Nahiyan Bin Noor

Md. Tahsin Amin, Tanim Ahmmod, Zannatul Ferdus et al.

Cardiovascular disease is the primary cause of death globally, necessitating early identification, precise risk classification, and dependable decision-support technologies. The advent of large language models (LLMs) provides new zero-shot and few-shot reasoning capabilities, even though machine learning (ML) algorithms, especially ensemble approaches like Random Forest, XGBoost, LightGBM, and CatBoost, are excellent at modeling complex, non-linear patient data and routinely beat logistic regression. This research predicts cardiovascular disease using a merged dataset of 1,190 patient records, comparing traditional machine learning models (95.78% accuracy, ROC-AUC 0.96) with open-source large language models via OpenRouter APIs. Finally, a hybrid fusion of the ML ensemble and LLM reasoning under Gemini 2.5 Flash achieved the best results (96.62% accuracy, 0.97 AUC), showing that LLMs (78.9 % accuracy) work best when combined with ML models rather than used alone. Results show that ML ensembles achieved the highest performance (95.78% accuracy, ROC-AUC 0.96), while LLMs performed moderately in zero-shot (78.9%) and slightly better in few-shot (72.6%) settings. The proposed hybrid method enhanced the strength in uncertain situations, illustrating that ensemble ML is considered the best structured tabular prediction case, but it can be integrated with hybrid ML-LLM systems to provide a minor increase and open the way to more reliable clinical decision-support tools.

Sabik Aftahee, A. F. M. Farhad, Arpita Mallik et al.

Accessing legal help in Bangladesh is hard. People face high fees, complex legal language, a shortage of lawyers, and millions of unresolved court cases. Generative AI models like OpenAI GPT-4.1 Mini, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Meta Llama 3 70B, and DeepSeek R1 could potentially democratize legal assistance by providing quick and affordable legal advice. In this study, we collected 250 authentic legal questions from the Facebook group "Know Your Rights," where verified legal experts regularly provide authoritative answers. These questions were subsequently submitted to four four advanced AI models and responses were generated using a consistent, standardized prompt. A comprehensive dual evaluation framework was employed, in which a state-of-the-art LLM model served as a judge, assessing each AI-generated response across four critical dimensions: factual accuracy, legal appropriateness, completeness, and clarity. Following this, the same set of questions was evaluated by three licensed Bangladeshi legal professionals according to the same criteria. In addition, automated evaluation metrics, including BLEU scores, were applied to assess response similarity. Our findings reveal a complex landscape where AI models frequently generate high-quality, well-structured legal responses but also produce dangerous misinformation, including fabricated case citations, incorrect legal procedures, and potentially harmful advice. These results underscore the critical need for rigorous expert validation and comprehensive safeguards before AI systems can be safely deployed for legal consultation in Bangladesh.