensionality reduction methods, and clustering algorithms using intrinsic clustering and topic-coherence metrics; the results support MiniLM embeddings with 10-dimensional UMAP and Agglomerative Clustering as a practical default. A scenario-based survey and expert focus group assess interpretability and use contexts: participants rated cluster labels as meaningful in 85% of scenario responses, and feedback indicated that $\texttt{Eliot}$ is most valuable for auditable overviews of rapidly changing technical areas. These results suggest that query-time clustering and temporal inspection can complement search and generation tools by helping researchers inspect and refine the evidence behind literature trends.

Despite impressive multilingual capabilities, large language models (LLMs) remain poorly evaluated on literary knowledge in non-English languages. We introduce PersLitEval, a benchmark of 4,514 Persian literature multiple-choice questions across eight fine-grained categories spanning spelling, literary devices, grammar, vocabulary, word formation, and conceptual understanding, sourced from materials for the Konkur university entrance examination. We evaluate six LLMs across ten prompting strategies, revealing striking category-level disparities across three tiers of task difficulty: models reach higher accuracy on conceptual similarity tasks but struggle with formal linguistic analysis, with spelling and word formation proving the hardest across all models. Prompting strategy has a significant impact on performance, with explained few-shot examples yielding the best results, particularly on formal linguistic categories. An error analysis identifies three failure modes: semantic comprehension gaps, formal linguistic knowledge gaps, and counting/enumeration errors, suggesting that different categories require different improvement strategies.

Fragmentation is common in interdisciplinary fields with diverse methods and theoretical commitments. Predictive coding neuroscience is a clear example: its literature spans computational theory, electrophysiology, imaging, behavior, and modeling, creating a synthesis problem that conventional meta-analysis cannot easily resolve. Here, we describe a local multi-LLM pipeline for ontology-constrained literature synthesis. The pipeline reads papers, extracts evidence, incorporates figure descriptions, assembles constrained prompts, and validates outputs against an expert glossary. We manually defined a predictive-coding glossary of thirty-six concepts grouped into three hypotheses: predictive suppression, feedforward error propagation, and ubiquity. A council of ten local language models scored 31 studies according to their agreement or disagreement with each glossary factor across local and global oddball contexts. This enabled pairwise study-agreement analysis, cross-model comparison, and three-dimensional hypothesis-space mapping. Agreement was high for some hypotheses but weaker for others, revealing structured disagreement, particularly across local versus global oddball paradigms. We further define hypothesis-space temperature, a geometric dispersion metric measuring how compactly studies occupy the hypothesis space. Temperature was lower for local oddball contexts and higher for global oddball contexts, indicating greater dispersion in the latter. The scoring geometry also allowed us to estimate vectors of change between experimental contexts. These results demonstrate that local multi-LLM councils can produce auditable disagreement measurements that map heterogeneous literatures into quantitative evidence spaces. This framework may generalize to cross-study hypothesis mapping where conventional meta-analysis lacks a common comparison space.

Literary translation requires balancing target-language fluency with faithfulness to the source. Recent large language models (LLMs) often produce fluent translations, but it remains unclear whether fluency corresponds to semantic preservation in literary text. We examine this relationship using 130,486 translated paragraphs from 106 novels in 16 source languages, including human, Google Translate, and TranslateGemma translations. Fluency is measured as original-likeness with a translationese classifier trained on paragraph part-of-speech n-grams, and faithfulness with the automatic translation evaluation metric COMET-KIWI. We control for paragraph length and find a consistent negative correlation between fluency and faithfulness. The pattern appears for both human and Google Translate, but is weaker and often non-significant for TranslateGemma. These results show that segment length matters for automatic evaluation and suggest a tradeoff between fluency and faithfulness in literary translation.

This article investigates the performance of automatic evaluation metrics (AEMs) and LLM-as-a-judge evaluation on literary translation across multiple languages, genres, and translation modalities. The aim is to assess how well these tools align with professionals when evaluating translation, creativity (creative shifts & errors), and see if they can substitute laborious manual annotations. A dataset of literary translations across three modalities (human translation, machine translation, and post-editing), three genres and three language pairs was created and annotated in detail for creativity by experienced professional literary translators. The results show that both AEMs and LLM-as-a-judge evaluations correlate poorly with professional evaluations on creativity, with LLM-as-a-judge showing a systematic bias in favour of machine-translated texts and penalising creative and culturally appropriate solutions. Moreover, performance is consistently worse for more literary genres such as poetry. This highlights fundamental limitations of current automatic evaluation tools for literary translation and the need to create new tools that do not frequently consider out of routine translations as errors.

Large language models (LLMs) can convincingly imitate human writing styles, yet it remains unclear how much stylistic information is encoded in embeddings from any language model and retained after LLM rewriting. We investigate these questions in French, using a controlled literary dataset to quantify the effect of stylistic variation via changes in embedding dispersion. We observe that embeddings reliably capture authorial stylistic features and that these signals persist after rewriting, while also exhibiting LLM-specific patterns. These analytical results offer promising directions for authorship imitation detection in the era of language models.

Evaluating literary quality requires assessing interpretive dimensions such as cultural representation, emotional depth, and philosophical sophistication that resist straightforward computational measurement. We introduce SAGE, a hierarchical evaluation framework that decomposes literary quality into ontology-grounded interpretive dimensions assessed through structured large language model evaluation with multi-round iterative reflection and independent validation. We validate the framework on 100 short stories (50 canonical works, 30 pulp fiction, 20 LLM-generated narratives) across three analytical layers (cultural, emotional-psychological, existential-philosophical) using dual-mode assessment. Across 600 evaluations, the framework achieves 98.8% score convergence and greater than 94% inter-rater agreement, with near-perfect mode invariance between content-based and metadata-based evaluation. Statistical analysis reveals a consistent genre hierarchy (Canonical > Pulp > LLM, all p<0.001) with layer-specific discrimination: cultural critique and philosophical depth exhibit very large effect sizes (Cohen's d>2.4), while emotional representation shows smaller gaps (d=1.68), suggesting that affective patterns are more learnable from training data than critical stance or philosophical depth. Cross-layer correlations (r=0.649-0.683) confirm the three dimensions capture empirically distinguishable quality facets. These findings demonstrate that theory-driven LLM evaluation can achieve measurement-grade reliability and support systematic identification of where current generative models fall short of human literary production, with direct implications for scalable automated evaluation of open-ended text generation.

In the era of large language models, creative writing quality lacks a computable theoretical anchor. The dominant approaches are rubric scoring -- decomposing holistic aesthetic judgment into sub-scores -- and RLHF preference signals -- replacing quality with group votes. Both bypass the statistical structure of the text itself. This paper provides an information-theoretic foundation to fill this gap. We propose 'calibrated surprise' as the information-theoretic essence of excellent creative writing. This judgment matches reading intuition and covers its opposite. This literary judgment admits a precise mathematical formulation. Under full-dimensional constraints Y, feasible writing choices are forced into an extremely narrow space. The rare survivors are, from the unconstrained perspective, exactly the least predictable choices. Both are measured precisely by Shannon mutual information I(X;Y) = H(X) - H(X|Y) -- 'calibrated' corresponds to H(X|Y) approaching 0; 'surprising' corresponds to H(X) going high. The subtraction structure of the formula naturally separates 'well-grounded surprise' from 'pure noise'. We use token-level logprobs from Qwen1.5-7B as an operational proxy for the ideal reader's probability distribution. Across 20 pairs (12 Chinese / 8 English) of high-quality vs. systematically degraded literary passages, 20/20 pairs support the core prediction: high-quality passages have systematically higher I(X;Y) than their degraded versions.

While annotated corpora are crucial in the field of natural language processing (NLP), those containing copyrighted material are difficult to exchange among researchers. Yet, such corpora are necessary to fully represent the diversity of data found in the wild in the context of NLP tasks. We tackle this issue by proposing a method to lawfully and publicly share the annotations of copyrighted literary texts. The corpus creator shares the annotations in clear, along with a non-reversible hashed version of the source material. The corpus user must own the source material, and apply the same hash function to their own tokens, in order to match them to the shared annotations. Crucially, our method is robust to reasonable divergences in the version of the copyrighted data owned by the user. As an illustration, we present alignment experiments on different editions of novels. Our results show that our method is able to correctly align 98.7 to 99.79% of tokens depending on the novel, provided the user version is sufficiently close to the corpus creator's version. We publicly release novelshare, a Python implementation of our method.

Protein-ligand bioactivity data published in the literature are essential for drug discovery, yet manual curation struggles to keep pace with rapidly growing literature. Automated bioactivity extraction remains challenging because it requires not only interpreting biochemical semantics distributed across text, tables, and figures, but also reconstructing chemically exact ligand structures (e.g., Markush structures). To address this bottleneck, we introduce BioMiner, a multi-modal extraction framework that explicitly separates bioactivity semantic interpretation from ligand structure construction. Within BioMiner, bioactivity semantics are inferred through direct reasoning, while chemical structures are resolved via a chemical-structure-grounded visual semantic reasoning paradigm, in which multi-modal large language models operate on chemically grounded visual representations to infer inter-structure relationships, and exact molecular construction is delegated to domain chemistry tools. For rigorous evaluation and method development, we further establish BioVista, a comprehensive benchmark comprising 16,457 bioactivity entries curated from 500 publications. BioMiner validates its extraction ability and provides a quantitative baseline, achieving an F1 score of 0.32 for bioactivity triplets. BioMiner's practical utility is demonstrated via three applications: (1) extracting 82,262 data from 11,683 papers to build a pre-training database that improves downstream models performance by 3.9%; (2) enabling a human-in-the-loop workflow that doubles the number of high-quality NLRP3 bioactivity data, helping 38.6% improvement over 28 QSAR models and identification of 16 hit candidates with novel scaffolds; and (3) accelerating protein-ligand complex bioactivity annotation, achieving a 5.59-fold speed increase and 5.75% accuracy improvement over manual workflows in PoseBusters dataset.

Adversarial robustness evaluation underpins every claim of trustworthy ML deployment, yet the field suffers from fragmented protocols and undetected gradient masking. We make two contributions. (1) Structured synthesis. We analyze nine peer-reviewed corpus sources (2020--2026) through seven complementary protocols, producing the first end-to-end structured analysis of the field's consensus and unresolved challenges. (2) Auto-ART framework. We introduce Auto-ART, an open-source framework that operationalizes identified gaps: 50+ attacks, 28 defense modules, the Robustness Diagnostic Index (RDI), and gradient-masking detection. It supports multi-norm evaluation (l1/l2/linf/semantic/spatial) and compliance mapping to NIST AI RMF, OWASP LLM Top 10, and the EU AI Act. Empirical validation on RobustBench demonstrates that Auto-ART's pre-screening identifies gradient masking in 92% of flagged cases, and RDI rankings correlate highly with full AutoAttack. Multi-norm evaluation exposes a 23.5 pp gap between average and worst-case robustness on state-of-the-art models. No prior work combines such structured meta-scientific analysis with an executable evaluation framework bridging literature gaps into engineering.

We present a dual-track pipeline for detecting biblical allusions in literary fiction and apply it to the novels of Cormac McCarthy. A bottom-up embedding track uses inverse document frequency to identify rare vocabulary shared with the King James Bible, embeds occurrences in their local context for sense disambiguation, and passes candidate passage pairs through cascaded LLM review. A top-down register track asks an LLM to read McCarthy's prose undirected to any specific biblical passage for comparison, catching allusions not distinguished by word or phrase rarity. Both tracks are cross-validated by a long-context model that holds entire novels alongside the KJV in a single pass, and every finding is checked against published scholarship. Restricting attention to allusions that carry a textual echo--shared phrasing, reworked vocabulary, or transplanted cadence--and distinguishing literary allusions proper from signposted biblical references (similes naming biblical figures, characters overtly citing scripture), the pipeline surfaces 349 allusions across the corpus. Among a target set of 115 previously documented allusions retrieved through human review of the academic literature, the pipeline independently recovers 62 (54% recall), with recall varying by connection type from 30% (transformed imagery) to 80% (register collisions). We contextualise these results with respect to the value-add from LLMs as assistants to mechanical stylometric analyses, and their potential to facilitate the statistical study of intertextuality in massive literary corpora.

This study examines the role of artificial intelligence in translation, focusing on ChatGPT, specifically ChatGPT-4, and the extent to which human postediting is required in literary translation. A mixed-method approach was adopted, involving 30 professional translators who evaluated and postedited AI-generated translations of selected Arabic and English literary texts. The results show that although AI improves translation speed and accessibility, it remains limited in handling cultural, stylistic, and figurative aspects of language. Participants generally confirmed the necessity of human postediting, particularly in novels and drama. The findings indicate that emerging human-machine collaboration model rather than replacement of human translators. The study concludes that AI should be used as a supportive tool, while human expertise remains essential for ensuring translation quality and cultural appropriateness.

Software documentation is essential for program comprehension, developer onboarding, code review, and long-term maintenance. Yet producing quality documentation manually is time-consuming and frequently yields incomplete or inconsistent results. Large language models (LLMs) offer a promising solution by automatically generating natural language descriptions from source code, helping developers understand code more efficiently, facilitating maintenance, and supporting downstream activities such as defect localization and commit message generation. However, the effectiveness of LLMs in documentation tasks critically depends on how they are prompted. Properly structured instructions can substantially improve model performance, making prompt engineering-the design of input prompts to guide model behavior-a foundational technique in LLM-based software engineering. Approaches such as few-shot prompting, chain-of-thought reasoning, retrieval-augmented generation, and zero-shot learning show promise for code summarization, yet current research remains fragmented. There is limited understanding of which prompting strategies work best, for which models, and under what conditions. Moreover, evaluation practices vary widely, with most studies relying on overlap-based metrics that may not capture semantic quality. This systematic literature review consolidates existing evidence, categorizes prompting paradigms, examines their effectiveness, and identifies gaps to guide future research and practical adoption.

Identifying promising research directions in fast-moving subareas is one of the most cognitively expensive tasks in modern AI research. Existing LLM-driven scientific discovery systems are typically limited to one-shot prompting on static literature snapshots and are validated only against contemporary judges such as human reviewers, agent peer review, wet-lab assays, or self-evaluation, leaving open whether they can anticipate future trends. We present Continuous Knowledge Metabolism (CKM), an AI workflow for hypothesis generation with three key capabilities: (i) continuous literature metabolism via sliding windows that maintain an evolving knowledge state; (ii) predictive evaluation, which grades hypotheses against papers published after the generation window; and (iii) practitioner-grade failure detection that diagnoses workflow failure modes from its outputs. On a 50-topic machine learning benchmark, CKM-Lite produces at least one validated hypothesis on 72% of topics (36 out of 50), more than doubling a one-shot baseline (30%) at approximately 3 dollars per topic and achieving 91% lower token cost. Validated hypotheses precede their matched papers by an average of 404 days (55 hits across 36 topics; median 399 days, range 66-757 days). Broadly, predictive validation against future literature provides a falsifiable, low-cost alternative to contemporary-judge evaluation protocols and can be applied wherever a corpus has dated publication records.

Scientific discovery is slowed by fragmented literature that requires excessive human effort to gather, analyze, and understand. AI tools, including autonomous summarization and question answering, have been developed to aid in understanding scientific literature. However, these tools lack the structured, multi-step approach necessary for extracting deep insights from scientific literature. Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new possibilities for literature analysis, but remain unreliable due to hallucinations and incomplete extraction. We introduce Elhuyar, a multi-agent, human-in-the-loop system that integrates LLMs, structured AI, and human scientists to extract, analyze, and iteratively refine insights from scientific literature. The framework distributes tasks among specialized agents for filtering papers, extracting data, fitting models, and summarizing findings, with human oversight ensuring reliability. The system generates structured reports with extracted data, visualizations, model equations, and text summaries, enabling deeper inquiry through iterative refinement. Deployed in materials science, it analyzed literature on tungsten under helium-ion irradiation, showing experimentally correlated exponential helium bubble growth with irradiation dose and temperature, offering insight for plasma-facing materials (PFMs) in fusion reactors. This demonstrates how AI-assisted literature review can uncover scientific patterns and accelerate discovery.

Wide access to advanced experimental methods in materials science has given rise to an abundance of procedural knowledge, which is scattered across decades of scientific literature and recorded in unstructured formats that are challenging to analyze systematically. In this work, we present LeMat-Synth Parser, a modular, open-source, and multi-modal extraction toolbox that utilizes large language models (LLMs) and vision language models (VLMs) to automatically structure synthesis protocols and performance metrics extracted from both text and figures of publications. Applying LeMat-Synth Parser to 81K open-access publications, we curate LeMat-Synth, an extensive dataset of 58K synthesis procedures and to our knowledge the largest and most diverse structured inorganic materials synthesis dataset to date, covering 35 synthesis methods and 16 material classes based on a domain-specific ontology. We validate extraction quality against annotations by domain experts and a scalable LLM-as-a-judge framework, and benchmark a suite of models to identify optimal configurations and characterize cross-model biases. To demonstrate the extensibility of LeMat-Synth Parser, we apply it to two distinct domains. First, we link synthesis protocols and catalyst identity to thermocatalytic performance across a corpus of ammonia-decomposition publications. Second, we cross-validate text- and figure-reported critical transition temperatures across 1,384 superconductivity papers, then use the validated pipeline to recover the critical transition temperature for every composition in a sample series. We release LeMat-Synth Parser and the LeMat-Synth dataset openly on GitHub and Hugging Face

Because most scientific literature data are unlabeled, semantic representation learning based on unsupervised graphs has become crucial. To enrich scientific-literature features, this paper proposes a semantic representation learning method based on adaptive features and graph neural networks. By introducing adaptive feature processing, scientific-literature features are considered globally and locally. The graph attention mechanism weights and aggregates features of scientific documents connected by citation relations, so that correlations among different documents can be expressed more effectively. In addition, an unsupervised graph neural network semantic representation learning method is proposed. By comparing the mutual information between positive and negative local semantic representations of scientific literature and the global graph semantic representation in the latent space, the graph neural network captures local and global information and improves semantic representation learning. Experimental results show that the proposed method is competitive for scientific literature classification.