Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2503.21352

Using large language models to produce literature reviews: Usages and systematic biases of microphysics parametrizations in 2699 publications

Tianhang Zhang·Shengnan Fu·David M. Schultz·Zhonghua Zheng
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Large language models afford opportunities for using computers for intensive tasks, realizing research opportunities that have not been considered before. One such opportunity could be a systematic interrogation of the scientific literature. Here, we show how a large language model can be used to construct a literature review of 2699 publications associated with microphysics parametrizations in the Weather and Research Forecasting (WRF) model, with the goal of learning how they were used and their systematic biases, when simulating precipitation. The database was constructed of publications identified from Web of Science and Scopus searches. The large language model GPT-4 Turbo was used to extract information about model configurations and performance from the text of 2699 publications. Our results reveal the landscape of how nine of the most popular microphysics parameterizations have been used around the world: Lin, Ferrier, WRF Single-Moment, Goddard Cumulus Ensemble, Morrison, Thompson, and WRF Double-Moment. More studies used one-moment parameterizations before 2020 and two-moment parameterizations after 2020. Seven out of nine parameterizations tended to overestimate precipitation. However, systematic biases of parameterizations differed in various regions. Except simulations using the Lin, Ferrier, and Goddard parameterizations that tended to underestimate precipitation over almost all locations, the remaining six parameterizations tended to overestimate, particularly over China, southeast Asia, western United States, and central Africa. This method could be used by other researchers to help understand how the increasingly massive body of scientific literature can be harnessed through the power of artificial intelligence to solve their research problems.

Explore related subjects

cs.AIstat.AP

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Tianhang Zhang, Shengnan Fu, David M. Schultz, Zhonghua Zheng. 2025-03-27. Using large language models to produce literature reviews: Usages and systematic biases of microphysics parametrizations in 2699 publications. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.21352

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗