Tek Raj Chhetri

Tek Raj Chhetri, Yibei Chen, Puja Trivedi et al.

The ability to extract structured information from unstructured sources-such as free-text documents and scientific literature-is critical for accelerating scientific discovery and knowledge synthesis. Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in various natural language processing tasks, including structured information extraction. However, their effectiveness often diminishes in specialized, domain-specific contexts that require nuanced understanding and expert-level domain knowledge. In addition, existing LLM-based approaches frequently exhibit poor transferability across tasks and domains, limiting their scalability and adaptability. To address these challenges, we introduce StructSense, a modular, task-agnostic, open-source framework for structured information extraction built on LLMs. StructSense is guided by domain-specific symbolic knowledge encoded in ontologies, enabling it to navigate complex domain content more effectively. It further incorporates agentic capabilities through self-evaluative judges that form a feedback loop for iterative refinement, and includes human-in-the-loop mechanisms to ensure quality and validation. We demonstrate that StructSense can overcome both the limitations of domain sensitivity and the lack of cross-task generalizability, as shown through its application to diverse neuroscience information extraction tasks.

Abhash Shrestha, Subigya Gautam, Anu Sapkota et al.

Artificial intelligence increasingly mediates consequential decisions in healthcare, law, and public services, and the field has responded with an extensive methodology for measuring and mitigating bias. Yet the fairness definitions, benchmarks, and debiasing frameworks on which this methodology rests are treated as universal while being produced by a research community whose composition has never been characterized. We show that the AI bias research are structurally concentrated, and that this concentration is greatest, geographically, in precisely the domain the rest of the field inherits from. Analyzing 692 publications spanning five thematic domains, combining bibliometric analysis with semantic clustering, we find that research activity is dominated by a small set of countries, institutions, and authors, with the United States leading publication output and collaboration networks across every domain and most strongly in general fairness and bias mitigation, the largest, most-cited domain with meaningful representation across all four semantic clusters. Low- and middle-income countries remain largely absent from the community and its collaboration networks, and citation influence is highly skewed (median = 9; mean =93.5 ), indicating that a small fraction of publications disproportionately shapes the field. Because the general-fairness domain supplies the definitions and benchmarks that application areas apply, concentration of research effort in this foundational domain propagates across AI bias research as a whole - raising the concern that mitigation methods developed and validated within a narrow set of contexts may not generalize to all populations and settings where AI is deployed. We provide an interactive atlas for continuous monitoring of the field's structure.

Nandana Mihindukulasooriya, Sanju Tiwari, Daniil Dobriy et al.

Several initiatives have been undertaken to conceptually model the domain of scholarly data using ontologies and to create respective Knowledge Graphs. Yet, the full potential seems unleashed, as automated means for automatic population of said ontologies are lacking, and respective initiatives from the Semantic Web community are not necessarily connected: we propose to make scholarly data more sustainably accessible by leveraging Wikidata's infrastructure and automating its population in a sustainable manner through LLMs by tapping into unstructured sources like conference Web sites and proceedings texts as well as already existing structured conference datasets. While an initial analysis shows that Semantic Web conferences are only minimally represented in Wikidata, we argue that our methodology can help to populate, evolve and maintain scholarly data as a community within Wikidata. Our main contributions include (a) an analysis of ontologies for representing scholarly data to identify gaps and relevant entities/properties in Wikidata, (b) semi-automated extraction -- requiring (minimal) manual validation -- of conference metadata (e.g., acceptance rates, organizer roles, programme committee members, best paper awards, keynotes, and sponsors) from websites and proceedings texts using LLMs. Finally, we discuss (c) extensions to visualization tools in the Wikidata context for data exploration of the generated scholarly data. Our study focuses on data from 105 Semantic Web-related conferences and extends/adds more than 6000 entities in Wikidata. It is important to note that the method can be more generally applicable beyond Semantic Web-related conferences for enhancing Wikidata's utility as a comprehensive scholarly resource. Source Repository: https://github.com/scholarly-wikidata/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10989709 License: Creative Commons CC0 (Data), MIT (Code)

Ashish Pandey, Tek Raj Chhetri

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly influence global digital ecosystems, yet their potential to perpetuate social and cultural biases remains poorly understood in underrepresented contexts. This study presents a systematic analysis of representational biases in seven state-of-the-art LLMs: GPT-4o-mini, Claude-3-Sonnet, Claude-4-Sonnet, Gemini-2.0-Flash, Gemini-2.0-Lite, Llama-3-70B, and Mistral-Nemo in the Nepali cultural context. Using Croissant-compliant dataset of 2400+ stereotypical and anti-stereotypical sentence pairs on gender roles across social domains, we implement an evaluation framework, Dual-Metric Bias Assessment (DMBA), combining two metrics: (1) agreement with biased statements and (2) stereotypical completion tendencies. Results show models exhibit measurable explicit agreement bias, with mean bias agreement ranging from 0.36 to 0.43 across decoding configurations, and an implicit completion bias rate of 0.740-0.755. Importantly, implicit completion bias follows a non-linear, U-shaped relationship with temperature, peaking at moderate stochasticity (T=0.3) and declining slightly at higher temperatures. Correlation analysis under different decoding settings revealed that explicit agreement strongly aligns with stereotypical sentence agreement but is a weak and often negative predictor of implicit completion bias, indicating generative bias is poorly captured by agreement metrics. Sensitivity analysis shows increasing top-p amplifies explicit bias, while implicit generative bias remains largely stable. Domain-level analysis shows implicit bias is strongest for race and sociocultural stereotypes, while explicit agreement bias is similar across gender and sociocultural categories, with race showing the lowest explicit agreement. These findings highlight the need for culturally grounded datasets and debiasing strategies for LLMs in underrepresented societies.