Aida Kostikova

Steffen Eger, Christoph Leiter, Jonas Belouadi et al.

The rapid growth of information in the field of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly in the subfields of Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Machine Learning (ML), presents a significant challenge for researchers and practitioners to keep pace with the latest developments. To address the problem of information overload, this report by the Natural Language Learning Group at Bielefeld University focuses on identifying the most popular papers on arXiv, with a specific emphasis on NLP and ML. The objective is to offer a quick guide to the most relevant and widely discussed research, aiding both newcomers and established researchers in staying abreast of current trends. In particular, we compile a list of the 40 most popular papers based on normalized citation counts from the first half of 2023. We observe the dominance of papers related to Large Language Models (LLMs) and specifically ChatGPT during the first half of 2023, with the latter showing signs of declining popularity more recently, however. Further, NLP related papers are the most influential (around 60\% of top papers) even though there are twice as many ML related papers in our data. Core issues investigated in the most heavily cited papers are: LLM efficiency, evaluation techniques, ethical considerations, embodied agents, and problem-solving with LLMs. Additionally, we examine the characteristics of top papers in comparison to others outside the top-40 list (noticing the top paper's focus on LLM related issues and higher number of co-authors) and analyze the citation distributions in our dataset, among others.

Aida Kostikova, Benjamin Paassen, Dominik Beese et al.

Solidarity is a crucial concept to understand social relations in societies. In this paper, we explore fine-grained solidarity frames to study solidarity towards women and migrants in German parliamentary debates between 1867 and 2022. Using 2,864 manually annotated text snippets (with a cost exceeding 18k Euro), we evaluate large language models (LLMs) like Llama 3, GPT-3.5, and GPT-4. We find that GPT-4 outperforms other LLMs, approaching human annotation quality. Using GPT-4, we automatically annotate more than 18k further instances (with a cost of around 500 Euro) across 155 years and find that solidarity with migrants outweighs anti-solidarity but that frequencies and solidarity types shift over time. Most importantly, group-based notions of (anti-)solidarity fade in favor of compassionate solidarity, focusing on the vulnerability of migrant groups, and exchange-based anti-solidarity, focusing on the lack of (economic) contribution. Our study highlights the interplay of historical events, socio-economic needs, and political ideologies in shaping migration discourse and social cohesion. We also show that powerful LLMs, if carefully prompted, can be cost-effective alternatives to human annotation for hard social scientific tasks.

Aida Kostikova, Zhipin Wang, Deidamea Bajri et al.

Large language model (LLM) research has grown rapidly, along with increasing concern about their limitations such as failures in reasoning, hallucinations, and limited multilingual capability. While prior reviews have addressed these issues, they often focus on individual limitations or consider them within the broader context of evaluating overall model performance. This survey addresses the gap by presenting a data-driven, semi-automated review of research on limitations of LLMs (LLLMs) from 2022 to 2025, using a bottom-up approach. From a corpus of 250,000 ACL and arXiv papers, we extract 14,648 relevant limitation papers using keyword filtering and LLM-based classification, validated against expert labels. Using topic clustering (via two approaches, HDBSCAN+BERTopic and LlooM), we identify between 7 and 15 prominent types of limitations discussed in recent LLM research across the ACL and arXiv datasets. We find that LLM-related research increases nearly sixfold in ACL and nearly fifteenfold in arXiv between 2022 and 2025, while LLLMs research grows even faster, by a factor of over 12 in ACL and nearly 28 in arXiv. Reasoning remains the most studied limitation, followed by generalization, hallucination, bias, and security. The distribution of topics in the ACL dataset stays relatively stable over time, while arXiv shifts toward safety and controllability (with topics like security risks, alignment, hallucinations, knowledge editing), and multimodality between 2022 and 2025. We offer a quantitative view of trends in LLM limitations research and release a dataset of annotated abstracts and a validated methodology, available at: https://github.com/a-kostikova/LLLMs-Survey.

Christoph Leiter, Jonas Belouadi, Yanran Chen et al.

The NLLG (Natural Language Learning & Generation) arXiv reports assist in navigating the rapidly evolving landscape of NLP and AI research across cs.CL, cs.CV, cs.AI, and cs.LG categories. This fourth installment captures a transformative period in AI history - from January 1, 2023, following ChatGPT's debut, through September 30, 2024. Our analysis reveals substantial new developments in the field - with 45% of the top 40 most-cited papers being new entries since our last report eight months ago and offers insights into emerging trends and major breakthroughs, such as novel multimodal architectures, including diffusion and state space models. Natural Language Processing (NLP; cs.CL) remains the dominant main category in the list of our top-40 papers but its dominance is on the decline in favor of Computer vision (cs.CV) and general machine learning (cs.LG). This report also presents novel findings on the integration of generative AI in academic writing, documenting its increasing adoption since 2022 while revealing an intriguing pattern: top-cited papers show notably fewer markers of AI-generated content compared to random samples. Furthermore, we track the evolution of AI-associated language, identifying declining trends in previously common indicators such as "delve".

Aida Kostikova, Ole Pütz, Steffen Eger et al.

Migration has been a core topic in German political debate, from millions of expellees post World War II over labor migration to refugee movements in the recent past. Studying political speech regarding such wide-ranging phenomena in depth traditionally required extensive manual annotations, limiting the scope of analysis to small subsets of the data. Large language models (LLMs) have the potential to partially automate even complex annotation tasks. We provide an extensive evaluation of a multiple LLMs in annotating (anti-)solidarity subtypes in German parliamentary debates compared to a large set of thousands of human reference annotations (gathered over a year). We evaluate the influence of model size, prompting differences, fine-tuning, historical versus contemporary data; and we investigate systematic errors. Beyond methodological evaluation, we also interpret the resulting annotations from a social science lense, gaining deeper insight into (anti-)solidarity trends towards migrants in the German post-World War II period and recent past. Our data reveals a high degree of migrant-directed solidarity in the postwar period, as well as a strong trend towards anti-solidarity in the German parliament since 2015, motivating further research. These findings highlight the promise of LLMs for political text analysis and the importance of migration debates in Germany, where demographic decline and labor shortages coexist with rising polarization.

Ran Zhang, Aida Kostikova, Christoph Leiter et al.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has witnessed rapid growth, especially in the subfields Natural Language Processing (NLP), Machine Learning (ML) and Computer Vision (CV). Keeping pace with this rapid progress poses a considerable challenge for researchers and professionals in the field. In this arXiv report, the second of its kind, which covers the period from January to September 2023, we aim to provide insights and analysis that help navigate these dynamic areas of AI. We accomplish this by 1) identifying the top-40 most cited papers from arXiv in the given period, comparing the current top-40 papers to the previous report, which covered the period January to June; 2) analyzing dataset characteristics and keyword popularity; 3) examining the global sectoral distribution of institutions to reveal differences in engagement across geographical areas. Our findings highlight the continued dominance of NLP: while only 16% of all submitted papers have NLP as primary category (more than 25% have CV and ML as primary category), 50% of the most cited papers have NLP as primary category, 90% of which target LLMs. Additionally, we show that i) the US dominates among both top-40 and top-9k papers, followed by China; ii) Europe clearly lags behind and is hardly represented in the top-40 most cited papers; iii) US industry is largely overrepresented in the top-40 most influential papers.