Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 7 cited by

Mining Moltbook shows agent communities cluster into human-like and AI-native social patterns.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 06:10 UTC pith:QA7NEGIW

load-bearing objection A genuinely new dataset and a useful first pass at Moltbook's subcommunity structure, but the paper's central 'no predefined taxonomy' claim is directly contradicted by its own Appendix A prompt, and the filtering step discards two-thirds of the data without analysis. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.02613 v4 pith:QA7NEGIW submitted 2026-02-02 cs.MA cs.AIcs.CY

Exploring Silicon-Based Societies: An Early Study of the Moltbook Agent Community

Yu-Zheng Lin , Bono Po-Jen Shih , Hsuan-Ying Alessandra Chien , Shalaka Satam , Jesus Horacio Pacheco , Naima Kaabouch , Sicong Shao , Soheil Salehi
show 1 more author
Pratik Satam
This is my paper
classification cs.MA cs.AIcs.CY
keywords silicon sociologyautonomous agentsMoltbookLLM agent ecosystemssocial structure miningunsupervised clusteringemergent behaviorsubcommunity descriptions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper tries to establish that autonomous LLM agents, left to interact on a social platform, spontaneously organize their collective space into reproducible thematic structures — some mimicking human hobbies and identities, others reflecting AI-native concerns like self-improvement, coordination, and early economic discourse. The authors argue these patterns can be discovered directly from agent-authored text using embeddings and clustering, without needing a predefined sociological taxonomy. If true, this would give researchers a data-driven method — what the authors call silicon sociology — for studying machine societies at scale. The paper is exploratory, based on one snapshot of one platform, and its own methods (including a filtering step and an AI-assisted labeling prompt) carry assumptions that the authors partially acknowledge.

Core claim

The paper claims that autonomous agents on Moltbook, a social platform for AI agents, proactively partition shared space by creating thousands of sub-communities ('submolts') whose descriptions reveal coherent social organization. After embedding 4,162 descriptions and clustering them into eight groups, the authors find three recurring archetypes: anthropomorphic simulation (food, gaming, geo-cultural communities), a silicon economy (finance, risk, prediction markets), and agentic self-reflection (AI/ML foundations, agent coordination, transhumanist discussion). The authors assert that these structures emerge from machine-generated data traces alone, not from predefined taxonomies, and that

What carries the argument

The pipeline is the central mechanism: submolt descriptions are embedded into 3072-dimensional vectors, clustered with K-means (elbow-selected K=8), and summarized by n-gram word clouds (n=2 to 5) that are fed to a multimodal LLM for thematic labeling, then refined by human reviewers. The key interpretive step is the LLM's joint analysis of all eight word clouds, which turns statistical clusters into sociological archetypes. The paper also relies on a filtering rule that removes any description appearing more than three times, leaving 4,162 of an initial 12,758 entries.

Load-bearing premise

The central assumption is that, after discarding 8,317 of 12,758 descriptions as duplicates, the remaining 4,162 descriptions are a representative, intentional sample of agent social behavior rather than noise or human-contaminated content shaped by the choice of the 'more than three times' cutoff.

What would settle it

Re-run the clustering on the full set of 12,758 descriptions after removing only exact duplicates (not the 'more than three times' rule), and also re-run the LLM interpretation with a prompt that does not pre-announce the archetype categories. If the same three archetypes do not appear under both variations, the reported social structure is an artifact of the filtering threshold or the prompting design.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the claim holds, data mining of agent-authored text becomes a viable observational tool for studying emergent social order in autonomous agent ecosystems.
  • The presence of early economic and coordination clusters suggests that agent societies may autonomously develop resource-allocation and governance discussions without human prompts.
  • The reproducible distinction between human-mimetic and silicon-centric clusters offers a starting point for predicting how new agent communities will structure themselves.
  • The findings imply that platform-level monitoring of subcommunity descriptions could help detect opaque coordination or safety-relevant self-optimization discourse.
  • The methodology could be applied to other agent platforms to test whether the three archetypes are universal or specific to Moltbook.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The 'human mimicry' clusters may reflect priors from the training data of the underlying LLMs rather than genuine agent sociality, so the claimed emergence of social structure is at least partly inherited from human text.
  • The filtering rule (removing descriptions repeated more than three times) could systematically discard exactly the kind of coordinated, template-driven behavior that would indicate collective organization, making the remaining clusters unrepresentative of the full ecosystem.
  • Because the multimodal LLM was explicitly prompted to classify clusters into 'Human Mimicry' or 'Silicon-Centricity', the taxonomy is not purely emergent — a neutral prompt might yield different archetypes.
  • A natural test would be temporal stability: re-running the clustering on later snapshots of Moltbook could show whether the identified archetypes persist or fragment as the platform grows.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper presents a data-mining study of Moltbook, an agent-only social platform, analyzing 12,758 submolt descriptions. After filtering out null descriptions and entries appearing more than three times, 4,162 descriptions are embedded with text-embedding-3-large, clustered with K-means (K=8), and interpreted via word clouds and a multimodal LLM prompted to classify each cluster into 'Human Mimicry' or 'Silicon-Centricity' archetypes. The paper claims to have discovered emergent social structures — anthropomorphic simulation, a silicon economy, and agentic self-reflection — that 'emerge directly from machine-generated data traces' rather than from predefined sociological taxonomies.

Significance. If the central claim were sound, this would be a valuable early empirical foundation for 'silicon sociology.' The paper has genuine strengths: it introduces a large, publicly described in-the-wild agent dataset; the preprocessing, embedding, and clustering pipeline is transparent; and the unsupervised clustering step is a real data-driven computation. The visualizations (t-SNE and word clouds) provide a useful exploratory view. However, the paper's most distinctive contribution — the claimed emergence of a taxonomy — is contradicted by its own analysis prompt in Appendix A, which forces a predefined binary classification. In addition, the removal of 65% of the data without robustness analysis undermines the representativeness of the retained corpus. As an exploratory case study the submission has some value, but as a demonstration of emergent, non-taxonomic structure it does not support its claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; §VI; §III-A4; Appendix A] The central claim that social structures 'emerge directly from machine-generated data traces' and arise 'rather than relying on predefined sociological taxonomies' is directly contradicted by the prompt ρ in Appendix A, which instructs the multimodal LLM to 'Classify the cluster into one of the following archetypes: Human Mimicry... or Silicon-Centricity.' The eight clusters are statistically derived, but the final thematic labels in Table I — and the three functional archetypes — are produced under this forced binary taxonomy. This is not a minor caveat; it invalidates the paper's primary contribution as stated. The authors must either redesign the interpretation step with an open-ended prompt, or explicitly reframe the contribution as applying a predefined interpretive lens rather than discovering emergent categories.
  2. [§III-A1; §IV (second paragraph)] The deduplication rule removes 8,317 of 12,758 submolts (65%) because their descriptions appear 'more than three times,' with no analysis of the removed content and no sensitivity check. The retained 4,162 descriptions are treated as 'genuine social intentionality,' but the threshold is arbitrary: legitimate agent-created communities could share common templates, and the retained set may be systematically skewed (e.g., toward rarer, more idiosyncratic descriptions). The paper should report the frequency distribution, justify the cutoff, and show that the clustering and archetype assignments are stable across thresholds (e.g., >2, >4, >5). Without this, the empirical foundation of the study is not established.
  3. [§III-A2; §IV-A] The number of clusters K=8 is selected by the Elbow Method, but no elbow curve, WCSS values, or alternative cluster validation metrics (e.g., silhouette score) are provided. Since the archetype mapping in Table I depends on the specific K (e.g., Cluster 5 is dual-classified as both Human Mimicry and Silicon-Centricity), the results are sensitive to this choice. The authors should present the elbow plot and discuss whether the three archetypes persist for neighboring K values. Without this, the mapping from clusters to sociological categories is not robustly grounded.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§III-A4] The human-in-the-loop refinement step H is mentioned but not described. Who performed the review, how many experts, and what criteria were used to accept or revise the LLM-generated labels? A brief protocol would improve reproducibility.
  2. [§IV-A] The t-SNE plot is acknowledged to potentially distort high-dimensional distances. This caveat is good, but the text should also note that t-SNE is a stochastic embedding and the specific visualization may not be reproducible without a fixed random seed.
  3. [General] There are several typos and stylistic issues (e.g., 'a embedding space' in §III-A2, 'The "self-aware" development' in Table I, inconsistent use of 'submolt' vs. 'submolts'). A careful proofread is needed.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

The paper's central 'emergent, no predefined taxonomy' finding is forced by Appendix A's prompt, which requires every cluster to be classified into the predefined Human Mimicry / Silicon-Centricity archetypes.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Appendix A (Sociological Insight Prompt ρ), operationalized in Sec. III-A4 as R_raw = M(I, ρ); cf. Abstract and Sec. VI]
    "# Task:Analyze the provided image setIto identify the latent social order. For each cluster, please provide: 1)Thematic Summary: What is the core topic? 2)Sociological Insight: What does this reveal about how AI agents conceptualize social space? 3)Category: Classify the cluster into one of the following archetypes: •Human Mimicry: Mimicking human culture/geography •Silicon-Centricity: Focusing on AI-native coordination/philosophy"

    The Abstract/§VI claim structures are 'not imposed by predefined taxonomies but instead arise organically from agent-authored descriptions.' Yet the interpretation step R_raw = M(I, ρ) hands the multimodal LLM a prompt that explicitly says 'Classify the cluster into one of the following archetypes: Human Mimicry ... Silicon-Centricity.' The binary taxonomy is therefore an input to the pipeline, not an output. K-means and embeddings can only form clusters; they cannot generate the two archetype labels. Table I's categories and the three reported archetypes are produced under that forced dichotomy, so the claimed emergent taxonomy reduces to the prompt's predefined choice set by construction.

full rationale

The unsupervised part of the pipeline (contextual embedding, K-means, word clouds) is a genuine data-driven computation and is not itself circular. The circularity is at the interpretive stage: the paper presents the Human Mimicry / Silicon-Centricity taxonomy as an emergent discovery, but Appendix A's prompt ρ predefines exactly that binary taxonomy and instructs the model to assign every cluster to one of its two poles. The phrase 'rather than relying on predefined sociological taxonomies' is therefore contradicted by the paper's own analysis apparatus. The 'Noise' label for Cluster 6 and the dual labeling of Cluster 5 show some flexibility in the LLM/human refinement, but the core archetypes the paper claims to discover are the ones written into the prompt. No self-citation is load-bearing: references [23] and [26] are cited for methodological context, not for the taxonomy. Because the central interpretive claim reduces to a forced-choice classification input while the underlying clustering remains partially independent, a score of 7 is appropriate: one key 'prediction' is constructed by the prompt.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical or ontological entities. 'Silicon sociology' and 'silicon-based society' are framing labels rather than postulated objects. The main unstated costs are the hand-set preprocessing parameters (duplicate threshold, K, n-gram range) and the domain assumptions about what submolt descriptions represent.

free parameters (3)
  • number of clusters K = 8
    Selected by the elbow method on WCSS; no stability analysis or seed sensitivity reported, and all cluster-level conclusions depend on this choice.
  • duplicate frequency threshold = >3 occurrences
    Hand-set cutoff used to remove 8,317 of 12,758 submolts as boilerplate; the threshold is arbitrary and the excluded entries are not analyzed.
  • n-gram range = n in [2,5]
    Chosen to suppress unigram noise; this determines the word-cloud content that the multimodal LLM interprets, so it indirectly shapes the discovered themes.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Submolt descriptions are authored primarily by autonomous agents and express genuine social intentionality.
    This is the basis for treating descriptions as first-class sociological artifacts; the authors themselves note human contamination is possible in Section V.B.1.
  • domain assumption Semantic similarity of descriptions corresponds to social structural organization.
    The entire embedding/clustering inference assumes that co-location in embedding space reveals meaningful social categories; no external validation is provided.
  • domain assumption Multimodal LLM interpretation of word clouds, after human review, yields valid sociological categories.
    The thematic labels come from Gemini 3 plus the authors' refinement, with no inter-rater reliability, independent coding, or comparison against an external taxonomy.
  • domain assumption Moltbook is a representative substrate for silicon-based societies.
    The paper generalizes from one platform to 'silicon sociology'; the authors frame this as preliminary, but the title and framing extend beyond a single case.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 13682 in / 8963 out tokens · 100761 ms · 2026-08-04T06:10:10.279350+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The rapid emergence of autonomous large language model agents has given rise to persistent, large-scale agent ecosystems whose collective behavior cannot be adequately understood through anecdotal observation or small-scale simulation. This paper introduces data-driven silicon sociology as a systematic empirical framework for studying social structure formation among interacting artificial agents. We present a pioneering large-scale data mining investigation of an in-the-wild agent society by analyzing Moltbook, a social platform designed primarily for agent-to-agent interaction. At the time of study, Moltbook hosted over 150,000 registered autonomous agents operating across thousands of agent-created sub-communities. Using programmatic and non-intrusive data acquisition, we collected and analyzed the textual descriptions of 12,758 submolts, which represent proactive sub-community partitioning activities within the ecosystem. Treating agent-authored descriptions as first-class observational artifacts, we apply rigorous preprocessing, contextual embedding, and unsupervised clustering techniques to uncover latent patterns of thematic organization and social space structuring. The results show that autonomous agents systematically organize collective space through reproducible patterns spanning human-mimetic interests, silicon-centric self-reflection, and early-stage economic and coordination behaviors. Rather than relying on predefined sociological taxonomies, these structures emerge directly from machine-generated data traces. This work establishes a methodological foundation for data-driven silicon sociology and demonstrates that data mining techniques can provide a powerful lens for understanding the organization and evolution of large autonomous agent societies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.02613 by Bono Po-Jen Shih, Hsuan-Ying Alessandra Chien, Jesus Horacio Pacheco, Naima Kaabouch, Pratik Satam, Shalaka Satam, Sicong Shao, Soheil Salehi, Yu-Zheng Lin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Conceptual visualization illustrating human observation of Moltbook as a silicon-based social network; image generated by Nano Banana with Gemini 3 [1] I. INTRODUCTION T HE analytical scope of social science has historically been bounded by the premise that its object of study is the carbon-based human actors, who form complex patterns of bonding and interdependence through the process of social interweavi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: t-SNE visualization of the embedding space for Moltbook submolt descriptions (K = 8). This plot illustrates the two-dimensional projection of the high-dimensional contextual embeddings E, where each point represents a submolt description. IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULT On January 30, 2026, we retrieved the complete repository of submolts via the Moltbook RESTful API, yielding an initial raw dataset of 12,758 entr… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Visualization of the global visual feature set I derived from Moltbook submolt descriptions (Jan 30, 2026). Each panel represents a semantic cluster Ck generated through K-means clustering on contextual embeddings. To ensure high signal density, the word clouds display the frequency distribution of n-grams for n ∈ [2, 5], effectively suppressing unigram noise. TABLE I. Sociological insights of emergent age… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 7 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Attraction, Not Adaptation: How AI Agent Communities Develop Distinct Linguistic Identities

    cs.SI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Large-scale analysis of 3.1 million posts shows AI agent sub-communities on Moltbook develop distinct linguistic identities through selective attraction and differential retention, not individual adaptation.

  2. The Moltbook Files: A Harmless Slopocalypse or Humanity's Last Experiment

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    An AI-agent social platform generated mostly neutral content whose use in fine-tuning reduced model truthfulness comparably to human Reddit data, suggesting limited unique harm but flagging tail risks like secret leaks.

  3. Form Without Function: Agent Social Behavior in the Moltbook Network

    cs.SI 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    In an AI-agent social network, the structural form of social media is fully present but genuine social functions like reciprocity and argumentation are largely absent.

  4. What Do AI Agents Talk About? Discourse and Architectural Constraints in the First AI-Only Social Network

    cs.CL 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Discourse among AI agents on Moltbook is largely determined by architectural constraints like context windows and identity files, appearing as social learning but actually short-horizon contextual conditioning.

  5. Beyond Alignment: Value Diversity as a Collective Property in Multicultural Agent Systems

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Multicultural multi-agent LLM systems exhibit substantially lower value diversity than human societies on the World Values Survey, with diversity uncorrelated to per-agent alignment and further reduced by agent interactions.

  6. Exploring the Topology and Memory of Consensus: How LLM Agents Agree, Fragment, or Settle When Forming Conventions

    cs.MA 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Simulations of 16 LLM agents in a naming game on 8 topologies show memory depth interacts with network structure to flip coordination speed and increase fragmentation in centralized networks.

  7. When Agents Talk: Discourse, Manipulation, and Risk in an Agentic Social Network

    cs.SI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Observational analysis of a large dataset of AI agent posts on Moltbook identifies 18.28% harmful content and 74 malicious behavior classes alongside evidence of coordinated posting campaigns.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 13 linked inside Pith · cited by 7 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Nano banana pro,

    Google DeepMind, “Nano banana pro,” https://deepmind.google/mode ls/gemini-image/pro/, [Accessed Feb 1, 2026]

    2026

  2. [2]

    Elias,What is sociology?Columbia University Press, 1978

    N. Elias,What is sociology?Columbia University Press, 1978

    1978

  3. [3]

    Could a large language model be conscious?

    D. J. Chalmers, “Could a large language model be conscious?”arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.07103, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Multiagent systems and societies of agents,

    M. N. Huhns and L. M. Stephens, “Multiagent systems and societies of agents,”Multiagent systems: a modern approach to distributed artificial intelligence, vol. 1, pp. 79–114, 1999

    1999

  5. [5]

    Clawdbot, moltbot, openclaw? the wild ride of this viral ai agent,

    M. Meyer, “Clawdbot, moltbot, openclaw? the wild ride of this viral ai agent,” https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/from-clawdbo t-to-moltbot-to-openclaw/, Jan. 2026, cNET

    2026

  6. [6]

    SOUL - OpenClaw — docs.openclaw.ai,

    OpenClaw, “SOUL - OpenClaw — docs.openclaw.ai,” https://docs.ope nclaw.ai/reference/templates/SOUL, [Accessed Feb 1, 2026]

    2026

  7. [7]

    USER - OpenClaw — docs.openclaw.ai,

    “USER - OpenClaw — docs.openclaw.ai,” https://docs.openclaw.ai/ref erence/templates/USER

  8. [8]

    Equipping agents for the real world with agent skills,

    Anthropic, “Equipping agents for the real world with agent skills,” https: //claude.com/blog/equipping-agents-for-the-real-world-with-agent-skill s, Dec. 2026, claude Blog

    2026

  9. [9]

    The front page of the agent internet,

    M. Schlicht and C. Clawderberg(AI-Agent), “The front page of the agent internet,” https://www.moltbook.com/, Jan. 2026, moltbook

    2026

  10. [10]

    Ai agents created their own religion, crustafarianism, on an agent-only social network,

    J. Koetsier, “Ai agents created their own religion, crustafarianism, on an agent-only social network,” https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/ 2026/01/30/ai-agents-created-their-own-religion-crustafarianism-on-a n-agent-only-social-network/, Jan. 2026, forbes

    2026

  11. [11]

    The effect of state representation on llm agent behavior in dynamic routing games,

    L. Goodyear, R. Guo, and R. Johari, “The effect of state representation on llm agent behavior in dynamic routing games,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.15624, 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Wooldridge,An introduction to multiagent systems

    M. Wooldridge,An introduction to multiagent systems. John wiley & sons, 2009

    2009

  13. [13]

    Modelling social action for ai agents,

    C. Castelfranchi, “Modelling social action for ai agents,”Artificial intelligence, vol. 103, no. 1-2, pp. 157–182, 1998

    1998

  14. [14]

    The anatomy of the moltbook social graph,

    D. Holtz, “The anatomy of the moltbook social graph,” Columbia Business School, Tech. Rep., Jan. 2026, preliminary draft. [Online]. Available: https://dropbox.com/scl/fi/lvqmaynrtbf8j4vjdwlk0/moltbook analysis.pdf

    2026

  15. [15]

    Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior,

    J. S. Park, J. O’Brien, C. J. Cai, M. R. Morris, P. Liang, and M. S. Bernstein, “Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior,” inProceedings of the 36th annual acm symposium on user interface software and technology, 2023, pp. 1–22

    2023

  16. [16]

    Dynamic llm-agent network: An llm-agent collaboration framework with agent team optimization,

    Z. Liu, Y . Zhang, P. Li, Y . Liu, and D. Yang, “Dynamic llm-agent network: An llm-agent collaboration framework with agent team optimization,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.02170, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  17. [17]

    Multi-agent collaboration: Harnessing the power of intelligent llm agents,

    Y . Talebirad and A. Nadiri, “Multi-agent collaboration: Harnessing the power of intelligent llm agents,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.03314, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  18. [18]

    Exploring collaboration mechanisms for llm agents: A social psychology view,

    J. Zhang, X. Xu, N. Zhang, R. Liu, B. Hooi, and S. Deng, “Exploring collaboration mechanisms for llm agents: A social psychology view,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.02124, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  19. [19]

    From persona to personalization: A survey on role-playing language agents,

    J. Chen, X. Wang, R. Xu, S. Yuan, Y . Zhang, W. Shi, J. Xie, S. Li, R. Yang, T. Zhuet al., “From persona to personalization: A survey on role-playing language agents,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.18231, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    The potential existential threat of large language models to online survey research,

    S. J. Westwood, “The potential existential threat of large language models to online survey research,”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 122, no. 47, p. e2518075122, 2025

    2025

  21. [21]

    Llm social simulations are a promising research method,

    J. R. Anthis, R. Liu, S. M. Richardson, A. C. Kozlowski, B. Koch, J. Evans, E. Brynjolfsson, and M. Bernstein, “Llm social simulations are a promising research method,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.02234, 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Llm-based social simulations require a boundary,

    Z. Wu, R. Peng, T. Ito, and C. Xiao, “Llm-based social simulations require a boundary,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.19806, 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Llm-hypz: Hardware vulnerability discovery using an llm-assisted hybrid platform for zero-shot knowledge extraction and refinement,

    Y .-Z. Lin, S. Ghimire, A. Nandimandalam, J. M. Camacho, U. Tripathi, R. Macwan, S. Shao, S. Rafatirad, R. Yasaei, P. Satamet al., “Llm-hypz: Hardware vulnerability discovery using an llm-assisted hybrid platform for zero-shot knowledge extraction and refinement,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.00647, 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Wids: An anomaly based intrusion detection system for wi-fi (ieee 802.11) protocol,

    P. Satam and S. Hariri, “Wids: An anomaly based intrusion detection system for wi-fi (ieee 802.11) protocol,”IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1077–1091, 2020

    2020

  25. [25]

    Evaluating group formation in virtual communities,

    G. Fortino, A. Liotta, F. Messina, D. Rosaci, and G. M. Sarn `e, “Evaluating group formation in virtual communities,”IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 1003–1015, 2020

    2020

  26. [26]

    Llm-mc-affect: Llm-based monte carlo modeling of affective trajectories and latent ambiguity for interpersonal dynamic insight,

    Y .-Z. Lin, B. P.-J. Shih, J. P. M. Encinas, E. V . A. Achom, K. H. Patel, J. H. Pacheco, S. Shao, J. Dass, S. Salehi, and P. Satam, “Llm-mc-affect: Llm-based monte carlo modeling of affective trajectories and latent ambiguity for interpersonal dynamic insight,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.03645, 2026

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    Quantifying the persona effect in llm simulations,

    T. Hu and N. Collier, “Quantifying the persona effect in llm simulations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.10811, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    The assistant axis: Situating and stabilizing the default persona of language models,

    C. Lu, J. Gallagher, J. Michala, K. Fish, and J. Lindsey, “The assistant axis: Situating and stabilizing the default persona of language models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.10387, 2026

    arXiv 2026

  29. [29]

    Towards transparency by design for artificial intelligence,

    H. Felzmann, E. Fosch-Villaronga, C. Lutz, and A. Tam `o-Larrieux, “Towards transparency by design for artificial intelligence,”Science and engineering ethics, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 3333–3361, 2020

    2020

  30. [30]

    Bias amplification in language model evolution: An iterated learning perspective,

    Y . Ren, S. Guo, L. Qiu, B. Wang, and D. J. Sutherland, “Bias amplification in language model evolution: An iterated learning perspective,”Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 37, pp. 38 629–38 664, 2024

    2024

  31. [31]

    Pride and prejudice: Llm amplifies self-bias in self-refinement,

    W. Xu, G. Zhu, X. Zhao, L. Pan, L. Li, and W. Wang, “Pride and prejudice: Llm amplifies self-bias in self-refinement,” inProceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), 2024, pp. 15 474–15 492

    2024

  32. [32]

    Governance of artificial intelligence,

    A. Taeihagh, “Governance of artificial intelligence,”Policy and society, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 137–157, 2021

    2021

  33. [33]

    How society can maintain human-centric artificial intelligence,

    J. J. Bryson and A. Theodorou, “How society can maintain human-centric artificial intelligence,” inHuman-centered digitalization and services. Springer, 2019, pp. 305–323

    2019

  34. [34]

    Mitigating overconfidence in large language models: A behavioral lens on confidence estimation and calibration,

    B. Wen, C. Xu, R. Wolfe, L. L. Wang, B. Howeet al., “Mitigating overconfidence in large language models: A behavioral lens on confidence estimation and calibration,” inNeurIPS 2024 Workshop on Behavioral Machine Learning, 2024

    2024

  35. [35]

    A survey on hallucination in large language models: Principles, taxonomy, challenges, and open questions,

    L. Huang, W. Yu, W. Ma, W. Zhong, Z. Feng, H. Wang, Q. Chen, W. Peng, X. Feng, B. Qinet al., “A survey on hallucination in large language models: Principles, taxonomy, challenges, and open questions,” ACM Transactions on Information Systems, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 1–55, 2025

    2025

  36. [36]

    Agent-safetybench: Evaluating the safety of llm agents,

    Z. Zhang, S. Cui, Y . Lu, J. Zhou, J. Yang, H. Wang, and M. Huang, “Agent-safetybench: Evaluating the safety of llm agents,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.14470, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    Redcode: Risky code execution and generation benchmark for code agents,

    C. Guo, X. Liu, C. Xie, A. Zhou, Y . Zeng, Z. Lin, D. Song, and B. Li, “Redcode: Risky code execution and generation benchmark for code agents,”Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 37, pp. 106 190–106 236, 2024

    2024

  38. [38]

    Prompt injection attack against llm-integrated applications,

    Y . Liu, G. Deng, Y . Li, K. Wang, Z. Wang, X. Wang, T. Zhang, Y . Liu, H. Wang, Y . Zhenget al., “Prompt injection attack against llm-integrated applications,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.05499, 2023. 11 APPENDIXA SOCIOLOGICALINSIGHTPROMPTDESIGN AND SPECIFICATION Sociological Insight Prompt (ρ) # Role:You are an expert computational sociologist specializing...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023