arXiv:2607. 05574v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: 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.
arXiv:2604. 14514v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Healthcare disparities persist across socioeconomic boundaries, often attributed to unequal access to screening, diagnostics, and therapeutics.
arXiv:2606. 24099v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Algorithms have become central to scientific research in the era of artificial intelligence (AI).
How does research evolve, and what substrate would let us forecast where it goes next? Scientific progress is not simply a uniform accumulation of facts: ideas extend prior methods, address known limitations, realize proposed future directions, and sometimes dispute earlier claims.
arXiv:2601. 15485v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Federal research funding shapes the direction, diversity, and impact of the US scientific enterprise.
arXiv:2607. 21327v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Bibliometric indicators - citation counts, h-indexes, co-authorship networks - have long anchored science, technology, and innovation (STI) analytics, yet suffer from temporal lag, semantic shallowness, and an inability to capture the non-linear dynamics of contemporary knowledge ecosystems.
Large language models are increasingly deployed in citation-augmented settings, yet the effect of citation presence on model behavior independent of factual content remains poorly understood. We introduce AuthorityBench, a 220,564-prompt multi-domain benchmark that isolates how citation-based authority signals influence epistemic behavior in LLMs.
arXiv:2607. 10341v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI visibility measurement is comparative: practitioners want to know which domains generative search engines cite most often and whether observed differences are large enough to support decisions.
arXiv:2606. 19625v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We use training-data attribution as an interpretable tool for capability discovery, mapping which regions of the pretraining corpus support social-reasoning versus STEM-reasoning in OLMo3-7B.
A set of exposure scores calculated in 2023 has become a central empirical input to the future of work debate. Produced by Eloundou et al.
arXiv:2607. 01507v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Empirical research rarely admits a unique analysis.
arXiv:2606. 19625v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We use training-data attribution as an interpretable tool for capability discovery, mapping which regions of the pretraining corpus support social-reasoning versus STEM-reasoning in OLMo3-7B.
arXiv:2607. 05420v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This study examines how alternative systems of scholarly representation identify and characterize broad public administration (PA) and artificial intelligence related public administration (AI-in-PA) scholarship.