SEARCH · Searcharxiv

Search Searcharxiv

Search indexed arXiv papers on artificial intelligence, large language models, computer vision and robotics. Read source abstracts and follow links to arXiv.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2026

The Generative AI Gold Rush in Theoretical and Computational Research

Generative AI is changing the production conditions of theoretical and computational research, but its sys tem level effects require measures that separate plat form growth, field specific divergence, and production structure. We assemble 2,080 monthly observations for twenty arXiv archives from January 2018 through Au gust 2026 and a separate pseudonymized Mathematics author panel. A regularized convex synthetic control fitted through December 2025 identifies the January August 2026 anomaly, while spatial placebos, prior year pseudo holdouts, donor refits, and alternative preperiods assess comparative robustness. Mathematics recorded 47,127 list entries, 33.5% above 2025 and 11.9% above a synthetic counterfactual of 42,113 entries. Qualified donor and preperiod designs yield 9.6% to 14.9%, and Mathematics has the largest RMSPE ratio among fifteen eligible placebo archives. Subfield growth is broad, with 29 of 30 primary math.* categories expanding. The author panel shows a marked thickening of the repeated output tail. The share of active author units produc ing at least five submissions rose from 2.45% to 3.80%, while the ten submission tail rose from 0.21% to 0.49%. These results document a new and unusually large 2026 Mathematics production regime shift. Its timing and production structure, combined with independent evi dence on AI diffusion and verifiable research tasks, are consistent with delayed diffusion and capability thresh old mechanisms. The comparative design identifies the anomaly, and separate triangulation evaluates AI related explanations. The findings locate verification, selection, and attention as central constraints for research gover nance.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

Westlake Scholar: AI-Enhanced Scholarly Discovery over an Institutional Repository

Institutional repositories (IRs) provide mature infrastructure for preserving and disseminating research outputs, but conventional record- and document-centric interfaces provide limited support for connecting deposited papers to related research and people. We present Westlake Scholar, an open-source, institution-grounded platform that adds four complementary artificial intelligence (AI) services to repository infrastructure: contextual paper reading, research-direction-guided paper discovery, publication-grounded expert discovery, and AI-generated research chronologies for scholars. The services draw on a shared institutional knowledge layer connecting approved publication records, paper content, and scholar--publication relationships. This allows the same paper to support contextual reading, cross-paper discovery, expert matching, and longitudinal views of scholarly work. Westlake Scholar provides an open and governable implementation of an institution-controlled AI layer that connects repository content, scholarly discovery, and researcher relationships while preserving provenance, human review, and institutional governance. A deployment at Westlake University, in operation since April 2026, demonstrates that the integrated system can operate in a live institutional setting.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

Measuring the Novelty of Biomedical Papers Using the Latent Distances between Knowledge Units

Measuring the novelty of scientific papers is a central concern in research evaluation and scientometrics. From a recombination perspective, prior studies have largely focused on the co-occurrence of knowledge units to assess the novelty of scientific papers. However, these studies often overlook other relationships between knowledge units. This narrow view may result in inaccurate or incomplete evaluations of novelty for scientific papers. To fill this gap, this study introduces a comprehensive novelty measurement that incorporates three types of relationships between knowledge units: network, semantic, and hierarchical. These relationships are used to quantify the latent distances among knowledge units. Using a dataset of 142,036 articles published in PLoS ONE and a validation dataset from the H1 Connect platform, our results demonstrate that (1) each relationship type captures distinct latent distances between MeSH terms; (2) compared to the widely used indicators proposed by Uzzi et al. (2013), our measures show stronger alignment with peer judgements; and (3) combining all three distance metrics yields more effective identification of novel papers than using any single perspective alone.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

Constructing the Field of Philanthropic and Nonprofit Studies: Evidence from Citation Networks

Philanthropic and nonprofit studies (PNPS) has grown rapidly as an interdisciplinary field, yet its intellectual structure and boundaries remain only partially visible. This study maps the field by combining journal- and keyword-based retrieval with citation network analysis, natural language processing, and large language model-assisted cluster labeling. Using 60,917 Web of Science articles, we identify major topical communities, examine their structural connections, and assess how well mainstream PNPS journals represent the broader landscape of related scholarship. The results show that PNPS is a loosely connected field dominated by three distinct "power centers": nonprofit organizations, social movements, and voluntary action. The analysis also reveals a broader disciplinary footprint than commonly recognized, extending beyond the social sciences and humanities into areas such as biomedicine and technology. These findings clarify the organization of PNPS and highlight opportunities for stronger integration across research domains.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2026

MultiGhostBench: A Multilingual Benchmark for Long-Form LLM-Generated Text Attribution under Distribution Shifts

While existing work on LLM authorship attribution (AA) has made progress, available benchmarks remain limited, often focusing on English, controlled settings, or relatively outdated models, with the few multilingual studies considering only relatively short texts. We introduce MultiGhostBench, a multilingual benchmark comprising 928 books generated by five recent LLMs across six languages and three scripts, with an average length of approximately 59K words per book. The benchmark supports evaluation under domain, author, and language shifts. Evaluation of representative AA methods shows that no single method consistently performs best across settings, and performance generally degrades under distribution shifts. Transformer-based detectors can retain generator-related information across languages, although transfer effectiveness varies by language pair, whereas statistical and fingerprint-based detectors are more language-dependent. We envision MultiGhostBench as a valuable resource for the development and evaluation of robust AA methods. The dataset and code can be found at https://github.com/GrecoMT/MultiGhostBench.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Qualified Cross-References as a Verification Method: The Normative Environment of the EU AI Act

Legal cross-references are commonly represented as links between instruments or provisions. In a curated legal knowledge base, a link must also identify the legal character of the interaction, its supporting provisions and conditions, and remain consistent from either instrument. This paper presents a provision-level model and a protocol for qualified cross-references, developed through a bilingual corpus of fourteen instruments surrounding Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (the AI Act). The model distinguishes direct textual reference, bounded presumption of conformity, substantive interaction without textual reference, mediated intersection, and institutional analogy; applicative interaction and definitional overlap are independent dimensions. Its methodological contribution is bidirectional inversion: a relationship documented from act A towards act B is reconstructed from B's perspective against both instruments. This verification tests provisions, qualification, direction, and conditions before deciding how to render the relationship from either side. Applied during construction, the protocol surfaced six incorrect article references, three inaccurate legal qualifications, and one divergence between two published descriptions of the same interaction. A reference to Regulation (EU) 2019/881 illustrates why qualification matters: the AI Act's bounded cybersecurity presumption differs from other product legislation's uses of the same certification framework. The contribution is a map of one regulatory environment and an explicitly specified method for making curated cross-reference knowledge bases inspectable and internally testable. A later, separately scoped corpus audit is discussed among the limitations, without pooling its findings with the original measurements; limited access to historical inputs constrains independent reproduction.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

The zbMATH Open Knowledge Graph: Tracing Centuries of Mathematical Research

We present the zbMATH Open Knowledge Graph, a large-scale RDF knowledge graph (KG) covering more than 250 years of mathematical scholarship. Unlike existing scholarly knowledge graphs that primarily capture bibliographic metadata and citation structures, the zbMATH Open KG integrates expert-curated semantic content, including reviews, keywords, subject classifications, software references, and disambiguated authorship. This combination of domain-specific representation of mathematical knowledge and extensive temporal coverage supports analyses that require fine-grained exploration of mathematical concepts, research fields, and scholarly relationships over time. The resulting graph comprises 34 million entities and 168 million RDF triples represented using established Semantic Web vocabularies, supporting interoperability and FAIR data principles. We further demonstrate its capabilities through query-driven historically grounded scholarly exploration use cases, illustrating how the knowledge graph can surface relationships and patterns that may be difficult to identify from bibliographic and citation information alone. The zbMATH Open KG provides an open semantic infrastructure for studying the development of mathematical knowledge and tracing scholarly connections across centuries of scholarship.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

Citing Less Critically: LLMs Reshape the Rhetoric and Reach of Scientific Citation

Scientific citations carry rhetorical intent. Scholars may cite prior work positively (supporting), negatively (contrasting), or neutrally (mentioning). As large language models (LLMs) increasingly assist scientific writing, whether they reproduce citations with the same rhetorical intent as humans remains unclear. We introduce a masked-citation task to compare human and LLM-generated citation behavior. For each citation context, an LLM generates a replacement citation sentence, producing a counterfactual corpus directly comparable to human citation. We analyze what, whom, and how models cite, using an LLM-as-a-judge to classify citation intent and a 20-million-edge coauthorship network to measure social distance between cited authors. Across six popular LLMs and 1,746 top NLP conference papers (63k+ contexts, 132k+ citations), three patterns emerge: (1) Compared with human citation, LLMs cite significantly less critically; (2) LLMs over-cite popular and older papers, a tendency amplified for contrasting citations where human writing more often draws on recent, niche work; (3) Whereas humans often cite within their close social network, especially for supporting citations, LLMs tend to draw on more socially distant authors. Together, these differences are double-edged: LLM citation reaches beyond a scholar's close collaborators while being less critical and amplifying visibility bias, reshaping the rhetoric and reach of scientific citation.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

Beyond Human-Likeness: Mapping the Scientific Critique Profiles of LLMs and Human Reviewers

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly discussed as tools for peer review, but their value is often assessed through human-likeness, perceived usefulness, or textual overlap with reviewer comments. This study shifts attention from whether LLMs resemble human reviewers to what functions of scientific critique they perform. Using ICLR 2025 peer-review data, we compare human reviews with LLM reviews generated under baseline and expert prompts. We operationalize scientific critique through two review acts, weakness critique and scientific questioning, and annotate point-level review text using five theory-guided frameworks: Anderson's knowledge types, Toulmin's argumentation model, Graesser's question depth, SOLO cognitive complexity, and Hattie's feedback functions. The results reveal a differentiated critique profile. Human reviews placed greater emphasis on scientific framing and revision guidance, more often identifying higher-order weaknesses and asking questions oriented toward improvement. LLM reviews showed higher rates of explanatory depth, integrative reasoning, and explicit argument structuring. Expert prompting did not make LLM critique uniformly more human-like; it partially narrowed some gaps but mainly amplified LLM-specific tendencies toward integration and formal argumentation. These findings show that LLM-assisted peer review changes the functional composition of review text, making it important to distinguish LLM-amplified critique from areas requiring human prioritization and accountable judgement.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

Guiding LLM Peer Reviewers: The Impact of Score Anchors on Review Evidence and Accuracy

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for research quality evaluation, with prior work exploring their scoring accuracy and the plausibility of review rationales. However, less is known about whether external score guidance changes the evidence presented in the generated review as well as the final score. This study uses 98 Allied Health Professions research outputs submitted for internal REF-style assessment, with specialist human review reports and adjudicated 1-4 reference scores. No-guidance baseline reviews are compared with oracle-guided reviews, where the supplied score is set to the rounded human reference score; extracted evaluation points are used to compare human and LLM evidence use. Using this design, oracle guidance improves scoring accuracy, with score-following checks showing that models do not simply copy the supplied score. Corrected score mismatches are associated with changes in the generated review frame, showing that the score signal can steer review rationales. This effect is direction-dependent: LLM reviews cover human strength or upgrade points more reliably than human weakness or downgrade points, with the weakest alignment for expert downgrade evidence. The results show that score-guided review generation can be evaluated at the level of review evidence, as well as the final score.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

A Text Recognition Dataset from Sahidic Coptic Ancient Manuscripts

In this work, we target Handwritten Text Recognition (HTR) in low-resource scenarios, which arise from underrepresented languages, rare scripts, and degraded visual conditions typical of historical documents. We introduce SCAM (Sahidic Coptic Ancient Manuscripts), a new line-level dataset built from digitized ancient manuscripts written in the extinct Sahidic Coptic dialect. The dataset reflects a realistic and challenging setting, as it combines heterogeneous acquisition conditions across libraries with typical manuscript degradations such as ink fading, bleed-through, and material deterioration. In addition to visual complexity, SCAM poses significant linguistic challenges due to the scarcity of resources for Sahidic Coptic, its uncommon alphabet, and dialect-specific diacritics. To support research in low-resource HTR, we benchmark several state-of-the-art approaches based on different paradigms, highlighting their limitations and strengths in this setting. Our results underline the gap between current HTR performance on well-resourced modern scripts and historically grounded, low-resource scenarios, thus providing a reference point for future developments.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2026

Loci Similes: A Benchmark for Extracting Intertextualities in Latin Literature

Tracing connections between historical texts is an important part of intertextual research, enabling scholars to reconstruct the virtual library of a writer and identify the sources influencing their creative process. These intertextual links manifest in diverse forms, ranging from direct verbatim quotations to subtle allusions and paraphrases disguised by morphological variation. Language models offer a promising path forward due to their capability of capturing semantic similarity beyond lexical overlap. However, the development of new methods for this task is held back by the scarcity of standardized benchmarks and easy-to-use datasets. We address this gap by introducing Loci Similes, a benchmark for Latin intertextuality detection comprising a curated dataset of ~176k text segments and 1,490 expert-verified parallels, including 945 labeled references from an existing dataset. Using this data, we establish baselines for retrieval and classification of intertextualities with both lexical methods and pretrained encoder language models.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Sustaining Dryad: Reconfiguring relationships and 'thinking like a business' to maintain open data infrastructures

Open data infrastructures underpin how open research is practiced across communities. While critical, the longevity of such infrastructures is far from certain, as they grapple with challenges related to technologies, dominant ideologies, and continued funding streams. This paper draws on a mixed-methods study of Dryad, a well-known open data infrastructure, to deeply explore one of these challenges: the quest for stable funding. Our analysis shows how Dryad has carefully reconfigured different forms of relationships and revenue models throughout its history to work towards financial sustainability. We identify four types of relationships with customers, collaborators, and competitors that have been critical to Dryad's financial evolution: reinforcing, forging, positioning, and excluding relationships. We argue that while implementing strategic, business thinking is a critical strategy, it is also one which shapes other factors important in sustainability: interpretations of value(s), community, and governance. We conclude by highlighting emerging tensions that provide insight for other open data infrastructures working to become financially sustainable. As a whole, our analysis focuses not just on financial mechanisms for funding open data infrastructures (although those emerge) but on the relationships which enable them.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

China's Shrinking Home Bias and Rising Disruptive Impact: Evidence from a Global Citation Network Analysis

China has become the world's largest producer of scientific publications, yet concerns persist that this growth is inflated by excessive domestic citation practices. In this study, we analyze a citation network of over 45 million publications from Web of Science (1980-2025) to investigate China's home citation bias and research impact. Using a network reshuffling null model to control for the structural effect of publication volume, we find that China's home citation bias is less pronounced than commonly assumed and has been steadily declining over the past two decades. Chinese researchers do not exhibit a significantly stronger home citation preference than other major countries, indicating increasing internationalization rather than insularity. Furthermore, using the persistent disruption framework, we show that Chinese papers are converging toward American papers in their capacity to produce paradigm-shifting work. These findings challenge prevailing narratives about Chinese scientific home bias and suggest that China's advances in research impact.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2026

SoniMet - A tool for sonifying and visualizing the performance of single researchers

For centuries, the scientific community has predominantly relied on visual tools to communicate empirical results and complex datasets. While visual representations dominate bibliometric analyses, the human auditory system possesses sensitive capacities for processing complex temporal information, distinguishing intricate patterns, and tracking parallel data streams. Data sonification translates data relations into acoustic signals, offering an alternative method for data exploration, pattern recognition, and scientific communication. This paper applies this concept to the field of bibliometrics through metrics sonification-the auditory translation of bibliometric information-and introduces SoniMet (Sonifying Metrics), a web-based tool designed to visualize and sonify the publication and citation data of individual scientists (see https://sonimet.kennebec.co.uk). SoniMet connects to the OpenAlex database to retrieve bibliometric records and displays them on an interactive chronological timeline. The tool employs direct parameter mapping to translate citation impact indicators into non-speech sound: field-weighted citation impact and citation counts determine the pitch and volume of a synthesized note and are mapped to the acoustic echo strength. Although SoniMet expands the methodological toolkit for research evaluation, current limitations include its restriction to individual scholar profiles and the challenge of integrating transient audio files into traditional, text-based scientific publishing workflows. Future empirical user studies are necessary to systematically evaluate the analytical utility and cognitive benefits of metrics sonification compared to established visual methods.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

Tracing high-profile attention to questionable research as a case for funder due diligence

When questionable research has entered the scientific record, it stands the same chance as other literature of shaping national and international policy, clinical guidance, and research and development activities. This study uses a known authorship-for-sale network identified in August 2022 to examine whether questionable research influences policy, patents, and clinical guidelines, and whether its authors continue to secure funding and publish after exposure. Across nearly 2,000 publications in our dataset, 57 were cited in policy documents, 12 in clinical guidelines, and 480 in patents. Nearly a quarter of these publications are linked to one or more grants: funding that could otherwise have supported rigorous, ethical science. Among the 278 authors we traced, publishing and funding continued well after the PNN's public exposure in 2022: over 90% continued publishing, and 23% were linked to a grant. As our findings show, the participants of paper mills and authorship-for-sale networks can still inform policy and clinical practice and support their authors' career progression even after the questionable practices behind them are exposed. We present a case for funders to consider authorship and network structure as part of a holistic due diligence process, alongside metrics such as citation counts and attention data.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

Do Large Language Models Favour Any Research Topics?

Large Language Models (LLMs) can estimate the quality of published journal articles, potentially supporting human assessment when evaluations are needed. Whilst there are reasons to believe that LLMs may have biases in this role, there is no statistically strong evidence yet. The current article addresses this gap with an exploration of the types of articles that attract high or low LLM scores in 73,489 articles from 15 health and life sciences journals. Based on comparing the words in the titles and abstracts of higher and lower scoring articles for two LLMs in various ways, the results suggest that topics favoured by GPT-OSS-120B include viruses, genes and cells and its disfavoured topics include surveys, patients and students. It is not clear whether these patterns reflect underlying quality differences or AI biases, however. The same method found systematic differences between the topics favoured by GPT-OSS-120B and Gemma 3 27B, such as Gemma 3 27B giving relatively higher scores for machine learning research, proving that at least one of the two LLMs has AI bias. Finally, comparing the scores for full-text articles compared to scores for titles and abstracts also finds differences for both LLMs, showing that they both can exhibit AI bias for at least one of these two input types, and probably both. Overall, the results show that it is important to consider LLM biases when deciding whether to use them for research evaluation tasks.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

LeMat-Synth: a multi-modal toolbox to curate broad synthesis procedure databases from scientific literature

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

cs.DL↗