A Comparative Empirical Study of Catastrophic Forgetting Mitigation in Sequential Task Adaptation for Continual Natural Language Processing Systems

Neural language models deployed in real-world applications must continually adapt to new tasks and domains without forgetting previously acquired knowledge. This work presents a comparative empirical study of catastrophic forgetting mitigation in continual intent classification. Using the CLINC150 dataset, we construct a 10-task label-disjoint scenario and evaluate three backbone architectures: a feed-forward Artificial Neural Network (ANN), a Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU), and a Transformer encoder, under a range of continual learning (CL) strategies. We consider one representative method from each major CL family: replay-based Maximally Interfered Retrieval (MIR), regularization-based Learning without Forgetting (LwF), and parameter-isolation via Hard Attention to Task (HAT), both individually and in all pairwise and triple combinations. Performance is assessed with average accuracy, macro F1, and backward transfer, capturing the stability-plasticity trade-off across the task sequence. Our results show that naive sequential fine-tuning suffers from severe forgetting for all architectures and that no single CL method fully prevents it. Replay emerges as a key ingredient: MIR is the most reliable individual strategy, and combinations that include replay (MIR+HAT, MIR+LwF, MIR+LwF+HAT) consistently achieve high final performance with near-zero or mildly positive backward transfer. The optimal configuration is architecture-dependent. MIR+HAT yields the best result for ANN and Transformer, MIR+LwF+HAT, on the other hand, works the best for GRU, and in several cases CL methods even surpass joint training, indicating a regularization effect. These findings highlight the importance of jointly selecting backbone architecture and CL mechanism when designing continual intent-classification systems.

Linguistic Indicators of Early Cognitive Decline in the DementiaBank Pitt Corpus: A Statistical and Machine Learning Study

Background: Subtle changes in spontaneous language production are among the earliest indicators of cognitive decline. Identifying linguistically interpretable markers of dementia can support transparent and clinically grounded screening approaches. Methods: This study analyzes spontaneous speech transcripts from the DementiaBank Pitt Corpus using three linguistic representations: raw cleaned text, a part-of-speech (POS)-enhanced representation combining lexical and grammatical information, and a POS-only syntactic representation. Logistic regression and random forest models were evaluated under two protocols: transcript-level train-test splits and subject-level five-fold cross-validation to prevent speaker overlap. Model interpretability was examined using global feature importance, and statistical validation was conducted using Mann-Whitney U tests with Cliff's delta effect sizes. Results: Across representations, models achieved stable performance, with syntactic and grammatical features retaining strong discriminative power even in the absence of lexical content. Subject-level evaluation yielded more conservative but consistent results, particularly for POS-enhanced and POS-only representations. Statistical analysis revealed significant group differences in functional word usage, lexical diversity, sentence structure, and discourse coherence, aligning closely with machine learning feature importance findings. Conclusion: The results demonstrate that abstract linguistic features capture robust markers of early cognitive decline under clinically realistic evaluation. By combining interpretable machine learning with non-parametric statistical validation, this study supports the use of linguistically grounded features for transparent and reliable language-based cognitive screening.

BASS: Benchmarking Audio LMs for Musical Structure and Semantic Reasoning

Music understanding is a complex task that often requires reasoning over both structural and semantic elements of audio. We introduce BASS, designed to evaluate music understanding and reasoning in audio language models across four broad categories: structural segmentation, lyric transcription, musicological analysis, and artist collaboration. BASS comprises 2658 questions spanning 12 tasks, 1993 unique songs and covering over 138 hours of music from a wide range of genres and tracks, crafted to assess musicological knowledge and reasoning in real-world scenarios. We evaluate 14 open-source and frontier multimodal LMs, finding that even state-of-the-art models struggle on higher-level reasoning tasks such as structural segmentation and artist collaboration, while performing best on lyric transcription. Our analysis reveals that current models leverage linguistic priors effectively but remain limited in reasoning over musical structure, vocal, and musicological attributes. BASS provides an evaluation framework with widespread applications in music recommendation and search and has the potential to guide the development of audio LMs.

Fine-Grained Emotion Detection on GoEmotions: Experimental Comparison of Classical Machine Learning, BiLSTM, and Transformer Models

Fine-grained emotion recognition is a challenging multi-label NLP task due to label overlap and class imbalance. In this work, we benchmark three modeling families on the GoEmotions dataset: a TF-IDF-based logistic regression system trained with binary relevance, a BiLSTM with attention, and a BERT model fine-tuned for multi-label classification. Experiments follow the official train/validation/test split, and imbalance is mitigated using inverse-frequency class weights. Across several metrics, namely Micro-F1, Macro-F1, Hamming Loss, and Subset Accuracy, we observe that logistic regression attains the highest Micro-F1 of 0.51, while BERT achieves the best overall balance surpassing the official paper's reported results, reaching Macro-F1 0.49, Hamming Loss 0.036, and Subset Accuracy 0.36. This suggests that frequent emotions often rely on surface lexical cues, whereas contextual representations improve performance on rarer emotions and more ambiguous examples.

GEGO: A Hybrid Golden Eagle and Genetic Optimization Algorithm for Efficient Hyperparameter Tuning in Resource-Constrained Environments

Hyperparameter tuning is a critical yet computationally expensive step in training neural networks, particularly when the search space is high dimensional and nonconvex. Metaheuristic optimization algorithms are often used for this purpose due to their derivative free nature and robustness against local optima. In this work, we propose Golden Eagle Genetic Optimization (GEGO), a hybrid metaheuristic that integrates the population movement strategy of Golden Eagle Optimization with the genetic operators of selection, crossover, and mutation. The main novelty of GEGO lies in embedding genetic operators directly into the iterative search process of GEO, rather than applying them as a separate evolutionary stage. This design improves population diversity during search and reduces premature convergence while preserving the exploration behavior of GEO. GEGO is evaluated on standard unimodal, multimodal, and composite benchmark functions from the CEC2017 suite, where it consistently outperforms its constituent algorithms and several classical metaheuristics in terms of solution quality and robustness. The algorithm is further applied to hyperparameter tuning of artificial neural networks on the MNIST dataset, where GEGO achieves improved classification accuracy and more stable convergence compared to GEO and GA. These results indicate that GEGO provides a balanced exploration-exploitation tradeoff and is well suited for hyperparameter optimization under constrained computational settings.

A Unified Definition of Hallucination, Or: It's the World Model, Stupid

Despite numerous attempts to solve the issue of hallucination since the inception of neural language models, it remains a problem in even frontier large language models today. Why is this the case? We walk through definitions of hallucination used in the literature from a historical perspective up to the current day, and fold them into a single definition of hallucination, wherein different prior definitions focus on different aspects of our definition. At its core, we argue that hallucination is simply inaccurate (internal) world modeling, in a form where it is observable to the user (e.g., stating a fact which contradicts a knowledge base, or producing a summary which contradicts a known source). By varying the reference world model as well as the knowledge conflict policy (e.g., knowledge base vs. in-context), we arrive at the different existing definitions of hallucination present in the literature. We argue that this unified view is useful because it forces evaluations to make clear their assumed "world" or source of truth, clarifies what should and should not be called hallucination (as opposed to planning or reward/incentive-related errors), and provides a common language to compare benchmarks and mitigation techniques. Building on this definition, we outline plans for a family of benchmarks in which hallucinations are defined as mismatches with synthetic but fully specified world models in different environments, and sketch out how these benchmarks can use such settings to stress-test and improve the world modeling components of language models.

ClinicalTrialsHub: Bridging Registries and Literature for Comprehensive Clinical Trial Access

We present ClinicalTrialsHub, an interactive search-focused platform that consolidates all data from ClinicalTrials.gov and augments it by automatically extracting and structuring trial-relevant information from PubMed research articles. Our system effectively increases access to structured clinical trial data by 83.8% compared to relying on ClinicalTrials.gov alone, with potential to make access easier for patients, clinicians, researchers, and policymakers, advancing evidence-based medicine. ClinicalTrialsHub uses large language models such as GPT-5.1 and Gemini-3-Pro to enhance accessibility. The platform automatically parses full-text research articles to extract structured trial information, translates user queries into structured database searches, and provides an attributed question-answering system that generates evidence-grounded answers linked to specific source sentences. We demonstrate its utility through a user study involving clinicians, clinical researchers, and PhD students of pharmaceutical sciences and nursing, and a systematic automatic evaluation of its information extraction and question answering capabilities.

Accepted with Minor Revisions: Value of AI-Assisted Scientific Writing

Large Language Models have seen expanding application across domains, yet their effectiveness as assistive tools for scientific writing -- an endeavor requiring precision, multimodal synthesis, and domain expertise -- remains insufficiently understood. We examine the potential of LLMs to support domain experts in scientific writing, with a focus on abstract composition. We design an incentivized randomized controlled trial with a hypothetical conference setup where participants with relevant expertise are split into an author and reviewer pool. Inspired by methods in behavioral science, our novel incentive structure encourages authors to edit the provided abstracts to an acceptable quality for a peer-reviewed submission. Our 2x2 between-subject design expands into two dimensions: the implicit source of the provided abstract and the disclosure of it. We find authors make most edits when editing human-written abstracts compared to AI-generated abstracts without source attribution, often guided by higher perceived readability in AI generation. Upon disclosure of source information, the volume of edits converges in both source treatments. Reviewer decisions remain unaffected by the source of the abstract, but bear a significant correlation with the number of edits made. Careful stylistic edits, especially in the case of AI-generated abstracts, in the presence of source information, improve the chance of acceptance. We find that AI-generated abstracts hold potential to reach comparable levels of acceptability to human-written ones with minimal revision, and that perceptions of AI authorship, rather than objective quality, drive much of the observed editing behavior. Our findings reverberate the significance of source disclosure in collaborative scientific writing.

BLAB: Brutally Long Audio Bench

Developing large audio language models (LMs) capable of understanding diverse spoken interactions is essential for accommodating the multimodal nature of human communication and can increase the accessibility of language technologies across different user populations. Recent work on audio LMs has primarily evaluated their performance on short audio segments, typically under 30 seconds, with limited exploration of long-form conversational speech segments that more closely reflect natural user interactions with these models. We introduce Brutally Long Audio Bench (BLAB), a challenging long-form audio benchmark that evaluates audio LMs on localization, duration estimation, emotion, and counting tasks using audio segments averaging 51 minutes in length. BLAB consists of 833+ hours of diverse, full-length audio clips, each paired with human-annotated, text-based natural language questions and answers. Our audio data were collected from permissively licensed sources and underwent a human-assisted filtering process to ensure task compliance. We evaluate six open-source and proprietary audio LMs on BLAB and find that all of them, including advanced models such as Gemini 2.0 Pro and GPT-4o, struggle with the tasks in BLAB. Our comprehensive analysis reveals key insights into the trade-offs between task difficulty and audio duration. In general, we find that audio LMs struggle with long-form speech, with performance declining as duration increases. They perform poorly on localization, temporal reasoning, counting, and struggle to understand non-phonemic information, relying more on prompts than audio content. BLAB serves as a challenging evaluation framework to develop audio LMs with robust long-form audio understanding capabilities.

Automated Testing of COBOL to Java Transformation

Recent advances in Large Language Model (LLM) based Generative AI techniques have made it feasible to translate enterprise-level code from legacy languages such as COBOL to modern languages such as Java or Python. While the results of LLM-based automatic transformation are encouraging, the resulting code cannot be trusted to correctly translate the original code, making manual validation of translated Java code from COBOL a necessary but time-consuming and labor-intensive process. In this paper, we share our experience of developing a testing framework for IBM Watsonx Code Assistant for Z (WCA4Z) [5], an industrial tool designed for COBOL to Java translation. The framework automates the process of testing the functional equivalence of the translated Java code against the original COBOL programs in an industry context. Our framework uses symbolic execution to generate unit tests for COBOL, mocking external calls and transforming them into JUnit tests to validate semantic equivalence with translated Java. The results not only help identify and repair any detected discrepancies but also provide feedback to improve the AI model.